Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tuesday 12 August 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 02 9399 0999 or

1300 722 542 (for Sydney metropolitan area)

Fax:02 9319 1510

general.manager@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee Meeting

 

Notice is hereby given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Council of the City of Randwick will be held in the Council Chamber, First Floor, 90 Avoca Street, Randwick on Tuesday, 12 August 2014 at 6:00pm.

 

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

 

Quorum:                           Eight (8) members

 

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

Apologies/Granting of Leave of Absences 

Confirmation of the Minutes  

Planning Committee Meeting - 8 July 2014

Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests

Address of Committee by Members of the Public

Privacy warning;

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

Urgent Business

Development Application Reports (record of voting required)

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

D67/14      10A Kynaston Avenue, Randwick (DA/597/2013) - Deferred........................ 1

D68/14      22 Araluen Street, Kingsford (DA/713/2009/A)........................................ 33

D69/14      13 -15 Silver Street, Randwick (DA/311/2008/E)..................................... 39

D70/14      45 Carr Street, Coogee (DA/768/2009/A)............................................... 47

D71/14      16 Coogee Street, Coogee (DA/853/2013).............................................. 53

D72/14      137 Carrington Road, Coogee (DA/88/2014)........................................... 63

D73/14      60 Holmes Street, Maroubra (DA/394/2014)........................................... 85

Miscellaneous Reports

Nil   

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil 

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D67/14

 

 

Subject:                  10A Kynaston Avenue, Randwick (DA/597/2013) - Deferred

Folder No:                   DA/597/2013

Author:                   Kerry Kyriacou, Manager Development Assessment     

 

Introduction

 

The application was recommended for a approval and referred to the Planning Committee as the proposal included a departure from a development standard of greater than 10% and was also called up by Councillors Neilson, Shurey and Matson.

 

At the Planning Committee Meeting on 10 June 2014, it was resolved:

 

“(Smith/Bowen) that the application be deferred to allow for the submission of amended plans that address the oobjectives in the DCP in relation to wall height, landscaping, setbacks and car parking.”

 

On 28 July 2014 the applicant submitted amended plans involving the following changes to the scheme:

 

·         Carpark layout redesigned and amended to provide 7 spaces (in lieu of 6 spaces for DA) plus on external carwash bay, 8 car spaces in total.

·         The carpark entry podium to Tram Lane has been deleted to improve landscape/soft landscaping area.

·         L-01 balcony overhangs have been reduced to improve landscape/soft landscape areas under.

·         “Mansard” style cladding added to L3 West and South East in response to the wall height non compliance.

·         A slight reduction in FSR resulting from the unit area’s on L3 being measured only 1.4m up from floor level due to the new “mansard” treatment.

·         The footprint of the building has been amended by including reduced balcony overhangs, resulting in a total landscape area of 51.9%.

·         The soft landscape area has been increased to 28%.

 

Issues

 

Car parking

The original development provided 7 spaces, including 1 visitor space resulting in a shortfall of 2 spaces when assessed against the numerical requirements of the DCP. An additional car space has now been provided within the basement reducing the deficiency to one car space. The proposed shortfall is acceptable given the site is located in close proximity (within 300m) of Randwick Town Centre and good public transport with a number of bus routes available in Alison and Belmore Roads.

 

Landscaping

The original scheme provided 32.45% of the area of the site in landscaping which was short of the 50% requirement. This was largely due to a component of the landscaping being located beneath the substantial areas of building over-hang. The applicant has amended the proposal by deleting carpark entry podium to Tram Lane and reducing the balcony overhangs to level 1. Whilst this has resulted in compliance with the landscaped area requirement it has also impacted on the usability of the balconies to the level 1 units, in particular the balconies off the living areas which are now quite constrained with their angular configuration.

 

Setbacks and Wall height

The only changes to the setbacks of the building have been at the lower residential floor level where sections of balcony have been deleted and at the rear upper level (Tram lane) section of the building where a “mansard” style treatment in the form of angled metal cladding has been introduced. The change to the rear upper level has been made in an attempt to address Council’s resolution in relation to the wall height breach (which is more pronounced at the rear), whilst not losing any significant amount of floor area. However, the external appearance and associated bulk of this level is not significantly altered by the proposed amendment due to the steepness associated with the angled wall that has been applied to the rear elevation of the upper floor (See figures below). It also results in the aesthetics of the building being somewhat compromised by not providing a coherent architectural language and resolution in its overall appearance.

 

Figure 1: Section A

 

Picture 2: South West Elevation.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The applicant has submitted amended plans in response to Council’s resolution that was seeking an increase in car parking, landscaped area, setbacks and reduction in wall height. Whilst the amended plans have increased the car parking and landscaped area provision, they have also resulted in smaller and constrained balconies on level 1, and a rear upper level that retains a similar degree of visual bulk to that originally proposed. Should Council consider that the amendments have satisfactorily addressed the issues raised in Council’s resolution, the recommendation and the conditions below reflect the scheme as amended.

 

 

Recommendation

 

A.     That Council supports the exceptions to development standards under Clause 4.6 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in respect to non-compliance with Clauses 4.3 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012, relating to height of buildings, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning & Environment be advised accordingly.

 

B.     That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/597/2013 for demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of a residential flat building at No. 10A Kynaston Avenue, Randwick, subject to the following non standard conditions and the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report attached to this report:

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

Received by Council

DA100E –Ground floor

ASA Architects

12/4/14

28/7/14

DA101E – Level 1

ASA Architects

16/7/14

28/7/14

DA102D – Level 2

Architecture & Interiors

12/4/14

15/4/14

DA103E – Level 3

ASA Architects

16/7/14

28/7/14

DA104D – Roof plan

ASA Architects

16/7/14

28/7/14

DA300D – Elevation

ASA Architects

16/7/14

28/7/14

DA301E - Sections

ASA Architects

12/4/14

28/7/14

 

BASIX Certificate No.

Dated

Received by Council

499630M

4/9/13

12/9/13

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

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

 

a.       The following windows must have a minimum sill height of 1.6m above floor level, or alternatively the windows are to be provided with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing below this specified height  or exterior privacy screens can be added with openings not to exceed 25% of the area of the screen:

 

·       Kitchen and bathroom windows in the western elevation facing No. 10 Kynaston Avenue.

 

b.       Screening on balconies is to have openings not exceeding 25% of the area of the screen on the western side of the balconies facing No. 10       Kynaston Avenue.

 

c.         Details of fencing are to be submitted for Council approval prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

 

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

External Colours, Materials & Finishes

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

 

External materials, finishes and colours of the building are required to match, as closely as possible, the existing building and any metal roof sheeting is to be pre-painted (e.g. Colourbond) to limit the level of reflection and glare.

 

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

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

5.       In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 12 July 2012, based on the development cost of $1,846,582 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $18,465.82

       

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

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

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

 

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

 

Security Deposits

7.       The following security deposits requirement must be complied with prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development, as security for making good any damage caused to Council’s assets and infrastructure; and as security for completing any public work; and for remedying any defect on such public works, in accordance with section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

·           $10,000.00        -    Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Sydney Water

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

Upgrading of 30R Church Street

9.       The applicant must meet all costs associated with upgrading a section of Council’s public reserve, formally recognised as 30R Church Street, with a refundable deposit in the form of cash, credit card, cheque or bank guarantee for an amount of $10,000.00 to be paid at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre, prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development, in order to ensure protection of the reserve and any associated items or fixtures, compliance with the conditions listed in this consent, and ultimately, full completion of the landscape works in the reserve.

 

The refundable deposit will be eligible for refund a period of 6 months (maintenance period) after the issue of an Occupation Certificate, subject to completion and submission of Council’s ‘Security Deposit Refund Application Form’, and pending a satisfactory inspection by Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613).

 

Any contravention of Council's conditions relating to these works, or prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, may result in Council claiming all or part of the lodged security in order to perform any rectification works necessary, as per the requirements of 80A (6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Protection of park trees

10.     In order to ensure retention of the Brachychiton acerifolius (Flame Tree) located in the public reserve, 30R Church Street, past the northeast corner of the site, as well as the mature Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island date Palm) at the opposite end of the site, adjacent the southeast corner in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.       All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show the retention of both trees, with the position and diameter of their trunks and canopies/crowns to be clearly and accurately shown on all plans in relation to the proposed works.

 

b.       All works associated with upgrading of the reserve can only be performed by hand, with the written approval of Council’s Co-ordinator Open Space Assets to be obtained should the use of machinery be sought, with Council’s requirements to be complied with at all times.

 

c.       In order to prevent the introduction of pathogens such as Fusarium sp, to which Date Palms are particularly vulnerable, any imported soils and mulch used in the public reserve must comply with AS4419 – 2003: Soils for landscaping & garden use; and AS4454 – 2003 Composts, Soil Conditioners & Mulches respectively, with certificates of compliance confirming such to be provided to Council Landscape Development Officer, prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

d.       Any tools or machinery associated with works in the reserve, within a radius of 5 metres of the trunk of the Date Palm must be disinfected and sterilised, prior to commencement, as well as regularly during the course of the works by soaking for 5 minutes in the following mixture:

 

i.      50% household bleach or 5% quaternary ammonium (eg, Phytoclean, Avis Chemicals); then;

 

ii.     Rinsing affected equipment with clean water and/or 70% alcohol to remove disinfectant.

 

e.       Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613) must be contacted, giving at least 2 working days notice, to confirm that this sterilizing has been performed, prior to commencing any works in the reserve.

 

f.       Ground levels within a 5 metre radius of the trunk of either tree must not be altered by more than 200mm.

 

g.       The applicant is not authorised to perform any works to either of these trees, and must contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 should anything be sought, with the applicant to cover all associated costs with such work, to Council’s satisfaction, prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

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

 

The PCA must ensure compliance with these requirements on-site during the course of construction, and prior to issuing any type of Occupation

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

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

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

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

 

Traffic conditions

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

 

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

 

Design Alignment levels

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

 

·      60mm above the edge of the bitumen at all points opposite, along the full site frontage.

 

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

 

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

 

15.     The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $2792 calculated at $50.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Footbridge Access from Kynaston Avenue Reserve (30R Church St)

16.     The applicant must submit to Council for approval and have approved by the Director of City Planning detailed construction plans for the proposed pedestrian bridge access from Kynaston Avenue reserve. The submitted documentation shall include but not be limited to the following requirements;

 

·      The area underneath the pedestrian bridge shall be enclosed on either side.

·      Plans, Elevations, sections clearly showing any adjustments in levels, retaining walls, footings and location of any services.

 

Stormwater Drainage & Flood Management

Council/External  Drainage

17.     The applicant must accurately locate, (both alignment and depth), the existing Council stormwater pipeline located within the subject development site. The existing pipeline must remain fully operational until such time as an alternate stormwater drainage system has been constructed to Council’s satisfaction.

 

18.     The applicant/developer is to meet the full cost of diverting Council’s 0.6m diameter drainage line from within the development site to Tram Lane with suitably designed pits and junctions.

Should it be demonstrated to the satisfaction of Council that diversion of the stormwater line is not feasible consideration will then be given to upgrading the pipeline within the development site so it is sized for the critical 5% AEP (1 in 20 yr) storm event with a new pit constructed immediately west/downstream of the proposed building within the development site.

 

19.     The applicant must submit to Council for approval and have approved “for construction” plans to be prepared by a suitably qualified hydraulic engineer for the upgrade/relocation of the Council controlled pipeline through the development site and within Tram lane/ Kynaston Ave reserve. The plans must also include a detailed specification which must be prepared in consultation with Council’s Development Engineer Coordinator. All works associated with reconstruction of the Council pipeline must be carried out to the satisfaction of Council and certification from a certified practicing engineer is to be provided to Council upon completion of the works. All costs associated with reconstruction of the Council pipeline shall be met by the applicant.

 

·      Relevant Council Assessment and Inspection fees, as specified in Council's adopted Pricing Policy, are required to be paid to Council prior to commencement of the drainage works.

 

·      The diversion/upgrade of the Council Line will be required to be completed prior to commencement of building works within the site

 

20.     Should the council pipeline not be relocated off the site,  the section of the proposed development located immediately over/above the reconstructed pipeline (or box culvert) must be suitably designed such that if Council requires access to the pipeline the structures can be removed without adversely affecting the structural integrity of the remaining structures within the development site. The Construction Certificate plans must demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

·          The applicant must liaise with Council’s Development Engineer Coordinator to obtain Council’s requirements for structures over the reconstructed pipeline.

 

21.     All proposed footings located adjacent to the drainage pipe shall either be:

 

a.  Founded on rock, or;

b.  Extended below a 30 degree line taken from the level of the pipe invert at the edge of the drainage reserve/easement (angle of repose).

 

Structural details demonstrating compliance with this condition shall be submitted with the construction certificate application.

 

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

 

Internal  Drainage

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.    Roof areas

ii.   Paved areas

iii.   Grassed areas

iii.  Garden areas

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

a)       The stormwater drainage system must be provided in accordance with the relevant requirements of Building Code of Australia and the conditions of this consent, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate.

 

b)       The stormwater must be discharged (by gravity) either:

 

i.   Directly into Council’s underground drainage system located within the site or in Tram Lane via a new and/or existing  pit.

 

c)       An on-site stormwater detention system must be provided to ensure that the maximum discharge from the site does not exceed that which would occur during a 1 in 5 year storm of one hour duration for existing site conditions. All other stormwater run-off from the site for all storms up to the 1 in 20 year storm is to be retained on the site for gradual release to the street drainage system, to the satisfaction of the certifying authority.

 

An overland escape route or overflow system (to Council’s street drainage system) must be provided for storms having an average recurrence interval of 100 years (1 in 100 year storm), or, alternatively the stormwater detention system is to be provided to accommodate the 1 in 100 year storm.

 

d)       Determination of the required cumulative storage (in the on-site detention and/or infiltration system) must be calculated by the mass curve technique as detailed in Technical Note 1, Chapter 14 of the Australian Rainfall and Run-off Volume 1, 1987 Edition.

 

Where possible any detention tanks should have an open base to infiltrate stormwater into the ground. Infiltration should not be used if ground water and/or any rock stratum is within 2.0 metres of the base of the tank.

 

e)       If connecting to Council’s underground drainage system, a reflux valve shall be provided (within the site) over the pipeline discharging from the site to ensure that stormwater from Council drainage system does not surcharge back into the site stormwater system.

 

f)       Any new kerb inlet pits (constructed within Council’s road reserve) are to be constructed generally in accordance with Council’s standard detail for the design of kerb inlet pits (drawing number SD6 which is available from Council).

 

g)       Generally all internal pipelines must be capable of discharging a 1 in 20 year storm flow.  However the minimum pipe size for pipes that accept stormwater from a surface inlet pit must be 150mm diameter.  The site must be graded to direct any surplus run-off (i.e. above the 1 in 20 year storm) to the proposed drainage (detention/infiltration) system.

 

h)       A sediment/silt arrestor pit must be provided within the site near the street boundary prior to discharge of the stormwater to Council’s drainage system and prior to discharging the stormwater to any absorption/infiltration system.

 

Sediment/silt arrestor pits are to be constructed generally in accordance with the following requirements:

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

·      The pit being constructed from cast in-situ concrete, precast concrete or double brick.

·      A minimum of 4 x 90 mm diameter weep holes (or equivalent) located in the walls of the pit at the floor level with a suitable geotextile material with a high filtration rating located over the weep holes.

·      A galvanised heavy-duty screen being provided over the outlet pipe/s (Mascot GMS multipurpose filter screen or equivalent).

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

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

·      Provision of a sign adjacent to the pit stating, “This sediment/silt arrester pit shall be regularly inspected and cleaned”.

 

Sketch details of a standard sediment/silt arrester pit may be obtained from Council’s Drainage Engineer.

 

i)        The floor level of all habitable, retail, commercial and storage areas located adjacent to any detention and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage must be a minimum of 300mm above the maximum water level for the design storm or alternately a permanent 300mm high water proof barrier is to be provided.

 

(In this regard, it must be noted that this condition must not result in any increase in the heights or levels of the building.  Any variations to the heights or levels of the building will require a new or amended development consent from the Council prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development).

 

j)       The maximum depth of ponding in any above ground detention areas and/or infiltration systems with above ground storage shall be as follows (as applicable):

 

i.      150mm in uncovered open car parking areas (with an isolated maximum depth of 200mm permissible at the low point pit within the detention area)

ii.     300mm in landscaped areas (where child proof fencing is not provided around the outside of the detention area and sides slopes are steeper than 1 in 10)

iii.     600mm in landscaped areas where the side slopes of the detention area have a maximum grade of 1 in 10

iv.    1200mm in landscaped areas where a safety fence is provided around the outside of the detention area

v.     Above ground stormwater detention areas must be suitably signposted where required, warning people of the maximum flood level.

 

Note: Above ground storage of stormwater is not permitted within basement car parks or store rooms.

 

k)       A childproof and corrosion resistant fastening system shall be installed on access grates over pits/trenches where water is permitted to be temporarily stored.

 

l)        A ‘V’ drain (or equally effective provisions) are to be provided to the perimeter of the property, where necessary, to direct all stormwater to the detention/infiltration area.

 

m)      Mulch or bark is not to be used in on-site detention areas.

 

n)       Site discharge pipelines shall cross the verge at an angle no less than 45 degrees to the kerb line.

 

o)       Any onsite detention/infiltration systems shall be located in areas accessible by residents of all units.

 

Waste Management

24.     A Waste Management Plan detailing the waste and recycling storage and removal strategy for all of the development, is required to be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning.

 

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

 

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

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

·    Demolition and construction waste, including materials to be re-used or recycled.

·    Details of the proposed recycling and waste disposal contractors.

·    Waste storage facilities and equipment.

·    Access and traffic arrangements.

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

 

Further details of Council's requirements and guidelines, including pro-forma Waste Management plan forms can be obtained from Council's Customer Service Centre.

       

25.     The waste storage areas are to be provided with a tap and hose and the floor is to be graded and drained to the sewer to the requirements of Sydney Water.

 

Landscaping

26.     The landscape plan submitted for works within the site as part of the approved Construction Certificate must be substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan by Stuart Noble Associates, dwg DA-1313-01, dated 31.07.13.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

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

 

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

 

 

Certification, PCA & other Requirements

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Home Building Act 1989

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

 

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

 

Dilapidation Reports

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

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan

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

 

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

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

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

 

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

·          location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·          location of building materials for construction;

·          provisions for public safety;

·          dust control measures;

·          site access location and construction

·          details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·          protective measures for tree preservation;

·          provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

·          location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·          details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·          provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·          construction noise and vibration management;

·          construction traffic management details.

 

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

 

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

 

Demolition Work Plan

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

 

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

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

·          Details of hazardous materials (including asbestos)

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

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

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

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

·          Other relevant details, measures and requirements to be implemented

·          Details of re-use, recycling and disposal of waste demolition/building materials

·          Date the demolition works will commence

 

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

 

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

 

Notes

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

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

 

Construction Traffic Management

33.     An application for a ‘Works Zone’ and Construction Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to Councils Integrated Transport Department, and approved by the Randwick Traffic Committee, for a ‘Works Zone’ to be provided in the vicinity of the site for the duration of the demolition & construction works. 

 

The ‘Works Zone’ must have a minimum length of 12m and extend for a minimum duration of three months.  The suitability of the proposed length and duration is to be demonstrated in the application for the Works Zone.  The application for the Works Zone must be submitted to Council at least six (6) weeks prior to the commencement of work on the site to allow for assessment and tabling of agenda for the Randwick Traffic Committee.

 

The requirement for a Works Zone may be varied or waived only if it can be demonstrated in the Construction Traffic Management Plan (to the satisfaction of Council’s Traffic Engineers) that all construction related activities (including all loading and unloading operations) can and will be undertaken wholly within the site.  The written approval of Council must be obtained to provide a Works Zone or to waive the requirement to provide a Works Zone prior to the commencement of any site work.

 

34.     A detailed Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to commencement of any site work.

 

The Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and must include the following details, to the satisfaction of Council:

 

·          A description of the demolition, excavation and construction works

·          A site plan/s showing the site, roads, footpaths, site access points and vehicular movements

·          Any proposed road and/or footpath closures

·          Proposed site access locations for personnel, deliveries and materials

·          Size, type and estimated number of vehicular movements (including removal of excavated materials, delivery of materials and concrete to the site)

·          Provision for loading and unloading of goods and materials

·          Impacts of the work and vehicular movements on the road network, traffic and pedestrians

·          Proposed hours of construction related activities and vehicular movements to and from the site

·          Current/proposed approvals from other Agencies and Authorities (including NSW Roads & Traffic Authority, Police and State Transit Authority)

·          Any activities proposed to be located or impact upon Council’s road, footways or any public place

·          Measures to maintain public safety and convenience

     

NOTE: Construction access to the site through Kynaston Avenue Reserve will not be permitted

 

Civil Works

35.     A separate written approval from Council is required to be obtained in relation to all works which are located externally from the site within the road reserve/public place, in accordance with the requirements of the Roads Act 1993.  Detailed plans and specifications of the proposed works (including the proposed footbridge) are to be submitted to and approved by the Director of City Services prior to commencing any works within the road reserve/public place.

 

All works within the road reserve/public place must be carried out to the satisfaction of Council and certification from a certified practicing engineer is to be provided to Council upon completion of the works.

 

Relevant Council assessment and inspection fees, as specified in Council's adopted Pricing Policy, are required to be paid to Council prior to commencement of the works.

 

Upgrading of public reserve - 30R Church Street

36.     The applicant must meet all costs associated with upgrading a section of Council’s public reserve, formally recognised as 30R Church Street, of approximately 5 metres in width, measured along the full length of the western site boundary, and will include, but not be limited to; removal of existing low-growing vegetation, soil preparation, minor re-grading, supply and installation of plants, erosion control, mulching, construction of a pedestrian footpath/s and foot-bridge, safety measures and any other activities required to complete these works to Council’s satisfaction.

 

37.     All works carried out on Council property must be in accordance with Council’s requirements for Civil Works on Council property.

 

Landscape Plan for public reserve

38.     A completely separate landscape plan which deals only with upgrading of the public reserve, for an area approximately 5 metres in width, measured off the length of the western site boundary, and which is similar to the treatment that is already shown on the Landscape Plan by Stuart Noble Associates, dwg DA-1313-01, dated 31.07.13, must be submitted to, and be approved in writing by, Council’s Landscape Development Officer, prior to the commencement of any external works in the reserve, and must include the following requirements:

 

a.       The location of existing garden beds, planting, trees, footpaths, park furniture and all other features in relation to the embankment and site, including existing and proposed ground levels;

 

b.       Planting plan at an appropriate scale of 1:100 or 1:200;

 

c.       Planting schedule that includes botanic name, common name, quantities/densities, pot size at the time of planting and mature size;

 

d.       The new works in the reserve may need to extend past the northern and southern ends of the site if needed so as to match in with existing planting and garden beds, so as to create a continuous planted cover, and may involve upgrading existing beds if needed to achieve optimum appearance and consistency;

 

e.       Any erosion control measures such as jute matting or similar initiatives that will assist in soil stabilization until the planting on the embankment is established;

 

f.       Full construction details of the elevated foot-bridge, which underneath is to be enclosed by walls on both sides, together with any details of feature/blade walls, surface treatments, lighting and the location of the new access path/s to link the existing footpath in the park with the proposed foot-bridge;

 

g.       Plant selection adjacent both walls beneath the foot-bridge must be those that will assist with screening and softening these built elements on the reserve, with low growing feature planting also to be provided in the area where the footbridge actually meets with the reserve;

 

h.       A simple, mass-planted layout is required, and to ensure consistency of treatment with existing schemes that are already established in the reserve, species selection must be amended from what is currently shown to include Lomandra & Dianella cultivars, Gymea Lillies, Grevillea’s and others;

 

i.        A minimum 50mm layer of woodchip mulch over all newly created planted areas within the reserve;

 

j.        Details of staking, garden edging and any other elements required to fully described the proposed works;

 

k.       The plan must include a notation that once Council has given written approval of completion of landscape works within the reserve, a maintenance/liability/defects period of at least 6 months will apply, where the applicant will be required to perform regular, routine maintenance activities including the replacement of any failed stock, as advised by Council;

 

l.        There must be no pedestrian or vehicles access through Council’s reserve during the course of works, and even when landscaping of the reserve is being undertaken, access must still be made through private property.

 

39.     Following approval of the public reserve plan; and prior to commencement of the these works on Council property, the applicant must liaise further with Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613, regarding scheduling of work, inspections, supervision fees and compliance with Council’s requirements for public liability insurance.

 

40.     The applicant must advise Council’s Landscape Development Officer, in writing, giving at least 10 working days, of their intention to commence works in the reserve, with all works to comply with the approved Landscape Plans and Construction Management Plans.

 

41.     The works shown on the approved public reserve plan must be completed to the satisfaction of Council’s Landscape Architect and Landscape Development Officer, with confirmation of approval to be provided in writing from Council’s Officers, prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

Landscaping with the site

42.     The PCA must ensure that the Landscape Plan by Stuart Noble Associates, dwg DA-1313-01, dated 31.07.13, for landscape works within the subject site, is amended to include the following additional details:

 

a.       In order to soften the dominance of the building over the public reserve, a stronger landscape element using either an evergreen feature tree,  palm/s or similar, which will attain a minimum height at maturity of 5 metres shall be installed around the southeast corner of the site, and will replace the single, deciduous Frangipani that is currently shown in this area;

 

b.       More substantial screening species than what are currently shown must be incorporated into the western side setback so as to maximize privacy and amenity between the subject site and no.10, and must achieve a minimum height at maturity of 4 metres.

 

Public Utilities

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

 

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION & SITE WORK

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

 

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

 

Inspections During Construction

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

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

 

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

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

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

 

Restriction on Working Hours

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

 

Activity

Permitted working hours

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

·   Monday to Friday - 7.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

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

 

·   Monday to Friday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

 

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

 

Demolition Work Requirements

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

 

·          Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and Regulations

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

·          WorkCover NSW Guidelines and Codes of Practice

·          Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·          The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations

·          Relevant EPA Guidelines

·          Randwick City Council Asbestos Policy

 

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

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

 

·          Relevant Occupational Health & Safety legislation and WorkCover NSW requirements

 

·          Randwick City Council’s Asbestos Policy

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

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

 

Public Safety & Site Management

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land, Excavations & Retaining Walls

52.     In accordance with section 80 A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 98 E of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that the adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

·      as may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

55.     There must be no encroachment of any structures or building work onto Council’s road reserve, footway, nature strip or public place, apart from the foot bridge pedestrian entrance from Kynaston Avenue. .

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

56.     Any openings within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place (i.e. for proposed drainage works or installation of services), must be carried out in accordance with the following requirements, to the satisfaction of Council:

 

a)     A Road / Asset Opening Permit must be obtained from Council prior to carrying out any works within or upon a road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place, in accordance with section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and all of the conditions and requirements contained in the Road / Asset Opening Permit must be complied with.

 

b)     Council’s Road / Asset Opening Officer must be notified at least 48 hours in advance of commencing any excavation works and also immediately upon completing the works (on 9399 0691 or 0409 033 921 during business hours), to enable any necessary inspections or works to be carried out.

 

c)     Relevant Road / Asset Opening Permit fees, construction fees, inspection fees and security deposits, must be paid to Council prior to commencing any works within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or other public place,

 

d)     The owner/developer must ensure that all works within or upon the road reserve, footpath, nature strip or other public place are completed to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issuing of a final occupation certificate or occupation of the development (whichever is sooner).

 

e)     Excavations and trenches must be back-filled and compacted in accordance with AUSPEC standards 306U.

 

f)     Excavations or trenches located upon a road or footpath are required to be provided with 50mm depth of cold-mix bitumen finish, level with the existing road/ground surface, to enable Council to readily complete the finishing works at a future date.

 

g)     Excavations or trenches located upon turfed areas are required to be back-filled, compacted, top-soiled and re-turfed with Kikuyu turf.

 

h)     The work and area must be maintained in a clean, safe and tidy condition at all times and the area must be thoroughly cleaned at the end of each days activities and upon completion.

 

i)      The work can only be carried out in accordance with approved hours of building work as specified in the development consent, unless the express written approval of Council has been obtained beforehand.

 

j)     Sediment control measures must be implemented in accordance with the conditions of development consent and soil, sand or any other material must not be allowed to enter the stormwater drainage system or cause a pollution incident.

 

k)     The owner/developer must have a Public Liability Insurance Policy in force, with a minimum cover of $10 million and a copy of the insurance policy must be provided to Council prior to carrying out any works within or upon the road, footpath, nature strip or in any public place.

 

Traffic Management

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

 

Stormwater Drainage

58.     Adequate provisions must be made to collect and discharge stormwater drainage during construction of the building to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.

 

The prior written approval of Council must be obtained to connect or discharge site stormwater to Council’s stormwater drainage system or street gutter.

 

Tree Removal within site

59.     Approval is granted for removal of the two Cypress Pines (Cedars) located hard up against the northern side of the existing garage, so as to accommodate the proposed works as shown, subject to full implementation of the approved landscape plan.

 

Removal of vegetation from reserve

60.     The applicant will be required to cover all costs associated with removal, stump-grinding and disposal of the shrubs located in the adjoining public reserve, 30R Church Street, being from north to south, a White Cedar, an Oleander and a Wattle, along with all Agapanthus and any weeds, so as to accommodate the new planting in this area, and must satisfy themselves as to the location of all services, prior to the commencement of any external works in the reserve.

 

Pruning of Neighbours Tree

61.     Permission is granted for the minimal and selective pruning of only those lower growing branches from the eastern aspect of the Cedar located in the side setback of the adjoining property at 10 Kynaston Avenue, only where they overhang the common boundary into the subject site, and need to be pruned in order to avoid damage to the tree; or; interference with the works.

 

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

 

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

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing an ‘Occupation Certificate’.

 

Note:        For the purpose of this consent, any reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall also be taken to mean ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

 

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

 

Occupation Certificate Requirements

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

 

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

 

BASIX Requirements

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

 

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

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

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

 

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

b)       Construct kerb and gutter for the full site frontage in Tram lane except opposite the vehicular entrance and exit points.

c)       Carry out a full depth, minimum 1 metre wide, road construction in front of the kerb and gutter along the full site frontage.

d)       Construct  0.5m (approximate) wide concrete footpath along the full site frontage behind new kerb.

e)       Construct new footpaths in Kynaston Avenue reserve as required to Council’s specification.

 

67.     Prior to issuing a final occupation certificate or occupation of the development (whichever is sooner), the owner/developer must meet the full cost for Council or a Council approved contractor to repair/replace any damaged sections of Council's footpath, kerb & gutter, nature strip etc which are due to building works being carried out at the above site. This includes the removal of cement slurry from Council's footpath and roadway.

 

68.     All external civil work to be carried out on Council property (including the installation and repair of roads, footpaths, vehicular crossings, kerb and guttering and drainage works), must be carried out in accordance with Council’s Policy for “Vehicular Access and Road and Drainage Works” and the following requirements: 

 

a)     All work on Council land must be carried out by Council, unless specific written approval has been obtained from Council to use non-Council contractors.

 

b)     Details of the proposed civil works to be carried out on Council land must be submitted to Council in a Civil Works Application Form, prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, together with payment of the relevant fees.

 

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

 

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

 

Pedestrian Footbridge

69.     Prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development, a positive covenant under section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919 shall be registered on the title of the subject property, which provides for:-

 

i)      The registered proprietors of the Lot(s) burdened to clean, maintain, renew and repair the pedestrian footbridge (including supporting elements) to Kynaston Avenue Reserve (30R Church Street);

 

ii)      The registered proprietors of the Lot(s) burdened to hold full public liability in relation to any claims sustained as a result of the pedestrian footbridge (including supporting elements);

 

Service Authorities

Sydney Water Requirements

70.     A section 73 Compliance Certificate, under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.  An Application for a Section 73 Certificate must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator.  For details, please refer to the Sydney Water web site www.sydneywater.com.au > Building and developing > Developing your Land > Water Servicing Coordinator or telephone 13 20 92.

 

Please make early contact with the Water Servicing Co-ordinator, as building of water/sewer extensions may take some time and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority and the Council prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate.

 

Aerial Bundling of power

71.     The applicant shall meet the full cost for the overhead power lines (and/or telecommunication cables - include whatever is appropriate) located along the Tram Lane site frontage to be aerially bundled. The applicant shall liaise directly with the relevant service utility authorities to organise for the cables to be bundled. All cables must be bundled to the satisfaction of the relevant service utility authority prior to the issuing of an occupation certificate for the development.

 

Stormwater Drainage

72.     A "restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant" (under section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919) shall be placed on the title of the subject property to ensure that the onsite detention/infiltration system is maintained and that no works which could affect the design function of the detention/infiltration system are undertaken without the prior consent (in writing) from Council. Such restriction and positive covenant shall not be released, varied or modified without the consent of the Council.

 

Notes:

a.       The “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” are to be to the satisfaction of Council. A copy of Council’s standard wording/layout for the restriction and positive covenant may be obtained from Council’s Development Engineer.

b.       The works as executed drainage plan and hydraulic certification must be submitted to Council prior to the “restriction on the use of land” and “positive covenant” being executed by Council.

 

iv.  A works-as-executed drainage plan prepared by a registered surveyor and approved by a suitably qualified and experienced hydraulic consultant/engineer must be forwarded to the Principal Certifying Authority and the Council. The works-as-executed plan must include the following details (as applicable):

 

·       The location of any detention basin/s with finished surface levels;

·       Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals;

·       Volume of storage available in any detention areas;

·       The location, diameter, gradient and material (i.e. PVC, RC etc) of all stormwater pipes;

·       The orifice size/s (if applicable);

·       Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and

·       Details of any pumping systems installed (including wet well volumes).

 

73.     The applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council, certification from a suitably qualified and experienced Hydraulic Engineer, which confirms that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system complies with the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standard AS3500.3:2003 (Plumbing & Drainage- Stormwater Drainage) and conditions of this development consent. 

 

The certification must be provided following inspection/s of the site stormwater drainage system by the Hydraulic Engineers to the satisfaction of the PCA.

 

74.     Shall Council’s pipeline not be relocated outside the development site, a minimum 3.5 metre wide drainage easement shall be created over the line of the pipeline. The easement shall be in favour of Council and the wording and location of the easement shall be to Council’s satisfaction.

 

75.     The applicant shall submit to Council, and have approved, CCTV videos of the reconstructed and/or existing Council stormwater pipeline through and immediately adjacent to the development site. Such CCTV shall inspect the stormwater pipe for any post construction damage.

 

Landscape Certification within site

76.     Prior to issuing any Occupation Certificate, certification from a qualified professional in the landscape/horticultural industry must be submitted to, and be approved by, the PCA, confirming the date that the completed landscaping was inspected, and that it has been installed substantially in accordance with the Landscape Plan by Stuart Noble Associates, dwg DA-1313-01, dated 31.07.13, and any relevant conditions of consent.

 

77.     The owner/s must implement strategies to ensure that the landscaping is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state, until maturity, and for the life of the development.

 

Landscape Certification of reserve

78.     Prior to the PCA issuing any Occupation Certificate, written approval that the landscape works in the reserve have been completed in accordance with any plans and conditions of consent must be obtained from Council’s Landscape Development Officer (9399-0613).

 

79.     Once this written approval is obtained, a 6 month maintenance period will then apply, where the applicant will be responsible for the replacement of failed stock and any other routine works that are required.

 

80.     Upon completion of the 6 month maintenance period, and prior to release/refund of the $10,000 bond, the applicant must obtain written approval from Council’s Landscape Development Officer that the maintenance period has concluded, and all works are satisfactory.

 

81.     Any turfed areas within the reserve that are damaged as result of the works must be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu Turf or similar, and must be completed to Council’s satisfaction, at the applicants cost, and prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

Waste Management

82.     Prior to the occupation of the development, the owner or applicant is required to contact Council’s City Services department, to make the necessary arrangements for the provision of waste services for the premises.

 

83.     The waste storage areas shall be clearly signposted.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

External Lighting

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

 

Street Numbering

85.     Street numbering must be provided to the premises in a prominent position, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Plant & Equipment

86.     The operation of all plant and equipment upon the premises shall not give rise to an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and Regulations.

 

In this regard, the operation of the plant and equipment shall not give rise to an LAeq, 15 min sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background LA90, 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise source/s under consideration by more than 5dB(A) in accordance with relevant NSW Office of Environment & Heritage (EPA) Noise Control Guidelines.

 

Rainwater Tanks

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

 

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

·      before 7.00am or after 8.00pm on weekdays.

 

Stormwater Detention/Infiltration System

88.     The detention area/infiltration system must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure it functions as required by the design.

 

ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

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

 

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

 

A2      This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards and you are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A3      Demolition, building or excavation work must not be commenced until;

 

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

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

For further information please contact Council on 9399 0944.

 

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

 

A7      Prior to commencing any works, the owner/builder should contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au and relevant Service Authorities, for information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

A8      This consent does not authorise any trespass or encroachment upon any adjoining or supported land or building whether private or public.  Where any underpinning, shoring, soil anchoring (temporary or permanent) or the like is proposed to be carried out upon any adjoining or supported land, the land owner or principal contractor must obtain:

 

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

A9      Smoke alarms are required to be installed in all residential dwellings, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and the Building Code of Australia.  Details should be included in the construction certificate application.

 

A10     Demolition work and removal of asbestos materials:

 

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

 

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

 

A11     Any external lighting to the premises should be designed and located so as to minimise light-spill beyond the property boundary or cause a public nuisance.

 

A12     Building owners and occupiers should consider implementing appropriate measures to prevent children from falling from high-level window openings and balconies (e.g. by installing window locking devices; installing heavy-duty screens to window openings; limiting the dimensions of any openings to 125mm; ensuring balustrades to balconies are at least 1m high and; locating fixtures, fittings and furniture away from high-level windows and balconies).

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

For further information about preventing falls from windows and balconies refer to www.health.nsw.gov.au/childsafety or pick-up a brochure from Council’s Customer Service Centre.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Executive Report

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

2.

DA Compliance Report

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D68/14

 

 

Subject:                  22 Araluen Street, Kingsford (DA/713/2009/A)

Folder No:                   DA/713/2009/A

Author:                   Mark Swain, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                    Section 96 modification of the approved development by increasing the height and size of the approved first floor addition, internal reconfiguration and changes to windows on southern and western elevations at first floor level

Ward:                     West Ward

Applicant:                Mr R A Cox

Owner:                        Mr R A Cox &  Ms L J Colenso

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

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

 

Proposal

 

The proposed modifications as submitted involved:

 

Ground floor:

·      A widening of the living room sliding door opening

·      A small pergola between the kitchen and barbeque area.

 

First Floor:

·      An extension towards the front of the dwelling forward of the predominant front roof line to include a 3rd bedroom and study area.

·      Relocation of the approved bathroom and inclusion of and en-suite to the main rear bedroom involving a slight increase in the rear approved first floor plan layout.

·      New window openings to the southern (street) elevation and 1 new and relocated window openings to the western side boundary.

·      Slightly increasing the height and form of the approved roof.

 

Following notification of the proposal and an objection from the owner of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling, principally objecting to the first floor extension forward of the predominant front roof line, discussions were held with the applicant and further modifications made.

 

The modifications which are now the subject of this report comprise:

 

Ground floor:

·      A widening of the living room sliding door opening.

·      A small pergola between the kitchen and barbeque area.

 

First floor

·      Modifications to the internal layout to comprise 3 bedrooms and rear balcony as opposed to the approved 2 bedrooms, rear living area and balcony.

·      A slight increase in the size of the bathroom area.

·      Slightly increasing the height of the approved roof form.

 

Site

The site is a regular shaped allotment having a frontage of 9.57m to Araluen Street and a site area of 301m2.

 

On the land is an existing single storey semi-detached dwelling.

 

Adjoining the site to the east is the adjoining semi-detached dwelling and to the west a semi-detached dwelling with basement garage. To the north is the rear yard area of a 2 storey dwelling house fronting Ainslie Street.

 

The locality is predominantly occupied by single and 2 storey attached and detached dwelling houses.

 

 

 

 

Photographs of Site and Surrounds

 

1. The existing subject and directly adjoining single storey semi-detached dwelling houses.

2. The adjoining single storey semi-detached dwelling to the east of the subject site.

3. The rear yard of the subject site.

4. The rear of the subject dwelling and yard.

 

Site History

 

Details of current approval

DA/713/2009 – Approved 23 March 2010 at the Ordinary Council meeting for demolition of an existing outbuilding, alterations and ground level additions to the rear of the existing semi-detached dwelling, construction of a new first floor level, a new in-ground swimming pool at rear and construction of a front fencing.

 

Submissions

 

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

 

Original Submission

 

24 Araluen Street, Kingsford

Issue

Comment

Overdevelopment of the site excessive bulk and scale.

The proposed modifications as submitted resulted in significant additional bulk to the building. The proposal has been modified to respect the alignment of the approved DA in relation to the first floor addition at the front and the remaining modifications are of minor consequence.

Non-compliance with LEP and DCP with the front setbacks for first floor additions to semi-detached dwellings and approved roof lines. 

The proposal now respects the approved first floor alignment. The roof line will integrate and complement better the integrity of the adjoining semi-detached roof line. The proposal continues to remain well within the allowable floor space (0.54:1 vs. 0.75:1 allowable) and height (7.3m vs. 9.5m) permitted under the RLEP.

Additional negative impact of overshadowing due to increased roof height.

The proposed altered roof line will have a negligible additional impact on shadows cast which are well within the numerical requirements and relevant objectives of the DCP.

 

Revised Submission:

No objections were raised to the amended plans and submission.

 

Key issues

 

Section 96 assessment:

Under the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the following criteria has been complied with:

 

Substantially the Same Development:

The proposed modifications will constitute a development which is substantially the same as that originally granted. As such the relevant criteria is satisfied and the matter may be dealt with under section 96 (2) of the EP and A Act, 1979.

 

Notification and Consideration of Submissions:

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  As a result of this notification, 1 submission was received in relation to the originally submitted modifications and no submissions were received in relation to the final plans.

 

Additional Design Provisions for Semi-Detached Dwellings:

The proposal in its original form did not conform to the objectives or controls relating to the front setback of the first floor additions to semi-detached dwelling. The proposal has since been amended to conform to the approved alignment in this respect.

 

The proposed modifications will result in a development well within the allowable FSR and height controls under the RLEP.

 

In their final form, the proposed modifications are minor in content and embody sustainable impacts similar to those inherent in the original consent.

 

Section 79c assessment:

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

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The proposal is not inconsistent with the general aims and objectives of the RLEP 2012. The relevant clauses of the RLEP are addressed in the Key Issues section of this report.

 


Development Control Plan 2013

The proposed modifications will not alter the approved site coverage, deep soil landscaping or private open space provision as included in the original consent. The minimal setback to the party wall at first floor level has been extended by about 1m to the north which will have negligible additional impacts beyond those inherent in the original consent.

 

The proposal will have negligible additional impacts on solar access to the subject site and surrounding properties and well within the numerical requirements and relevant objectives of the DCP.

 

The proposed upper level will continue to provide 3 relocated window openings to the west facing the adjoining semi-detached dwelling, all adjacent to bedroom areas. This relocation should not give rise to visual privacy impacts beyond those acceptable impacts associated with the original consent.

 

In summary the proposed modifications are consistent with the provisions of the DCP.

 

Site Suitability

The site has previously been assessed as being suitable for the proposed alterations and additions as approved under the original consent granted by Council. The current proposal represents modifications of a minor nature and the changes at upper level to the approved development which will have acceptable visual and amenity impacts. Therefore, the site is considered to be suitable for the proposed modification.

 

Public Interest

The proposed development as modified will be in the public interest as it provides a sustainable addition to a low density form of residential development as anticipated by the aims and relevant objectives of the RLEP and DCP 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 proposed modification to the original development consent satisfies Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and approval of the modification will not result in any significant impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable and within public interest.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/713/2009/A by increasing the height and size of the approved first floor addition, internal reconfiguration and changes to windows on southern and western elevations at first floor level. at 22 Araluen Street, KINGSFORD  in the following manner:

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.       The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA-05 (Revision A), dated 31/08/2009 and received by Council on 2 October 2009, amended plans DA-02, DA-03, DA-06 & DA-07 (Revision B), dated 3/01/2010 and received by Council on 15 February 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, except as may be amended by the following conditions and as may be shown in red by the following:

 

-     Section 96’A’ plans numbered DA02 – DA07 all Revision E, dated 31.05.14 and received by Council on June 20, 2014

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D69/14

 

 

Subject:                  13 -15 Silver Street, Randwick (DA/311/2008/E)

Folder No:                   DA/311/2008/E

Author:                   Mark Swain, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                    Section 96(2) application to modify the approved development by including an additional floor at second floor level to include 2 additional tenancies façade alterations and minor internal modifications to the approved layout

Ward:                     West Ward

Applicant:                MHN Design Union

Owner:                        Titan Enterprise Holdings

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

This S96 (2) application is reported to the Planning Committee as the original Development Application was determined by Council.

 

Proposal

 

The application involves a section 96(2) application to modify consent DA/311/2008 granted by Council on 21 October, 2008 for for demolition of existing buildings and construction of a 3 storey building with 4 tenancies for use as medical centre with 11 on site car park spaces at No 13-15 Silver Street, Randwick.

 

The proposed modifications involve:

 

·         An additional floor at second floor level to allow for 2 additional tenancies with a hipped roof above

·         Alterations to the southern Silver Street façade including removal of previously approved horizontal strip window openings at basement and ground floor level.

·         Provision of additional skylights to the western garden terrace at first floor level.

 

Some internal and minor external modifications at first floor level have already been carried out and the application seeks retrospective regularisation of same.

 

Site History

 

Details of current approval

DA/311/2008 – Approved 21 October 2008 at the Ordinary Council meeting for demolition of existing buildings and construction of a 3 storey building with 4 tenancies for use as medical centre with 11 on site car park spaces at No 13-15 Silver Street, Randwick.

 

DA/311/2008/A – Approved 6 November 2009 to modify the approved development by extending the period to satisfy deferred commencement condition.

 

DA/311/2008/B – Refused 9 February 2010 at the Planning Committee Meeting to modify the original consent by deleting conditions relating to cost of underground power lines.

 

DA/311/2008/C – Approved 19 February 2010 to modify the carparking layout at basement level and minor reconfiguration of internal layout of ground floor level, provision of air intake within the roof terrace garden at the western end of the site to service the new electrical substation as required by condition 75 of the development consent. 

 

DA/311/2008/D – 30 August, 2012 to modify approved development by in fill of light well on first floor and alteration to roof top plant.

 

The Subject Site and Surrounding Area

The subject site is located on the western side of Belmore Road on the corner of Belmore Road and Silver Street. The subject site has a generally regular shape except for a splayed front boundary at the corner. It has a southern frontage to Silver Street of approximately 42m, western side boundary of 9.45m and a northern boundary of 59m. Whilst the eastern boundary comprises a sharp splayed corner of 19.35m at the intersection of Silver Street and Belmore Road, the site does not have an address to Belmore Road. The site has an area of 469sqm and falls gently east to west by approximately 2.91m.

 

Existing on the site is a 3 storey medical centre development with 4 tenancies with 11 on site car park spaces approved by Council on October 21, 2008.

 

Figure 1: Subject Building viewed from Silver Street.

 

Figure 2: Subject Building viewed from Belmore Road.

To the north:

A single-storey commercial building, occupied by the Commonwealth Bank of typical 1970s commercial design.  Buildings further north of the bank comprises two-storey terraced period style units with shopfronts to the Belmore Road boundary.

 

To the east:

Across Belmore Road are predominantly two and three storey terraced buildings with ground floor shop and upper floor residential/commercial uses.

 

To the south :

Across Silver Street is a part one storey and part three storey 1920s style building with ground floor café/restaurant use and upper floor residential/commercial uses in the three storey section fronting Belmore Road and a TAB shop in the rear single storey section fronting Silver Street. Adjoining the TAB shop to the west is a three storey period style building containing commercial uses which is bounded by Arthur Lane. Across Arthur Lane is a public carpark and residential flat buildings all fronting Silver Street.

 

To the west :

A three story period style residential flat building at No. 11 Silver Street which is bounded by Elizabeth Street on its western side. Across Elizabeth Street is a row of residential flat buildings of various styles all fronting Silver Street.

 

Submissions

 

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

 

Key Issues

 

Section 96 assessment:

Under the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the following criteria has been complied with:-

 

Substantially the Same Development:

The proposed modifications relate essentially to the provision of an additional upper level component to the approved medical centre development on the site. The modifications which involve 2 new tenancies to the approved medical centre will constitute an end development which is substantially the same as that as the development for which consent was originally granted. As such the relevant criteria is satisfied and the matter may be dealt with under section 96 (2) of the EP and A Act, 1979.

 

With respect to the minor modifications involving internal and façade changes to the first floor level, given the minor nature of these changes and having regard to relevant Land Environment Court case law, the proposed modifications can be approved retrospectively and no objection is raised to this aspect of the proposal.

 

Notification and Consideration of Submissions:

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification.  As a result of this notification, no submissions were received.


Floor Space Ratio:

Under Clause 4.4 (2) of the RLEP, the maximum FSR applicable for the subject site is 2:1 (938sqm). The original proposal (DA/311/2008) resulted in a maximum approved FSR of 1.9:1 (932.3sqm). The most recent modification DA/311/2008/D involving the removal of the void resulted in a further increase of GFA of 39.75sqm yielding a currently approved FSR of 2.07:1 (972.05sqm).

 

Since approval of the most recent amendment above, the RLEP 2012 has been gazetted which includes a definition of gross floor area different to the previous instrument and excludes inter-alia wall thicknesses. The current modification seeks to take advantage of the new definition to extend the building by a further 154.87sqm which will result in a total FSR of 2.1:1 as per the new definition.

 

The proposed addition to the approved development at the upper second floor level will include 2 new tenancy areas for the approved medical centre on the site. Whilst the existing amount of approved floor area is lessened in strict numerical terms by the new definition it does not follow that a further increase in floor area is acceptable purely based on this fact as any proposed addition will add further bulk, scale and height to the development on the site. However on this occasion the proposed addition will result in an attractive built component to the existing building which will have acceptable impacts on the streetscape and amenity of the surrounding area.

 

The objectives of the FSR standard are:

 

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

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

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

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

 

The increase in the floor space on this occasion is supported for the following reasons:

 

§ The increase in floor area is minor being only 46.9 sqm or 5% over the standard.

§ The additional floor area will result in an end development of a size and scale that is compatible with surrounding development and the desired future character of the area.

§ The additional floor area does not result in any significant overshadowing, privacy and view loss impacts.

§ The building maintains the maximum permitted building height of 12m under the RLEP and the approved height of 11.92m. 

§ The siting of the proposed addition to the rear of the site will ensure that the development is compatible with the scale and character of contributory buildings in the conservation area proximate to the site.

§ The increase in floor area will not be inconsistent with relevant objectives of the local business B2 zone, will not be inconsistent with the purpose of the standard and satisfies the relevant DCP controls.

 

Height

Clause 4.3 (2) of the RLEP imposes a maximum FSR of 2:1. The proposed modification complies with the maximum height limit and retains the height of the building as approved development of 11.92m.

 

Car Parking

When the original application was assessed, due to the limited physical ability to provide onsite parking, the deferred commencement consent granted included 11 onsite parking spaces, resulting on a shortfall. A Voluntary Planning Agreement payment of $153,829 was also agreed to by the applicant to the cost of construction of townscape improvements including pavement and road upgrading within the boundaries of the Randwick Junction Town Centre within the B2 Local Centre Zone as planned to be carried out by Council.

 

The current application was referred to the engineering services unit which initially raised issues in relation to the proposed additional floor space and associated demand for off street parking. The applicants provided an additional traffic impact assessment which concludes an acceptable impact in this regard despite there being no additional parking proposed onsite. The following is an extract from the relevant sections of the engineering services unit’s report:

 

Parking Comments

The proposed increase of 154.87m2 in floor area as a result of this S96 application will generate an additional parking demand of 6 spaces when adopting the parking rate for medical centres of 1 space per 25m2 specified in Part B7 of Council’s DCP 2013.

 

In previous memo’s by Development Engineering dated 9th October 2013 and 10th April 2014 it was stated that the deficiency had not been adequately addressed and was not supported.  Following a meeting with applicant on 15th May 2014 Council requested the submission of a parking study to address the shortfall.  This has now been submitted and the following comments are made in relation to this study.

 

Parking Study

The parking study by Traffix Pty Ltd undertook a survey of available parking spaces on Friday 23rd May 2014 between the hours of 10am – 3pm. The survey area included a total of 835 spaces comprising of public off-street (564 spaces) and public on-street (271 spaces).

 

It should be noted that 530 (63%) of the spaces within the survey area were located within the basement carpark at Randwick Shopping Village. Relying solely on this carpark to justify the shortfall would not have been supported by Development Engineering as it is private property and cannot be relied upon in the future.

 

The results of the survey show that there was a minimum of 150 unused spaces at 10am which increased progressively throughout the day to 201 spaces at 3pm. When excluding the basement carpark at Randwick Shopping Village however the availability was only   21 spaces at 10am and remaining fairly constant throughout the day with 19 spaces available at 3pm. These rates indicate an occupancy rate of approximately 93% which is considerably higher than if the shopping village carpark is included (eg 82% at 10am and 75.9% at 3pm).

 

The parking study indicates there is a high demand for on-street parking in the vicinity of the development site. For example the 34 space Silver Street public carpark opposite the subject site was full at all times during the survey period except during a small window at 2pm where 1 space was available. Limited spaces were available however further down Silver Street and in Elizabeth St, within easy walking distance of the development.

 

Public parking availability within Randwick shopping village has been acknowledged however this has been considered mainly from a shared trip perspective and cannot be solely relied upon.

 

It is also acknowledged that the site is located within Randwick Town Centre and in close proximity to excellent bus services on Belmore road, car share bays and the future light rail terminus at High Cross Park. Sever geometric constraints on the site also prevent the provision of further parking.

 

In consideration of the submitted parking study and above factors Development Engineering is of the opinion that the proposed S96 amendment will have some minor impacts on the availability of on-street parking in the vicinity but this is not necessarily considered fatal to the application.

 

Having regard to the above assessment, the proposal is considered satisfactory in regard to off street parking provision.

 

Heritage Controls

The subject site is within the Randwick Junction Heritage Conservation Area.

 

The matter was referred to Council’s heritage officer and the following is an extract of the relevant comments from the officer’s report:

 

Changes to the exterior of the building appear to be minor, comprising changes to façade composition.  It is considered that the proposed façade design is consistent with the condition which was included in the original consent and does not raise any further heritage concerns.

 

In relation to the proposed additional floor area at level two, the original heritage comments recommended that an infill structure to a defined conservation area should be cohesive with the established context and streetscape.  It was noted that the proposed replacement building is of a scale responding to the dominant height plane of buildings fronting Belmore Road. 

 

The existing building form includes a three storey element at the Belmore Road end of the site, extending along Silver Street to include the central stairway, with a 2 ½ storey element along the remainder of Silver Street and a two storey element above the carpark entry at the western end of the site.  The proposed building form will include a partial third level extending from the stairway a further 14m along Silver Street. The partial additional level will give the building a 3 ½ storey scale, stepping down to the original 2 ½ and 2 storey scale.  The partial additional level will be set back from the western boundary of the site by over 20m.  The proposed additional level will not be visible from the north east in Belmore Road due to the height of the Commonwealth Bank parapets.  The proposed additional level will not be prominent from the south east in Belmore Road as it is well set back from the Belmore Road frontage and screened by the existing three storey element.  The scale of the development will remain compatible with surrounding development which includes a 3 storey Interwar flat building on the opposite side of Silver Street. 

 

Section 79c assessment:

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

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

The proposal is not inconsistent with the general aims and objectives of the RLEP 2012. The relevant clauses of the RLEP are addressed in the Key Issues section of this report.

 


Development Control Plans

 

Randwick Centre DCP

The site is within the Randwick Junction Development Control Plan Area. The DCP includes controls relating to visual character and architectural styles within the centre having regard to the historical and social significance within the Randwick LGA.

 

The proposed modifications which do not impact on the Belmore Road façade and will address Silver Street have been reviewed by Council’s Heritage Officer and considered acceptable in relation to surrounding contributory buildings and the wider conservation area.

 

The visual character controls within the DCP seek to retain views and vistas available from within the centre which are respected in the form of the proposed modification which will only be obtusely visible from Belmore Road.

 

The Urban form architectural style and site planning of the proposed modification will complement the existing approved development and satisfactorily relate to the surrounding built form.

 

The building envelope controls are envisaged by the FSR and height controls under the RLEP which have been addressed in the Key Issues section of the report and concluded as acceptable.

 

The building design controls as relevant to upper facades are satisfied in that the addition will complement rather than dominate the façade of the development to Silver Street or surrounding properties. A condition regarding detail of materials and finishes to be provided prior to issue of the CC is included in the recommendation.

 

The car parking and access provisions of the DCP have been dealt with in the Key Issues section of the report.

 

In summary the proposed modifications are consistent with the provisions of the Randwick Centre DCP.

 

Amenity Impacts

The proposed upper floor and other minor internal and external modifications will not have any adverse visual amenity impacts and in fact will complement the existing development. Additionally, there will be no privacy, solar access and view impacts arising from the proposed modifications.

 

In terms of internal amenity, the addition of 2 medical tenancies will contribute to the efficiency the medical centre as a whole and provide additional circulation space for staff and patients. 

 

Site Suitability

The site has previously been assessed as being suitable for the proposed medical centre approved under the original consent granted by Council. The current proposal represents modifications of a minor nature and the addition of an upper level extension to the approved development which will have acceptable visual and amenity impacts. Therefore, the site is considered to be suitable for the proposed modification.

 

Public Interest

The proposed development as modified will be in the public interest as it provides a specialist medical facility in a location within the Randwick Junction Town Centre that is highly accessible by public transport and private vehicles. In addition, the proposal will complement and consolidate the role and function of the Randwick Junction town centre in accordance with the Randwick City Plan and the Randwick LEP 1998.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modification to the original development consent satisfies Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, in that it will constitute substantially the same development, and approval of the modification will not result in any significant impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining premises or the streetscape. It is therefore considered that the modification to the original development consent is reasonable and within public interest.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council as the consent authority, grant its consent under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended to modify Development Consent No DA/311/2008 by adding an additional floor at second floor level to include 2 new tenancies, façade alterations and minor internal modifications at 13-15 Silver Street, Randwick in the following manner:

 

A.        Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA03 to DA09, all Revision D, and received by Council on 5 May 2008, and as amended by DA06, Rev E, received by Council on 6 August 2008, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the following: -

 

-    Section 96’A’ application dated 22.09.09 and received by Council on 22 September 2009, and

 

-    Section 96’C’ plans numbered DA-03 to DA-08, Revision F, dated 22.12.2009 and received by Council on 23 December 2009,

 

-    Section 96’D’ plans numbered DA-04, DA-05 and DA-08, Revision G, dated 03.05.2012 and received by Council on 9 May 2012,

 

-    Section 96’E’ plans numbered DA03 – DA06 and DA08 all Revision H and received by Council on August 12, 2013,

 

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

 

 

Attachment/s:

Nil

Development Application Report No. D70/14

 

 

Subject:                  45 Carr Street, Coogee (DA/768/2009/A)

Folder No:                   DA/768/2009/A

Author:                   Matthew Choi, Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                    Section 96(2) Modification of approved development by addition of bedroom to unit 2 at ground floor, extension of living area and terrace, internal alterations and addition of new window on the eastern side.

Ward:                     East Ward

Applicant:                Carr Street Coogee Pty Ltd

Owner:                        Carr Street Coogee Pty Ltd

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

Description: http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview37633.png

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The Section 96(2) application is referred to the Planning Committee as the original development application was determined at the Planning Committee meeting on 8 June 2010.

 

Proposal

 

The subject section 96 modification to the approved development involves providing an additional bedroom to unit no. 2, increase size to living room area and terrace, internal alterations and addition of new windows on eastern side of unit.

 

Site

 

At present, the site is currently under construction as per the approved development consent DA/768/2009. Immediately adjoining the site to the west (No.41-43 Carr Street) is a 4 storey residential flat building which is part of a larger H-shape multi-unit complex. To the east is a two-storey strata titled dwelling containing two units. To the north are two brick residential flat buildings at Nos. 26 and 28 Kidman Street. To the south on the opposite side of Carr Street is a 4 storey residential flat building with parking at ground floor. Overall, the locality is characterised by a mixture of multi-unit housing and duplex type developments.

 

Submissions

 

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

 

Section 96 Amendment

 

Under the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, Council may only agree to a modification of an existing Development Consent if the following criteria has been complied with:

 

Substantially the same development:

The proposal will not result in a change to the nature of the original application and the changes will result in a development that is substantially the same as that for which the consent was granted. The proposal involves an increase to the size of unit no. 2 by an additional 13 square metres and provision of additional bedroom, increase to size of outdoor terrace, minor internal alterations and new window openings along the eastern elevation at ground floor level. The modifications will not result in any significant or unreasonable appreciable impacts upon the amenity of the adjoining dwellings or the character of the locality. Therefore, it is considered the modifications are considered to result in substantially the same development for which consent was granted.  

 

Notification and consideration of submissions:

The owners of adjoining and neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed Section 96 modifications in accordance with the DCP for Public Notification.  

 

Consultation with relevant public authorities:

No referrals to other public authorities are required.

 

Key Issues

 

·      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012

Clause 4.4: Floor Space Ratios

Clause 4.4, subclause 2(B) of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 states that a maximum floor space ratio 0.9:1 applies in accordance with the floor space ratio map. The proposed development will increase the floor space ratio to the site, achieving a FSR of 0.93:1.

 

 

Floor Space Ratio

Gross Floor Area

Approved development

0.91:1

516 m²

Current modifications

0.93:1

529 m²

Permissible Floor Space Ratio/Gross Floor Area

0.9:1

511 m²

Section 96 Floor Space Ratio/Gross Floor Area in excess of LEP development standard

0.03:1

18

 

The subject modification will increase the breach of the FSR development standard as compared to the approved scheme. Given that the current application is made pursuant to Section 96 of the EP&A Act, there is no mechanism to require a Clause 4.6: Exceptions to the Development Standards to justify the variation from the statutory control. It is considered that the proposed FSR is satisfactory for the following reasons:

 

·      The extent of the increase in gross floor area (being 13sqm) is minor in nature and there are no significant changes to the approved building envelope. The built form will not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts in terms of overshadowing, views and privacy intrusion than the approved development.

·      The proposed addition will not impact the amenity of the streetscape nor will it detract from the individual character as the proposed addition is located at the rear of the multi-unit development and will not be readily visible from the public domain.

·      The proposal involves the increase to the outdoor terrace for unit no.2 and will extend 1.3 metres further north towards the rear boundary. Whilst the extension of the terrace is not technically included in the floor area calculation it arises due to the increase in the gross floor area of the ground floor unit no. 2. Nevertheless, the proposed extension of the approved terrace will not compromise existing privacy levels to the private open space and the habitable room windows of the neighbouring residential flat developments.

·      The proposal will continue to comply with the relevant objectives of Clause 4.4: Floor Space Ratios as the size and scale of the development is compatible with the desired future character of the locality and the modifications are considered to be articulated and will respond to environmental and energy needs.  

·      No objections have been received from the Design Review Panel in regards to the additional gross floor area and advised that the alterations and additions. 

 

The proposed modification is considered to be reasonable and will not result in significant additional impacts on the adjoining properties. The proposal is consistent with the aims of the LEP, the objectives for Clause 4.4: Floor Space Ratio and the R3: Medium Density Residential zone objectives in that the built form will not compromise the aesthetic character, environmental qualities and social amenity of the locality. The deviation from the FSR control is therefore supported.

 

·      Randwick Development Control Plan 2013

 

Amenity: Visual Privacy

The proposed section 96 modifications seeks to extend the outdoor terrace by an additional 1.3 metres towards the rear boundary. In accordance with the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 (RDCP 2013) new development must provide a reasonable level of visual privacy for dwellings and neighbouring properties.  The increase to the size of the outdoor terrace will not result in any significant privacy impacts to the neighbouring dwelling. To the east of the terrace extension is an existing driveway handle to garage structures at ground floor level and common area/clothes drying area at no. 41-43 Carr Street, to the west is an existing garage structure and common area to no. 45A Carr Street and finally to the rear is an existing common area/clothes drying area to no. 26 and 28 Kidman Street. In addition to this, the increase to the size of the outdoor terrace will still result in a 15 metre building separation between the subject terrace and the rear residential flat development at no. 26 Kidman Street which is considered to be a significant building separation to the neighbouring dwellings.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the proposal also includes the construction of new window openings along the eastern elevation of the ground floor unit no.2. However, the window openings are located directly adjacent to a trafficable footpath that leads to the common property at the rear of the subject site. Consequently, the positioning of the window openings will allow direct overlooking into bedroom no. 3 and the private living areas. To provide a reasonable level of privacy to the occupants of unit no. 2 the window openings along the eastern elevation shall have a sill height of more than 1.6 metres when measured from the finished floor level.  

 

Design Review Panel

Panel Comments:

This is a Section 96 Application for the conversion of one apartment from two to three bedrooms in an approved, and under construction, development containing six units (all with two bedrooms). 

 

The proposal would add 13m2 to the floor area of the building, increasing its FSR from 0.9:1 to 0.93:1. Car parking requirements would not be altered.

 

The proposed alterations to the structure would appear to have no adverse external impacts, nor would it reduce the amenity of the other apartments in the building.

 

The proposal would increase the diversity of units available in the locality. This is desirable and, according to the applicant, would assist in meeting a current demand for three bedroom apartments, particularly those with a relationship to garden spaces.

 

The Panel also discussed some privacy impacts between the common paths and the ground floor windows. The architect should adjust those elements to maximise amenity while minimising privacy conflicts.  The clash between the entry gate and the window position should also be amended.

 

In the Panel’s opinion the application should be approved.

 

Note: The applicant has provided amended plans by reconfiguring the pedestrian gate to open away from the window openings. In addition to this a condition of consent has been included that the window openings along the eastern elevation of unit no. 2 must have a sill height of more than 1.6 metres when measured from the finished floor level. The above addresses the concerns raised by the Design Review Panel.  

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed modifications to the approved multi-unit development has been assessed against the requirements of the relevant planning guidelines of the RLEP 2012, the relevant council policies including the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 as well as in regard to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended. The proposed modification will result in substantially the same development as that previously approved and will not result in any unreasonable adverse impacts upon either the amenity of the adjoining premises or the character of the locality.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants consent under Sections 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/768/2009/A for permission to modify the approved development by the addition of a bedroom to unit 2 at ground floor, extension of living area and terrace, internal alterations and addition of new window on the eastern side at 45 Carr Street, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

Amend Condition No. 1 to read:

1.     The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans numbered DA-01, Rev. E, dated  19/05/2010 and stamped received by Council on 20 May 2010; and DA-02 to DA-06, Rev. D, and dated 16/04/2010, and stamped received by Council on 12 May 2010, the application form and on any supporting information received with the application, as amended by the Section 96 plan numbered S96-14-04 to S96-14-06, all dated 20/04/14 and received by Council on the 23 May 2014; and S96-14-01 (Revision A), dated 22/07/14 and received by Council on 22 July 2014 only in so far as they relate to the modifications highlighted on the Section 96 plans and detailed in the Section 96 application, except as may be amended  by the following conditions and as may be shown in red on the attached plans:

 

Add Condition No. 104 to read:

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

 

·           East facing ground floor window to bedroom no. 3 of unit 2

·           East facing ground floor window to living room of unit 2

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

Nil

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D71/14

 

 

Subject:                  16 Coogee Street, Coogee (DA/853/2013)

Folder No:                   DA/853/2013

Author:                   Mark Swain, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

Proposal:                    Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a part 2/part 3 storey residential flat building containing 9 units, basement carparking for 10 vehicles, landscaping, fencing and associated works (variation to floor space ratio control)

Ward:                     East Ward

Applicant:                JPRA ArchitectsPty Ltd

Owner:                        Eva and John Grant

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

Description: http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview36676.png

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The DA is referred to Council as it is valued at over $2 million.

 

Proposal

 

The proposal is for the demolition of an existing dwelling and rear outbuilding and construction of a part 2/part 3 storey residential flat building containing 8 units, basement carparking for 10 vehicles, landscaping, fencing and associated works.

 

Site and Locality

The site is rectangular in shape with a frontage of 15.915m to Coogee Street and a total site area of 660.4m2.

 

Existing within the site is a single storey fibro clad and brick residential dwelling and detached out. The site fronts onto the southern side of Coogee Street and extends through to the rear boundary of properties facing the northern side of Dolphin Street and is flanked to the east and west by 2 storey red brick, residential flat buildings.

 

The land slopes away from Coogee Street to the rear at a gradient of approximately 1 in 10. Bounding the site to the south are the rear yard areas of residential developments fronting Dolphin characterised as low lying and with substantial vegetation (outside the subject site) and extending east west to the cul-de-sac end of Albi Place.

 

The site is located at the western end of Coogee Street, close to the intersection of Judge Street. Coogee Street runs east-west and is a two lane local street with on street parking available. The site is located in the north eastern part of the Randwick local government area and is approximately 1.4 kilometres west of Coogee Beach.

 

The locality is predominantly occupied by a mixture older style and 60s -70s style residential flat buildings and single and 2 storey detached housing.

 

        Subject site and surrounding Context and Rear Vegetated Gully

 

Subject Site

 

Adjoining Development to the East

Adjoining Development to the East

 

Streetscape to the East

Streetscape to the west

Streetscape Opposite the site in Coogee Street

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development on 2 occasions in accordance with the Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013. The following submissions were received as a result of the notification processes in relation to the original and amended submissions:

 

 

 

Original Submission

Nos. 6, 10, Units 2, 3 and 4-16A, 19, 21

And 23 Coogee Street, Randwick

Issue

Comment

Inadequate off street parking, lack of on-street parking and congestion of Coogee Street and surrounding Locality.

The traffic and parking impact has been assessed as acceptable by Council’s engineering services unit. The proposal will only result in one parking space deficiency.

 

Adverse impact on amenity of the locality

The proposal in its amended form complies with the principal controls under Councils RLEP and is consistent with the desired future character of development envisaged under these controls.

Non-compliance with FSR and height limits and consequent excessive bulk, scale and height of the proposed development.

The proposal in its amended form is fully compliant with FSR and maximum height controls in addition to the landscaping, setback, and private open space controls in Council’s DCP.

Excavation concerns regarding proposed basement and retaining walls.

Conditions will be imposed to ensure the protection of adjoining developments from any excavation impacts.

Concern over asbestos removal in the rear outbuilding due to concentration of small children on adjoining sites.

Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation to ensure removal of asbestos in accordance with applicable requirements.

Concerns over compliance with restricted hours of construction.

Strict compliance with construction hours will be conditioned.

Impact on sunlight access and adverse visual impact.

The proposed development in its amended form significantly reduces solar access impacts from the original proposal and is assessed as acceptable given the high level of compliance now evident.

 

External facades have been modified in bulk and coupled with compliant or greater setbacks the proposed visual impact is considered acceptable and in accordance with that envisaged under Council’s controls.

Privacy impacts to window openings in adjoining developments from outdoor spaces of units.

Deck areas adjacent to the relevant terrace areas will be appropriately screened.

Loss of privacy to rear yard areas of adjoining developments.

Rear balconies will be screened to ensure a reasonable level of mutual privacy between developments.

Inadequate street setbacks, landscaping of the development to Coogee Street and façade presentation.

The development in its amended form increases the setback and landscaping provision at the front of the site and the front façade has been transformed to provide a very attractive presentation to the streetscape.

High volume of development adversely impact surrounding amenity.

The proposal in its amended form reduces the overall number of dwellings on the site to 8 in compliance with the FSR control.

9, 11, 13, 15 and 17 Dolphin Street , Randwick

 

Presence of a vegetated rear gully between properties fronting Coogee and Dolphin Streets will be significantly disturbed affecting wildlife and amenity of private recreational space of properties.

 

 

The proposal in its amended form includes an additional setback beyond compliance) albeit slight, that coupled with general compliance with almost all other planning controls applicable to the site will result in a built environment within that envisaged under Council’s controls.

 

The rear setback will be greater than that existing to the outbuilding on the site and the rear yard areas will be appropriately landscaped.

Non-compliance with FSR and height limits and consequent excessive bulk, scale and height of the proposed development.

The proposal in its amended form is fully compliant with FSR and maximum height controls in addition to the landscaping, setback, and private open space controls in Council’s DCP.

Inadequate stormwater drainage areas on site.

The proposed development provides in excess of the required deep soil areas under Council’s DCP and the engineering services unit has assessed the stormwater arrangement to be acceptable.

Non-compliance with design guidelines and principals under the DCP.

The DCP controls with the exception of the external wall height are complied with in the form of the amended development. The departure from the external wall height is addressed in the Key Issues section of this report.

Inconsistency with the predominant rear setback of building in the immediate locality.

The proposed development in its amended form is consistent with the type of development envisaged under Council’s planning controls.

The development does not accord with the topography of the site.

The proposal in its amended form does relate acceptably to the site topography and accords with maximum height, bulk and scale controls.

Unacceptable privacy impacts to the rear of properties fronting Dolphin Street.

The proposal in its amended form embodies setbacks in excess of those required to the rear of the site and adequate physical separation of a minimum of approximately 14m to living areas. Landscaping of the rear yard area of the proposed development should also alleviate privacy impacts.

Significant loss of sunlight access to rear yard areas and associated installations in Dolphin Street.

Shadow diagrams have been checked and  indicate compliance with DCP requirements in regard to solar access to the respective properties.

Design of building seems completely out of character with adjoin and surrounding developments.

The amended plans include a reduced building envelope of compliant form that will relate more acceptable to the existing built environment.

Inadequate storage within the development.

Basement and in unit storage areas are available in accordance with the requirements of the DCP.

Amended Proposal

 

Nos. 9, 11 and 15 Dolphin Street, Randwick

 

Amended plans do not adequately address issues regarding bulk and scale impacts on privacy and the wildlife conditions of the gully.

The proposal in its amended form is compliant with the all but the external wall height control which is addressed in the Key Issue section of the report.

 

There is no statutorily identified wildlife habitat, community or corridor identified in this locality.

 

The rear of the proposed development will replace an existing outbuilding with additional setbacks to the boundary such that the subject site does not contain substantial vegetation that contributes to the conditions evident on other properties. The landscaping of this area will contribute to wildlife habitat.

 

The proposed development is consistent with the desired future character envisaged under Council’s planning controls.

Amended plans continue to include departures from the maximum external wall height controls and parking requirements.

Refer to Key Issues section of the report.

Proposed development will set a dangerous precedent for development to and resultant destruction of local character.

The proposal is consistent the type of development envisaged under Council’s planning controls.

 

Key Issues

 

1.1    External Wall Height:

The DCP outlines the following objectives in this regard:

 

·      To ensure that the building form provides for interesting roof forms and is compatible with the streetscape.

·      To ensure ceiling heights for all habitable rooms promote light and quality interior spaces.

·      To control the bulk and scale of development and minimise the impacts on the neighbouring properties in terms of overshadowing, privacy and visual amenity.

 

The DCP limits the external wall height to 8m and the proposed development incorporates external wall heights ranging from 7.4m to 9.5m at the highest point.

 

Despite the strict non-compliance with the maximum external wall height control under the DCP, objectives of the control are satisfied in that:

 

·        The proposed roof line provides for an interesting roof form with an acceptable aesthetic impact, the building includes substantial articulation to allow for a compatible presentation to the streetscape.

 

·        The proposed ceiling heights of 2.7m of habitable rooms and inclusion of clerestory window openings in the upper levels adequately promote light and quality of internal spaces in a form which has been supported by the SEPP 65 – Design Review Panel.

 

·        The proposed bulk and scale of the development conforms to the applicable controls. The impacts of overshadowing to adjoining properties are sustainable and privacy and visual amenity have been reasonably addressed in the form of the proposed development subject to appropriate conditions.

 

Having regard to the above assessment, departure from the external wall height requirement of Council’s DCP is supported.

 

1.2      Car Parking    

The proposed development results in a strict numerical shortfall of 1 car space.

 

This aspect is addressed by the Development Engineer (comments below) and the minor departure is supported in this instance.

 

Parking Comments

Parking Requirements for the development have been assessed as per the rates specified in Randwick Council’s Development Control Plan 2013 Part B7.

 

Vehicle Parking Provision

Vehicle parking for multi-unit housing is to be provided at the following rates as detailed in part B7 of Council’s DCP 2013;

1 space per 2 studio units (<40m2)

1 space per 1 bedroom unit (over 40m2)

1.2 spaces per 2 bedroom unit

1.5 spaces per 3 bedroom unit

1 visitor space per 4 units (but none where development is less than 4 dwellings)

 

The proposed amended development now consists of 8 units comprising of 4 x 1 bedroom units plus 4 x 2 bedroom units.

 

Parking required       = (4 x 1) + (4 x 1.2) + 8/4(visitor)

                             = 10.8

                             = say 11 spaces (including 2 visitor spaces)

 

Parking provided        = 11 spaces (including 1 visitor space)

 

The overall parking provision complies with the DCP requirements although there is a shortfall in the provision of visitor spaces. In consideration of the full compliance however and the sites location there is no objection to the 1 space shortfall in visitor parking in this instance.

 

1.3      Rear Setback and Existing Vegetated Gully and Associated Loss of Privacy and Amenity

The objectives of the DCP in respect of Landscaping and Biodiversity are as follows:

 

·         To promote high quality landscape design as an integral component of the overall design of a development.

·         To provide landscape design and plantings that are compatible with the site and locality.

·         To contribute to the preservation of and extension to native fauna and flora habitats.

 

The objectives in relation to Preservation of Trees and Vegetation are as follows:

 

·        To effectively protect the urban forest in Randwick City, with particular emphasis on retaining trees with cultural, heritage and natural significance.

·        To encourage the preservation of trees and vegetation that contribute to native flora and fauna habitat.

·        To establish a clear framework and requirements for the proper management of trees and other vegetation.

 

Residents from surrounding properties have raised concerns in relation to the setback of the development to the rear of the property which is proximate to a vegetated gully which carries flood waters in high level rainfall events and provides a natural habitat for local flora and fauna.

 

The proposed development in its amended form is fully compliant with the RLEP and DCP controls with the exception of the departure from the external wall height which is addressed in this report. The amended setback to the rear boundary is in excess of that required under the DCP.

 

Investigations regarding options to set the building further back from the southern boundary indicate necessary and significant departures from Council’s height controls would be incurred to provide a compliant bulk and scale within a reduced footprint which is undesirable.

 

Whilst the vegetation is substantial on other properties the proposed development in this instance will replace an existing outbuilding which is currently closer to the boundary. There is no substantial vegetation on the subject site and the protection of trees on adjoining properties will be ensured by appropriate conditions of consent.

 

Finally, landscaping in accordance with the submitted landscape plan will contribute to the vegetation in this area.

 

Privacy and amenity impacts in relation to each relevant DCP control are documented in the attached Compliance Report which documents overall conformity with the DCP controls.

 

Appropriate conditions of consent are included in the recommendation to include additional privacy measures to ensure a reasonable mutual level of privacy and amenity between developments.

 

On balance, the impact of the proposed development is considered sustainable, reasonably satisfies the identified objectives above and accords with that contemplated under 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 proposed development represents an appropriate planning response to the site constraints and opportunities.

 

The minor departures from DCP controls in this instance are justified and the development will have sustainable impacts on surrounding properties and the locality.

 

It is recommended that the application be approved.

 

 

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. 853/2013 for demolition of an existing dwelling house and outbuilding and construction of a part 2 and part 3 storey residential flat building with basement parking for 10 vehicles, landscaping fencing and associated works at No. 16 Coogee Street, Coogee, 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:

 

a.     A privacy screen having a height of 1.6m above floor level must be provided to eastern edges of the terrace areas to units 2 and 4 at ground floor level.  The privacy screen 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.

 

b.     The balconies (and associated metal cladding) on the southern (rear) elevation at ground and first floor levels are to be redesigned to incorporate materials and external finishes of lighter weight appearance to reduce the apparent bulk of the development Privacy panels shall be fixed and not sliding. Details are to be submitted and approved by Council’s Manager of Development Assessment prior to issue of the construction certificate.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 16 Coogee Street, Coogee

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D72/14

 

 

Subject:                  137 Carrington Road, Coogee (DA/88/2014)

Folder No:                   DA/88/2014

Author:                   Scott Williamson, Senior Assessment Officer       

 

Proposal:                    Demolish existing structures and construct a part four (4), part two (2) storey multi-unit development in two (2) building forms. The development comprises eight (8) units, parking for 13 vehicles at semi-basement and ground levels, associated landscaping and site works

Ward:                     East Ward

Applicant:                Ideal Coogee Pty Ltd

Owner:                        A Petron

Summary

Recommendation:     Refusal

 

Description: http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview21559.png

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application is reported to the Planning Committee as the cost of works is in excess of $2 million.

 

On 29 July 2014, the applicant lodged a Class 1 Appeal with the Land and Environment Court, seeking to challenge Council’s ‘deemed refusal’ of the subject application.

 

1.        Proposal

 

The application, as amended up to 23 May 2014, proposes demolition of the existing single dwelling and construction of a part four (4), part two (2) storey multi- unit development.

 

Specifically, the following works are proposed:

 

·      External works including demolition of the existing single dwelling, site works and landscaping across the site;

·      Semi-basement parking for 14 vehicles, partially using a stacking system. Access via a driveway ramp along the southern boundary from Carrington Road. A secondary basement area accommodates bicycle parking, waste area and storage areas;

·      Provision of six (6) dwellings over four (4) floors in the primary building form fronting Carrington Road;

·      Provision of two (2) dwellings over two (2) floors in a detached building at the rear of the site.

The following assessment is conducted according to that lodged and amended up to 23 May 2014.

 

*

Figure 1: Montage of the proposal, right of frame, as viewed from Carrington Road.

Figure 2: The proposed southern side elevation.

Site inspections were carried out in March 2014.

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3: The existing dwelling on the site, as viewed from Carrington Road.

Figure 4: Multi- unit development adjoining to the north.

 

2.        History

 

2.1      Current application, DA/88/2014:

·      16 May 2014  - Council wrote to the applicant advising the application was not supported in respect of the following primary issues:

 

o The proposed height is unacceptable and responds poorly to the constraints of the site;

o Setbacks to Carrington Road are insufficient;

o Landscaping is insufficient;

o Parking arrangements dominate the site;

o Shadow impact to adjoining sites is significant.

 

·      23 May 2014 –The applicant submitted amended plans, making changes in response to Council and Design Review Panel advice. Changes included:

 

o Reduction in building height to comply with the 12 metre height control;

o Amendment to basement including new vehicle stacking system;

o Delete central parking area and provide landscaping;

o Increase front setback to Carrington Road.

 

The following assessment is conducted in accordance with the amendments made on 23 May 2014.

 

3.        Site context

 

The site is described as Lot 35 in DP 9121, known as 137 Carrington Road, Coogee.

 

The subject site and those adjoining to the north and south are zoned R3 – Medium Density Residential. Development beyond the rear boundary to the east is zoned R2 – Low Density Residential. The site exists on the eastern periphery of the Medium Density zone and is the southern most site in the block to be restricted to 12 metres in height and 0.9:1 in floor space. These attributes are identified in the figures below.

 


 

 

 

 

 

Figure 5: The zoning context of the site. Subject site outlined in bold.

Figure 6: The height control context of the site. Subject site outlined in bold.

 

The site is located on the eastern side of Carrington Road with a single street frontage. The parcel is of irregular shape and oriented roughly east- west. Topographically, the site falls sharply in a south-easterly direction, such that an 11 metre level difference occurs between the north-west and south-east corners of the site.

 

Boundary

Length

Site area

Western, Carrington Road boundary

13.41m

822m2

Eastern, rear boundary

14.225m

Southern, side boundary

63.36m

Northern, side boundary

59.18m

 

A two (2) storey dwelling with pitched roof is presently contained within the site.

 

To the immediate north of the subject site exists multi unit buildings of up to four (4) stories. To the immediate south exists a low sitting multi unit building of 9.5 metres in height. To the south- east and east exists single dwelling development fronting Raleigh Street and Pauling Ave, respectively.

 


 

 

 

 

Figure 7: Cadastre of the subject site (grey). Single dwellings highlighted blue. Multi unit development in red.

Figure 8: The green corridor running to the north to which 137 Carrington Road presently contributes.

 

Surrounding development comprises a mix of residential flat buildings and single dwellings. To the north and north-west exists a predominance of residential flat building development of three (3) to five (5) stories. Immediately to the south, east and south-west exists a predominance of single dwellings of one (1) and two (2) stories in scale. The site contributes to a continuous green corridor, running to the north through the rear setback of development fronting Carrington Road. Neither the subject site nor those adjoining are noted to have any individual heritage significance within the provisions within RLEP 2012.

 

 

 

Figure 9: Green corridor running through the rear of the site and to the north.

 

4.        Community Consultation

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the application between 12 and 26 March 2014 in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. As a result of this notification, the following submissions were received.

 

·      32 Raleigh Street, Coogee (2 submissions);

·      30 Raleigh Street, Coogee;

·      27 Pauling Ave, Coogee;

·      2/131 Carrington Road, Coogee (2 submissions);

·      149 Carrington Rd Coogee (2 submissions);

·      5/131 Carrington Road, Coogee;

·      4/139- 141 Carrington Road, Coogee;

·      A Square Planning on behalf of 25 Pauling Ave, Coogee;

·      25 Pauling Ave, Coogee;

·      Units 1- 4, 139- 141 Carrington Road, Coogee;

·      28 Raleigh Street, Coogee.

 

Issue

Comment

Statutory:

·    The proposal fails to meet the objectives of the R3 zone;

 

·    The proposal does not respond to properties in adjoining lower density zones;

 

·    Concern the secondary building form is not permissible in the zone.

 

The statutory aspects of the application are discussed below.

Shortcomings of the proposal in respect of zone objectives and response to the zoning circumstances of adjoining sites is generally agreed with.

It may be reasonably argued that the classification of the rear building as a attached dual occupancy is not permissible under the LEP Notwithstanding this, the rear building is not supported in light of it’s impacts.  

The application is recommended for refusal.

Built form:

·    Building height is non-compliant and does not consider the site constraint of topography;

 

·    Concern floor space calculations are inaccurate;

 

·    Concern setbacks to the side and rear of the rear building are non compliant;

 

·    Concern insufficient communal open space is provided;

 

·    Concern the two (2) block form is unprecedented and inappropriate.

 

Outstanding concerns with the built form are discussed below, particularly in respect of impacts of height, setbacks and the necessity for appropriate response to inherent constraints of this site.

The application has been recommended for refusal due to combined effect of the built form and it’s associated impacts.

 

Landscaping and vegetation:

·    Concern over non- compliance with landscaping controls;

 

·    Concern over the number of TPO listed trees being removed is not in the public interest;

 

·    Trees being removed provide privacy to surrounding sites;

 

·    Omission of green space at the rear is out of character with medium density development to the north.

 

 

 

Landscaping is discussed below and has been further addressed in comments by Council’s Landscape Engineer.

Non-compliance with the landscaping control is noted and is a recommended reason for refusal. The proposed break in the continuous green corridor at the rear that continues to the north is also a contributing factor.

Trees proposed for removal have not been raised as substantial issue by the Landscape Engineer, with many being already compromised in the present circumstance.

Solar access:

·    Concern over shadow impact to the windows and private open spaces of single dwellings fronting Raleigh Street and Pauling Ave;

 

·    Concern over shadow impact to multi unit building at 139- 141 Carrington Road as a result of unnecessary building mass.

 

·    Concern around detail and accuracy of shadow diagrams.

 

Solar access is discussed in further detail below and remains an outstanding concern with the application.

Southern neighbours experience substantial additional shadow as part of the proposal, an impact which is considered to be accentuated by insufficient setbacks, excessive wall height and the presence of the rear building component.

Privacy:

·    Concern over privacy implications of the rear building upon single dwellings fronting Raleigh Street and Pauling Ave;

 

·    Concern over privacy implications of the front building and balconies;

 

·    Concern over detrimental acoustic impact of parking area immediately adjacent single dwellings.

 

 

Privacy is discussed in further detail below and remains an outstanding concern with the application.

The proposal has not provided sufficient information to make an assessment of the extent of privacy impact from openings.

Balconies on the both building forms are considered to pose detrimental impact to the privacy of adjoining properties.    

The amended plans of 23 May 2014 contained parking within the basement, which would reduce potential acoustic issues to adjoining dwellings.

Traffic and parking:

·    Parking is not confined to the basement as required in the DCP;

 

·    The driveway has no setback from the southern boundary;

 

·    Concern parking is insufficient.

 

Amendments of 23 May 2014 relocated all parking to the basement, introducing a landscaped courtyard.

The absence of driveway setback from the southern boundary is noted and is considered to present unsatisfactory impact upon the amenity of the southern neighbours.

The parking rate proposed is compliant with the DCP and is considered to be generally satisfactory. The layout through which this is achieved is an outstanding concern.

Other:

·      Concern over ongoing construction issues, including noise, dust and asbestos.

 

·      Concern over water runoff to the rear;

 

·      Property value;

 

·      The developer’s economic objectives are not planning considerations.

 

Water runoff has been discussed by Council’s Development Engineers and could be suitably regulated through conditions.

Suitable conditions could be feasibly applied to minimise disruption to neighbouring sites during construction.

Property value is not a matter that can be considered within the scope of a planning assessment.

 

Agreed.

 

The amendments of 23 May 2014 made a number of changes to the proposal, all comprising a reduction in impact of the initially notified scheme. Re-notification has not been pursued on the basis of both reduced impact and in light of the refusal recommendation of this assessment.

 

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

 

5.1      Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (LEP 2012)

The following table considers the proposed development having regard to the zoning provisions and development standards contained in RLEP 2012 that are of relevance to the subject development application:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

 

Zoning:

 

The site is zoned R3 - Medium Density Residential.

Lot size (Min)

N/A

822m2

N/A

Floor Space Ratio (Max)

0.9:1

0.9:1

 

Yes.

 

Height of Building (Max)

12m

12m

 

Yes.

 

 

5.1.1   Zone R3 – Medium Density Residential Zone.

The objectives of R3 Low Density Residential zone seek to:

 

•      To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment;

•      To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment;

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

•      To recognise the desirable elements of the existing streetscape and built form or, in precincts undergoing transition, that contribute to the desired future character of the area;

•      To protect the amenity of residents;

•      To encourage housing affordability;

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

 

In it’s current form the proposal is not considered to satisfy the key zoning objectives. Specifically, the scheme fails to recognise the desirable elements of the existing streetscape and built form, contribute to the desired future character of the area and does not satisfactorily protect the amenity of adjoining residents.

 

The extent of proposed external wall height on the southern elevation exceeds the numerical standard. Sufficient setback has not been provided to compensate for the excessive scale of the proposed building. This eventuates in substantial bulk, shadow and privacy impacts, particularly to southern neighbours.

 

The site has a substantial topographic constraint in its steeply sloping nature, which when combined with site orientation and the change in built form controls applicable to the south and east, serves to exacerbate the impacts of the development. The design is not considered to adequately respond to these site-specific and contextual circumstances. 

 

The scheme is not considered to represent a reasonable development outcome in the context of the planning controls applicable to the site and desired future character of the medium density residential area. Further, the scheme does not acknowledge the need for a transition to the low density zone to the east and the built form character of development to the south.

 

The proposal is not considered to satisfy the objectives of the zone.

 

5.1.2   Dictionary

A potential issue with the permissibility of the development on the site was raised with the applicant during assessment and remains an outstanding concern.

 

The following relevant definitions of RLEP 2012 should be noted:

 

·      dual occupancy (attached) means two (2) dwellings on one (1) lot of land that are attached to each other, but does not include a secondary dwelling;

 

·      residential flat building means a building containing 3 or more dwellings, but does not include an attached dwelling or multi dwelling housing.

 

The scheme is inclusive of two (2) proposed development types being a ‘residential flat building’ to the Carrington Road frontage, with an ‘attached dual occupancy’ at the rear of the site.

 

The proposed rear building being defined as an ‘attached dual occupancy’ may preclude any other development type being provided on the same allotment. Notwithstanding this issue, the rear building component is not been supported by this assessment as a result of it’s associated impacts upon adjoining properties.

 


5.1.3   Floor Space Ratio – Clause 4.3

While the proposed floor space ratio complies with the development standard applicable to the site, this does not obviate the need for the scheme to consider the manner in which the floor space is distributed on the site.

 

The location of the site on the periphery of a change in the built form controls in the R3 zone, the steeply sloping topography and east –west orientation all contribute to a significant impact of shadow, bulk and privacy upon lower scale development to the south and east of the subject site.

 

It is considered the proposed site strategy does not effectively distribute floor space to avoid the impacts of this and subsequently respond to the inherent constraints of the site.

 

5.2      Site planning – Section 2.1

The scheme entails two (2) building forms of four (4) and two (2) storeys. The primary building form is located to the western end of the site fronting Carrington Road, with a secondary form sited to the eastern end of the site, close to the rear boundary.

 

The DCP identifies this strategy as possible in certain circumstances:

 

Two Block / Courtyard Example:

Application:

·      Both narrow, elongated allotments and wider allotments;

·      Allotments with rear lane access;

·      Allotments with significant level difference or steep slope;

·      East-west oriented allotments where overshadowing from the adjoining property to the north forms a major constraint; and/or

·      The adjoining developments have significant building mass with habitable room windows oriented to the common boundaries.

 

Building layout concept:

 

Front block

 

Rear block

 

Courtyard

 

Example:

 

Figure 10: DCP figure identifying potential for two (2) building forms in certain circumstances.

 

The two (2) block strategy is not considered a suitable planning outcome in the specific circumstances of this site, with regard to the objectives of this section of the DCP for the following reasons:

 

·      The proposed site strategy, in combination with circumstances of site orientation, the change in built form controls to the south and east and steeply sloping topography, all serve to remove the benefits of the two (2) block layout to southern and eastern neighbours. The strategy does not adequately respond to surrounding context, primarily single dwellings fronting Raleigh Street and Pauling Ave;

·      The layout results in impacts to adjoining lower density development, including bulk and scale, shadow and privacy implications;

·      From the perspective of single dwellings fronting Raleigh Street, there is a reasonable expectation that some level of spatial separation will be retained through provision of a single building form fronting Carrington Road, as is the case with similar residential flat building development to the north. The present proposal places a component of the development immediately beside and on the same alignment as these single dwellings;

·      The length of the primary building component fronting Carrington Road is excessive and is not considered to be consistent with the two (2) block approach anticipated by the DCP;

·      The placement of the rear building component will break a continuous green- corridor, which presently occupies the rear setback of development running to the north of the site and along a spine of the landform (shown Figure 11).

 

 

Figure 11: Green corridor running through the rear of the site and to the north.

 

The scheme proposes a built form that does not adequately respond to the opportunities and constraints of the site and its context. As such, the scheme fails to meet the objectives and controls of Building Design set out in Clause 2.1 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential.

 


5.3      Landscaped open space and deep soil – Section 2.2

 

Residential flat building development

 

DCP control

Proposed

Compliance?

Landscaped area (Min.)

50% (411m2)

 

41% (342m2)

 

No; discussion below.

Deep soil (Min.)

 

25% (205.5m2)

 

31% (253m2)

Yes.

 

Landscaped area provision within the scheme is non-compliant with the control.

 

The amended scheme of 23 May 2014 provided a substantial improvement to landscaped area provision across the site from that originally lodged, introducing a contiguous area of landscaping within the central courtyard for communal use and inclusive of some deep soil. Roof gardens are also provided.

 

Nevertheless, the landscaped area non- compliance is indicative of an excessive building footprint, which in this case is considered to stem from the additional building component to the rear of the site.

 

The performance of the scheme in respect of the landscaping objectives could be improved through both the redistribution of building footprint around the site and improvements to the proposed planting regime to further green the site to each elevation, offset bulk and scale and facilitate privacy.

 

It is considered the proposal could be substantially improved through attention to a number of elements that relate to landscaping to eventuate in a more skillful design response to the site and achieve compliance with the landscaping control. In it’s present form, the scheme fails to meet the objectives and controls of landscaped area set out in Clause 2.2 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential.

 

5.4      Floor space ratio – Section 3.1

A number of issues with the present scheme are driven by the motive of achieving the full extent of the floor space standard on the site. The DCP notes the following:

 

“The Floor Space Ratio Map shows the maximum FSR which may not be achievable on all sites. The maximum FSR is not “as of right” and will depend on how the proposed development meets other relevant controls in this DCP”.

 

The scheme is not considered to respond adequately to it’s constraints. Through redistributing floor space the applicant may still achieve the full extent of the controls, however a more skillful response to inherent site constraints would be a prerequisite.

 

In this respect, the scheme fails to meet the objectives and controls of floor space ratio set out in Clause 3.1 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential.

 

5.5      Setbacks – Section 3.4

 

Residential flat building development

 

DCP control

Proposed

Compliance?

Front setback

Consistent with prevailing setback; No less than 3m.

 

Consistent with alignment of southern neighbour;

5.73m to bulk;

4.75m to balconies.

 

Yes.

Side setbacks – south elev.

 

Min. 2m

 

Primary building:

3.54m to bulk;

2m to balconies

Yes.

Secondary building:

Min 2m

Yes.

Side setbacks – north elev.

 

Min. 2m

 

Primary building:

Min. 2m

Yes.

Secondary building:

Min 1500mm

No.

Rear setback

 

Min. 8.9 - 9.5m

 

Min. 1800mm

No.

 

5.5.1   Side setbacks

It should be noted that the DCP makes the following provision within Clause 3.4.2 (ii)

 

ii)       Incorporate additional side setbacks to the building over and above the above minimum standards, in order to:

 

-    Create articulations to the building facades.

-    Reserve open space areas and provide opportunities for landscaping.

-    Provide building separation.

-    Improve visual amenity and outlook from the development and adjoining residences.

-    Provide visual and acoustic privacy for the development and the adjoining residences.

-    Ensure solar access and natural ventilation for the development and the adjoining residences.

 

Within the scope of the above clause and in lieu of the constraints that govern this site, it is considered necessary for the proposal to provide additional setback, particularly to the upper levels of the south elevation, over and above the stated minimums of the DCP.

 

Impacts of bulk, scale, privacy and shadow introduced by the upper levels of the development are compounded by the proposed setback and external wall height variation. A more effective response to the change in built form controls applicable to properties to the south is considered feasible within the scope of a sensitive redesign and is necessary to protect the amenity of neighbours.

 

The lack of setback afforded to the length of driveway from the southern shared boundary is also of issue to adjoining amenity. The location and design of the driveway will create unnecessary acoustic impact to the amenity of the immediate southern neighbours and fails to meet the objectives and controls for location of vehicular access. The driveway should be setback to allow for a planted buffer along the boundary in this regard.

 

It is noted the basement is proposed to be excavated to the side boundaries of the site. This aspect of the development is not considered to eventuate in any unreasonable environmental impacts and could be feasibly regulated by conditions of consent.

 

Further to the above points, the bulk of the development is not considered to provide satisfactory response to the side setback controls of Section 3.4 and 6.1 of the DCP.

 

 

 

Figure 12: Montage of the proposal as viewed from Carrington Road. Relationship of the proposal to the southern neighbour can be seen right of frame.

 

5.5.2   Rear setback

The DCP identifies that a rear setback of minimum 8.9 metres should be provided on a site of this depth. Concession is made for variation where a central courtyard is provided, which is the case in the present scheme. The proposed rear building component sits roughly 1800mm off the rear boundary.

 

As discussed in respect of site planning above, the two (2) block with courtyard form of the scheme is considered inappropriate with regard to the topography, orientation and zoning characteristics of this site. 

 

From the perspective of single dwellings fronting Raleigh Street, there is a reasonable expectation that some level of spatial separation will be retained through provision of a single building form fronting Carrington Road, as is the case with similar residential flat building development to the north. The development consequently imposes greater impacts of a medium density environment where a change in built form controls occurs, with little recognition of the form of existing development to the south and east.

 

Further, the placement of the rear building component will break a continuous green- corridor, which presently occupies the rear setback of development running to the north of the site and along a spine of the landform (Figure 11).

 

An improved rear setback to single dwelling development sited to the south and east is considered necessary, being the site occupies a zone interface location. As proposed, the scheme is not considered to provide satisfactory response to the rear setback controls of Section 3.4.

 

5.6      External wall height and ceiling height – Section 4.4

 

Building envelope

4.4 - External wall height

DCP control

Proposed

Compliance?

10.5m

11.8m

No; discussion below

The design entails a 1300mm variation of the 10.5 metre wall height control, occurring to both the north and south side elevations.

 

The occurrence of a variation on the northern elevation of the building is not considered to have substantial detrimental or unexpected impact, particularly in the context of the northern neighbouring buildings, which have a similar scale.

 

The occurrence of the variation on the southern elevation is unacceptable for the following reasons:

 

The variation results in a poor response to the sloping topography of the site and change in built form controls that occur to the south;

The variation occurs to a long length of the south elevation, considered beyond that necessary to compensate for topography;

The variation results in direct impacts to adjoining development, including bulk and scale, shadow and privacy implications;

The variation will eventuate in an incongruous and abrupt appearance of built form when viewed from Carrington Road. The scheme will see a roughly six (6) metre difference in wall height, occurring between the proposal and the building presently occupying the property to the south at 139- 141 Carrington Road. 

 

While some localised variation to wall height on the southern elevation may be anticipated due to topography, a more sensitive transition to the south is considered necessary in responding to the streetscape character. Opportunities exist for redistribution of floor space to allow a preferable planning outcome and improved compatibility with the urban environment. 

 

In light of the above points, the proposal is not considered to present satisfactory planning merit in relation to the provisions of Section 4.4 of the DCP.

 

5.6.1   Seaside Property Developments v Wyong Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 117

In respect of the proposed wall height, the occurrence of changing built form controls between adjoining sites is described in the case of Seaside Property Developments v Wyong Shire Council [2004] NSWLEC 117. In the case, Commissioner Bly noted:

 

“As a matter of principle, at a zone interface as exists here, any development proposal in one zone needs to recognise and take into account the form of existing development and /or development likely to occur in an adjoin different zone”.

 

A change in built form controls is applicable to properties adjoining to the south, contemplating a lower scale and density of development on smaller lots. As such, the feasible options available for these sites to compensate for impacts of the proposed development are limited.

 

The form of development likely to occur on these sites is anticipated to remain reflective of that existing, each having fulfilled the majority of it’s development potential in the present circumstance. Factors of limited site area, presence of a strata scheme, relatively recent development and likely impact of additional envelope upon southern neighbours, will make for an unlikely circumstance of significant change in the southern built form in the near future.

 

The limitations applied through the controls will allow minimal opportunity to increase height or floor space in order to compensate for excessive bulk, scale and reduced solar access arising from the proposal. The proposal is not considered to provide sufficient recognition of this site constraint.

 

5.6.2   Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191

Of further relevance to the wall height variation, the case of Project Venture Developments v Pittwater Council [2005] NSWLEC 191, addresses compatibility in the urban environment. Within the judgment, Senior Commissioner Roseth specifically identified the following:

 

“For a new development to be visually compatible with its context, it should contain, or at least respond to, the essential elements that make up the character of the surrounding urban environment”.

 

The most important contributor to urban character is the relationship of built form to surrounding space, a relationship that is created by building height, setbacks and landscaping.

 

 “Buildings do not have to be the same height to be compatible. Where there are significant differences in height, it is easier to achieve compatibility when the change is gradual rather than abrupt. The extent to which height differences are acceptable depends also on the consistency of height in the existing streetscape”.

 

The visual catchment of Carrington Road is characterised by a north to south falling slope, with larger development occurring to the north of the site and lower scale development to the south. This matter is reflected in the change in built form controls, introduced at the southern boundary of the subject site. The subject development should provide a gradual transition in scale to respond to this characteristic of the urban area.

 

Conversely, an abrupt change in bulk and scale stands to occur between development proposed at 137 Carrington Road and that existing at 139- 141 Carrington Road. This change is to the degree of roughly six (6) metres between parapets. This abrupt and undesirable change in level and visual bulk is considered indicative of insufficient response to the essential elements of urban character that define Carrington Road.

 

The proposed wall height prevents compatibility through exceeding the control applicable to this site and substantially exceeding the permissible wall height applicable to the immediate southern neighbour. It is considered that excessive wall height, insufficient setback and insufficient landscaping all contribute to a poor relationship of the built form to surrounding space, preventing an appropriate compatibility in scale.

 

Figure 13: The proposed southern side elevation, where wall height variations ccur.

5.7      Solar access – Section 5.1

The subject site and those adjoining are oriented roughly east- west, with landform that falls sharply to the south- east. The subject site is also of substantially greater length than it’s southern neighbours.

 

Updated shadow diagrams were not provided as a part of amendments of 23 May 2014. The following impacts are noted to 139- 141 Carrington Road from the shadow diagrams provided on 27 February 2014.

 

139- 141 Carrington Road, Coogee

The building at 139- 141 Carrington Road is a residential flat building of four (4) units located immediately to the south of the subject site. The property is zoned R3, however is subject to more restrictive built form controls of a maximum 9.5 metres in height and 0.75:1 in FSR. Conversely, the controls of the subject site foresee a maximum of 12 metres in height and 0.9:1 in floor space.

 

The following impacts upon 139- 141 Carrington Road are noted:

 

·      The northern side elevation is shown to be overshadowed for the majority of the day on 21 June. A component of solar access will be available to glazed areas on the western extent of the elevation, beyond roughly 1pm. 

 

·      The primary east elevation at the rear is shown to be overshadowed for the majority of the day on 21 June. A component of solar access will be retained to glazed surfaces on the southern extent of the elevation only, between 8am and roughly 9.30am;

 

·      The primary western elevation will receive solar access to glazed areas from 12 noon, for the remaining four (4) hours of the afternoon;

 

·      The rear open space and communal pool area is shown to be overshadowed for the majority of the day. A small amount of solar access to a component of the open space will be available between 9am and 11am only. 

 

The majority of glazed areas on the north and east elevations, in addition to the common open space and pool to the rear of the neighbouring sites will not see three (3) hours solar access a result of the proposal.

 

The impact is accentuated through the proposed wall height variation and setbacks.

 

This property is perhaps most significantly impacted by the proposed scheme. This is attributed to the substantially lower height than that of the proposal, eventuating from more restrictive development standards. As a result, this building will have minimal opportunity to regain any of this solar access through redeveloping the property to the allowable built form controls.

 

32 Raleigh Street, Coogee

The building at 32 Raleigh Street is a two (2) storey single dwelling, also located immediately to the south of the subject site. The property is zoned R3, however is subject to more restrictive built form controls of a maximum 9.5 metres in height and 0.75:1 in FSR. Conversely, the controls of the subject site foresee a maximum of 12 metres in height and 0.9:1 in floor space.

 

The following impacts upon 32 Raleigh Street are noted:

 

·      The northern side elevation is shown to see a component of overshadowing in the morning hours, increasing throughout the day. By approximately 1pm the majority of the elevation is overshadowed. Upper floor openings will retain three (3) hours solar access in the morning hours. Two (2) ground floor windows, corresponding to living areas, are unlikely to receive three (3) hours solar access;

 

·      The primary west elevation at the rear obtains solar access from approximately 11am. The proposal will overshadow the elevation by roughly 1pm, allowing the glazed areas at the rear of the building are likely to be restricted to two (2) hours solar access on 21 June

 

·      The rear open space is shown to obtain solar access from roughly 9am. By roughly 1.30pm, the space will be completely overshadowed. 

 

The majority of glazed area on the rear, primary elevation of 32 Raleigh Street is unlikely to see the necessary three (3) hours solar access a result of the proposal. The remaining elevations and rear open space should not be prevented from achieving the minimum solar access levels of the DCP.

 

The size of 32 Raleigh Street is relatively small, allowing that a medium density development on this site is unlikely to eventuate without amalgamation. As a result of this constraint and the applicable planning controls, this building will have minimal opportunity to regain any of this solar access.

 

The solar access impacts upon 32 Raleigh Ave are considered to be unnecessarily accentuated through the proposed wall height variation, setbacks and the presence of the rear building component.

 

 

The solar access impacts associated with the site orientation and medium density zoning of the subject site are to an extent inevitable with any development of 137 Carrington Road. Despite this, the impact of the present scheme is largely motivated in attempt to achieve the full extent of the floor space standard on the site. A more skillful response to these constraints is necessary in this context.

 

The method through which floor space has been distributed is considered unsatisfactory, having little recognition of the form of existing development and that likely to eventuate to southern neighboring properties through the planning controls. The proposed wall height variation to the southern elevation is a key contributor, being unacceptable in the presence of the above site constraints.

 

While the above impact may be to an extent commensurate with a medium density zone, it is not considered reasonable in the context of the change in built form controls to the south and east. The compromise to solar access of southern neighbouring sites and contribution of non- compliant aspects of the scheme are considered to deem the proposal unsatisfactory in respect of solar access and the objectives and controls of Section 5.1 of the DCP.

 

5.8      Pedestrian entry – Section 4.5

The DCP identifies that development must provide clearly identifiable and safe pedestrian entries to buildings. Design should allow separate and clearly distinguished pedestrian pathways and vehicular access.

 

A key issue with this site involves providing identifiable and accessible entry to the rear building for occupants and visitors down the steep slope from Carrington Road. The limited width of the site enhances this difficulty.

 

As amended on 23 May 2014, the scheme provides for vehicular access only along the southern side boundary at steep grade. For the rear building, separate pedestrian access is proposed through the lobby, down the lift and through the basement car park of the primary building form, delivering occupants and visitors to the level of the central landscaped courtyard and dwelling entries of the rear building.

 

Notwithstanding the driveway issues discussed in further sections of this report, this pedestrian access to the rear building is considered to be unsatisfactory, being indistinguishable and cumbersome to general access. The likelihood of occupants and visitors reverting to use of the driveway for pedestrian access is considered high, eventuating in an unsafe pedestrian outcome. Access though the car park is considered to provide poor amenity to occupants and visitors.

 

The pedestrian entry provided to the rear building within the scheme is considered unsatisfactory in respect of pedestrian entry and Section 4.5 of the DCP.

 

5.9      Privacy – Section 5.3

Visual privacy to adjoining properties is a key concern with development on the subject site, given both steep slope and transitional location to lower density development.

 

Where some compromise to privacy may be a reasonable expectation of development solely within a medium density context, the peripheral location of the site to a lower density zone is considered to necessitate an enhanced level of privacy consideration, particularly to adjoining single dwellings and their associated private open spaces.

 

The plans indicate screening devices being provided across all elevations to facilitate privacy and articulation. Despite this, the level of detail provided on the plans of 23 May 2014 is inadequate to determine the relationship of openings, sills and screening devices to adjoining sites. The privacy implications of the proposal upon immediate neighbours to the north, south and east are unknown and cannot be reasonably ascertained by this assessment.

 

Wrap-around balconies are proposed to the south and east facing facades at all levels of the primary building form, associated with living areas. The balconies will provide elevated and unimpeded view lines down into adjoining lower density development to the south, notably the windows and private open spaces of single dwellings fronting Raleigh Street and Pauling Ave. This outcome is considered unacceptable in responding to an inherent constraint of a site in a transitional zone location. The privacy impact of the balconies is considered unreasonable and is not supported.

 

Through both insufficient detail on the plans and clear privacy issues from proposed balconies to properties to the south, the scheme is considered unsatisfactory in respect of privacy and Section 5.3 of the DCP.

 

5.10    Parking – Section B7

Section B7 of the DCP requires car parking to be provided for multi-unit residential development at rates corresponding to unit amount and type. Car parking provision is assessed in the table below:

 

 

Rate

Units

Required

Proposed

1 bedroom

1 per unit

1

1 space

 

2 Bedroom

1.2 per unit

3

3.6 spaces

3 Bedroom

1.5 per unit

4

6 spaces

Visitor

1 per 4 units

8

2 spaces

Total

12.6 spaces

14 Spaces

 

Parking provision is discussed further by Council’s Development Engineers, in the attached Compliance Report.

6.               Randwick Section 94A Development Contributions Plan

 

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

 

Category

Cost

Applicable Levy

S94A Levy

Development cost more than $200,000

$2,312,045.00

1.0%

$23,120.45

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in Urban Design and Development.

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

 

Financial Impact Statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The proposed development poses a number of concerns with respect to the objectives and controls of the relevant planning instruments.

 

The scheme is not considered to represent a reasonable development outcome in the context of the planning controls applicable to the site and desired future character of the medium density residential area.

 

The applicant has been advised of these concerns within the assessment process and been given reasonable opportunity to resolve the issues. It is considered that the extent of conditions that would be necessary to alleviate outstanding issues is beyond what could be contemplated by conditions of consent.

 

The application is recommended for refusal, based on the reasons identified in the schedule below.

 

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuses consent to Development Application No. 88/2014 for demolition of existing structures, existing structures and construct a part four (4), part two (2) storey multi-unit development in two (2) building forms. The development comprises eight (8) units, parking for 13 vehicles at semi-basement and ground levels, associated landscaping and site works, at No. 137 Carrington Road, Coogee, pursuant to Section 80(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, for the following reasons:

 

1.     The proposed development is prohibited by virtue of the proposed ‘attached dual occupancy’ at the rear of the site

 

2.     The scheme fails to recognise the desirable elements of the existing streetscape and built form, does not contribute to the desired future character of the area or satisfactorily protect the amenity of adjoining residents. The proposal does not satisfy the relevant objectives for the R3 Medium Density Residential zone stipulated under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012;

 

3.     The scheme does not satisfy the design quality principles of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

4.     The scheme proposes a built form that does not adequately respond to the unique characteristics of the site and the surrounding context and fails to meet the objectives and controls of Building Design set out in Clause 2.1 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

5.     The scheme fails to meet the objectives and controls of landscaped area set out in Clause 2.2 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

6.     The scheme proposes a non compliant wall height that eventuates in unreasonable bulk, scale and shadow and fails to meet the objectives for Building Height set out in Clause 3.2 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

7.     The scheme proposes insufficient setbacks to ensure adequate separation and solar access, failing to meet the objectives for Setbacks set out in Clause 3.4 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

8.     The scheme does not provide satisfactory pedestrian access to the rear building component, failing to meet the objectives for Pedestrian Entry set out in Clause 4.5 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

9.     The scheme is unsatisfactory in respect of solar access and the objectives and controls of Section 5.1 of the DCP.

 

10.    The scheme is inclusive of balconies that will compromise the privacy of single dwellings to the south and fails to meet the objectives and controls for visual privacy set out in Clause 5.3 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

11.    The proposed car parking design does not comply with the access requirements of Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 Off Street Car Parking and fails to meet the objectives and controls for privacy set out in Section B7 Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access of Randwick Development Control Plan.

 

12.    The location and design of the driveway are of insufficient setback and excessive length that will create unnecessary impact to the amenity of the immediate southern neighbor and fails to meet the objectives and controls for location of vehicular access set out in Clause 6.1 of the Randwick Development Control Plan 2013 Part C2 – Medium Density Residential;

 

13.    The scheme has not properly examined the relationship between the building, the site conditions, the surrounding context and does not demonstrate a skilful design. The height, form and massing of the development will detrimentally affect the amenity of the neighbouring properties and the streetscape. The proposal is not considered to satisfy Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

14.    The scheme is not accompanied by sufficient information to carry out a proper assessment of the relevant environmental impacts, being a prescribed minimum of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 137 Carrington Road, Coogee

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                             12 August 2014

 

 

Development Application Report No. D73/14

 

 

Subject:                  60 Holmes Street, Maroubra (DA/394/2014)

Folder No:                   DA/394/2014

Author:                   Clare Brown, Planning Consultant - APP Corporation Pty Ltd     

 

Proposal:                    Addition of laundry to rear of existing dwelling, internal alterations including new internal staircase to provide access to attic storeroom

Ward:                     East Ward

Applicant:                Ms K Smith

Owner:                        Ms K Smith & Mr A J Bowen

Summary

Recommendation:     Approval

 

Description: http://wnadm10:8084/eview/output/eview36451.png

 

 

 

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

Ù

North

Locality Plan


Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application has been referred to the Planning Committee and assessed by an external planning Consultant as the property owner is a Councillor.

 

Proposal

Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling to provide the addition of a laundry to rear of the dwelling, internal alterations including new internal staircase to provide access to an existing attic storeroom.

 

Site

The site is identified as Lot 2 in DP615467 No. 60 Holmes Street Maroubra. The site is rectangular in shape, relatively level and has an area of 301.83 sqm. An existing driveway crossing is available from Holmes Street and this provides access to an existing car parking space.

 

The site abuts the Department of Defence land (Bundock Street) to the north. No access is provided to or from the Defence land.

 

The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential and the proposal is permissible with consent.

 

Submissions

 

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

 

Issue

Comment

A facsimile advice from the Department of Defence  thanking Council for the notification of the development application and noting that “…we will not provide or permit access through Defence lands at any time for an intended DA works.”

 

No objection was raised by the Department of Defence and the advice is noted. The submitted DA does not propose access via the Defence land for the construction of the proposed works.

 

 

 

Key Issues

The proposal involves minor internal alterations and external additions to an existing dwelling to provide additional ground level storage cupboard and new access to an existing attic storage space and the construction of a laundry.

 

The new spiral stair access to the attic storage area will replace an existing pull down attic ladder. The addition of a new laundry for the dwelling will provide a dedicated space separate but attached to the existing dwelling. The laundry is in the rear portion of the site and will not impact on the site frontage or the dwelling’s relationship with the adjoining dwelling at No. 58 Holmes Street.

 

The proposal will not result in any adverse impact on the environment or adjoining neigbours. The proposal can be accommodated on site.

 

The assessment of the proposal against the relevant provisions of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (RLEP 2012) and Randwick Development Control Plan (DCP) demonstrates that:

(a)    the proposal complies with the zone objectives for the R2 Low Density Residential zone,

(b)    the proposal complies with the building height and floor space ratio development standards within RLEP 2012,

(c)     the proposal complies with the relevant provisions of the DCP,

(d)    there will be no adverse impact on adjoining neighbours or the streetscape arising from the proposal, and

(e)    the scale of the proposed internal and external works is suitable for the site and will improve the amenity of the residents of the dwelling.

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

 

Conclusion

 

The application is recommended for approval subject to the imposition of standard conditions.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, grants development consent under Sections 80 and 80A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 394/2014 for the addition of a laundry to the rear of existing dwelling, internal alterations including a new internal staircase to provide access to an existing attic storeroom, at No. 60 Holmes Street, Maroubra, subject to the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report attached to this report.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 60 Homes Street, Maroubra

INCLUDED UNDER SEPARATE COVER