RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

Planning Committee Meeting

 

  BUSINESS PAPER

 

 

 

Tuesday 13 September 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Administrative Centre 30 Frances Street Randwick 2031

Telephone: 1300 722 542

Fax: 02 9319 1510

 council@randwick.nsw.gov.au

www.randwick.nsw.gov.au


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 13 September 2016

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

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, 13 September 2016 at 6:00 p.m.

 

 

Committee Members:          The Mayor N D’Souza, Andrews, Belleli, Bowen, Garcia, Matson, Moore, Nash, Neilson, Roberts (Deputy Chairperson), Seng, Shurey, Smith, Stavrinos (Chairperson) 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 - 9 August 2016

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 69 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice.

Urgent Business

Planning Matters

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 Councillor 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.

D66/16     29 Baird Avenue, Matraville (DA/142/2016) (Deferred)........................... 1

D67/16     20 Moore Street, Coogee (DA/551/2015) (Deferred)............................. 33

D68/16     105 Arden Street, Coogee (DA/301/2016)............................................ 171

D69/16     184-192 Marine Parade, Maroubra (DA/90/2016).................................. 179

D70/16     5 Shirley Crescent, Matraville (DA/458/2016)....................................... 189

D71/16     4 Neptune Street, Coogee (DA/107/2016)............................................ 201

D72/16     30 Mermaid Avenue, Maroubra (DA/915/2014/A).................................. 253

D73/16     2A-2B Smithfield Avenue, Coogee (DA/3/2016).................................... 261

D74/16     27-27a Norton St, Kingsford (DA/424/2016)......................................... 273

D75/16     19 Howard Street, Randwick (DA/177/2016)......................................... 289

D76/16     15 Cairo Street, South Coogee (DA/393/2016)..................................... 299

Miscellaneous Reports

M6/16       Report for Variation to Development Standard under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) and Clause 4.6 between 1 to 31 August, 2016..................................................................................................... 307   

Closed Session

M7/16       Short Term Extension of Current Waste Collection Contract

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (d) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

M8/16       SSROC Tender for the Supply and Delivery of Industrial Footwear

This matter is considered to be confidential under Section 10A(2) (d) Of the Local Government Act, as it deals with commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

  

Notice of Rescission Motions

Nil  

 

 

 

…………………………………………………….

Ray Brownlee

General Manager


Planning Committee                                                                                                 13 September 2016

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Development Application Report No. D66/16

 

Subject:              29 Baird Avenue, Matraville (DA/142/2016) (Deferred)

Folder No:                DA/142/2016

Author:                     Frank Ko, Coordinator Fast Track      

 

Introduction

 

The subject Development Application was considered at the Ordinary Council meeting of 26 June 2016 as an objector of the adjoining property is a Randwick Council employee. At the meeting, it was resolved:

 

“(Andrews/Seng) that this application be deferred for mediation between the applicant and the objectors, with the applicant to consider amending the plans in light of the mediation.”

 

Issues:

 

A mediation meeting was held on 23 August 2016 between the applicant and the objectors (owners of 31 Baird Avenue). The following comments were provided by the Mediator:

 

·      The applicant agrees to remove the Garage pitch roof and replace with flat colorbond roof.

 

·      The applicant agrees to reduce the depth of the rear first floor balcony from 2,460mm to 300mm.

 

·      The objectors agree with the above changes subject to heritage approval.

 

The above mediation comments have been reviewed by Council’s external heritage consultant and no objection was raised.

 

Considering the objectors have agreed to the proposed changes and have no further objection to the proposed development, if Council wishes to approve the subject application, the following non-standard conditions should be included in the determination to address the mediation outcome:

 

1)   The pitched roof to the rear garage shall be replaced with a flat colorbond roof.

 

2)   The depth of the rear first floor balcony shall be reduced from 2,460mm to 300mm. 

 

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

 

As per Council’s resolution, the application is referred to the Planning Committee for determination. If Council wishes to approve the subject application, the non-standard conditions and standard conditions could be included in the determination. Alternatively, the application can be determined as per the original recommendation of this assessment.

 

 

Recommendation

 

That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/142/2016 for Ground and first floor alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a double garage fronting laneway (Heritage item) at No. 29 Baird Avenue for the following reasons:

 

1.     The proposed development does not comply with the objectives of the R2 “Low Density Residential” zone of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the two storey rear addition will be inconsistent with the single storey presentation of the existing bungalow and of adjoining properties and will have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of privacy, overshadowing and visual massing.

 

2.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Clause 5.10 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the two storey rear addition will be inconsistent with and will dominate the single storey common elements and features of the group of three heritage bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue and the garage setback will adversely impact the heritage setting of 31 Baird Avenue.

 

3.     The proposed development does not comply with Part B2, Clause 1.13 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the Heritage Impact Statement is silent on the internal demolition and modifications as well as the proposed garage, and does not provide any internal images of the bungalow or the rear yard of the site.

 

4.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part B2, Clauses 2.2 and 2.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the excessive scale and unsympathetic form of the proposed rear two storey addition will not respect the heritage values of the group of three heritage bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue and will have an adverse impact on the streetscape.

 

5.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part B2, Clause 2.4 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the insufficient setback of the rear garage will adversely affect the heritage setting of the adjoining heritage bungalow at 31 Baird Avenue in terms of visual massing and overshadowing.

 

6.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part C1, Clause 5.1 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the excessive scale of the proposed rear addition and inadequate setback of the garage from the southern side boundary will result in the neighbouring property at 31 Baird Avenue not receiving adequate solar access.

 

7.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part C1, Clause 5.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the proposed first floor terrace will adversely impact on the visual privacy of the rear yards of both adjoining properties.

 

8.     The proposed development does not comply with Part C1, Clause 6.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the garage entry off Baird Lane has a zero setback from the lane boundary and the garage has an inadequate side setback.

 

9.     The proposal is not in the public interest.  The proposal is contrary to objectives of the zone; will result in adverse environmental impacts and will set a poor precedent with regard to the treatment of the rear yard of neighbouring properties (i.e. siting, design, location and relationship with the existing topography and neighbouring properties).

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

Executive Report -29 Baird Avenue, Matraville (DA/142/2016)

 

2.

DA Compliance Report - 29 Baird Avenue, MATRAVILLE 

 

3.

Mediation outcome - DA/142/2016, 29 Baird Avenue, MATRAVILLE

 

 

 

 


Executive Report -29 Baird Avenue, Matraville (DA/142/2016)

Attachment 1

 

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Director City Planning Report No. CP48/16

 

Subject:                    29 Baird Avenue, Matraville (DA/142/2016)

Folder No:                DA/142/2016

Author:                     Willana Associates, Pty Ltd      

 


Proposal:                  Ground and first floor alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a double garage with first floor storage above fronting laneway (Heritage item)

Ward:                        South Ward

Applicant:                Mr G Xylas

Owner:                     Mrs S Sykiotis & Mr N Theodorakopoulos

Summary

Recommendation:   Refusal

http://interactivemapping/Geocortex/Essentials/prod/REST/TempFiles/Export.jpg?guid=91a0ae1d-2cbf-47e7-9180-197a1c26611b&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

 

 

Ù

North

 

Locality Plan

 

Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application was assessed by external planning consultant and referred to Council for consideration as an objector of the adjoining property is a Randwick City Council employee.

 

Proposal

 

It is proposed to:

 

§  Demolish some internal fabric and the rear wall of the existing dwelling house on the subject site.

§  Construct a new bathroom and laundry within the existing dwelling house.

§  Construct a rear, two storey addition to the dwelling house containing a kitchen, dining room and living room on the Ground Floor Level and master bedroom, walk-in-robe, ensuite and rumpus room on the First Floor Level.

§  Construct a balcony adjacent to the proposed master bedroom.

§  Construct a double garage with pitched roof in the rear yard, with vehicle access from Baird Lane to the rear.

§  Construct two ground level decks in the rear yard.      

 

The applicant lodged an original set of plans with the DA on 14 March 2016. Following discussions with Council’s external planning consultant and comments received from Council’s heritage consultant, the applicant lodged an amended set of plans on 3 July 2016. The amended proposal involved:

 

§  Reduction in the height of the rear, two storey addition to the dwelling house by 0.7m

 

§  Reduction in the height of the rear garage structure by 2.2m and removal of the storage space within the roof form.

 

This report addresses those amended plans.

 

Site

 

The subject site is legally described as Lot 7 in DP 15983 and addressed as 29 Baird Avenue, Matraville. It is located on the eastern side of Baird Avenue and has an 11.855m frontage at this street. The side boundaries are 31.13m in length. The total area of the site, indicated on the submitted survey, is 369sqm.

 

There is a fall of approximately 1.5m, from the rear boundary of the subject site to the front boundary, and a modest cross fall of approximately 0.3m from the southern side boundary to the northern side boundary.

 

The subject site contains a single storey, dwelling house of face brick construction with a pitched, tiled roof. The dwelling house is part of a local heritage item comprised of three bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue. The group shares a consistent low brick front fence in liver brick matching that of the houses.

 

There are no significant trees on the subject site. Vehicle access is obtained from Baird Lane to the rear, although there is no structure to accommodate vehicles.

 

Both sites on either side of the subject site are consistent with it in lot size, dimensions and topography. The dwelling houses on those sites are consistent with that on the subject site in terms of architectural style, materials and dimensions.

 

Image 1: Subject site

 

Submissions

 

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

 

·     31 Baird Avenue, Matraville

 

 

Issues

Comments

Loss of sunlight to their living areas due to the second storey on the rear addition and the high garage roof

Sunlight to north-facing living room windows in the objectors’ property will not be significantly impacted by the proposal. The proposal will therefore have an acceptable impact on the objectors in this respect. Nonetheless, it is proposed to refuse the DA on other grounds.

Loss of sunlight to their rear yard due to the second storey on the rear addition and the high garage roof

The objectors’ rear yard will receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June. The amended proposal will therefore have an acceptable impact on the objectors in this respect. Nonetheless, it is proposed to refuse the DA on other grounds.

Adverse impact of inconsistent garage on the streetscape of Baird Lane

In the amended plans, the rear garage has been reduced in height by 2.2m and the storage space within the roof form has been removed. Nonetheless, the garage remains insufficiently setback from the southern side boundary and this is inconsistent with the laneway presentation of the three heritage bungalows.

Adverse impact of second storey of rear addition on the streetscape of Baird Avenue and the group of three heritage bungalows

The proposal will adversely impact on the heritage significance of the items.

 

The amended plans have not sufficiently addressed the inconsistency of the rear addition with the streetscape of Baird Avenue and the group of three heritage bungalows.

Upper level of garage structure may be used for residential accommodation

The upper level within the roof form has been removed in the amended plans. Nonetheless, it is proposed to refuse the DA on other grounds.

 

Key Issues

 

Council’s Consultant Heritage Planner has provided the following comments:

 

Heritage Comments

 

The subject residence at 29 Baird Avenue, Matraville is a brick Californian Bungalow located on the eastern side of Baird Avenue towards the southern end of the street block. The subject site is listed as a group heritage item which includes three neighbouring bungalows located at 27-31 Baird Avenue Item no. I233). The site is not located within proximity to any other heritage items and is not located within a Heritage Conservation Area.

 

It is a single storey dwelling with a tiled roof and later additions to the rear. The residence features a symmetrical façade with a veranda towards the western elevation surmounted by a gable end. Alike neighbouring properties 27 and 31 Baird Avenue, the subject site is set back from the street and includes a small front garden. The street boundary of the property is defined by a brick dwarf fence with a metal gate.

 

The surrounding neighbourhood of the subject site is dominated by single and double storey residential development with the majority of the houses featuring high pitched roofs and intact facades.

 

The following description and statement of significance has been extracted from the

Randwick Heritage Study form for group heritage item (Perumal Murphy, October 1987):

 

An excellent group of three later style Bungalows with some very good detailing, c. 1935. Liver brick, tuck pointed. Hipped terra cotta roofs with projecting central gables over large front porch areas. Recessed doorway flanked by small diamond-shaped windows with original leadlight. Decorative brick balustrades with heavy piers and stub columns. Decorative 1930’s style render over windows. All retain original front fence. Most impressive. All almost intact, but for minor alterations, down to original garden and gates. In need of some repair. Some of the better surviving examples of Bungalow design in the area. Good streetscape grouping.

 

Heritage Status and Significance

The site of the subject house at 29 Baird Avenue, Matraville is listed as a group heritage item as identified under Schedule 5 of the Randwick LEP 2012. As detailed above, the heritage item encompasses the bungalows located at 27-31 Baird Avenue. The subject bungalow and its group enhances the streetscape of Baird Avenue.

 

The Proposal

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the subject bungalow and is limited to the rear of the subject site. The proposal includes:

 

·     Demolition of the existing rear addition;

·     Construction of a two storey rear addition;

·     Construction of a new garage towards the rear.

 

Background

No previous consultation has been noted. Following provision of comments on the preliminary assessment of the proposed development, a site inspection has been carried out on 6th June 2016. The inspection provided an opportunity to discuss the proposed works in particular the rear two-storey extension, the location of the garage and the conservation / reinstatement works to the main dwelling. Subsequently, the recommendations of the Heritage referral dated 3 May 2016 have been amended in this report.

 

Submission

The documentation provided by Randwick City Council for this application included a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by John Robert Boers (February 2016) and a set of drawings (floor plans and elevations) prepared by Moshonis Building, Designers and Engineers. Drawings of the existing house and its elevations as it currently stands have not been provided. Limited detail regarding finishes and colours has been provided.

 

Comments

Following review of the submitted documentation including the Heritage Impact Assessment, the proposed drawings and the immediate neighbourhood of the subject dwelling, the proposed works are assessed for their impact on the subject site as a group heritage item. As detailed above, the documentation submitted to Council provides limited information regarding the proposed development and the existing dwelling in particular its internal features and rear yard. The Heritage Impact Statement is silent on the internal demolition and modifications as well as the proposed garage, and does not provide any internal images of the bungalow or the rear yard of the site. Notwithstanding, due to the previous additions to the rear of the subject bungalow, the proposed works to the ground floor including modifications to insert bathroom, laundry and pantry in association with new dining, living and kitchen extension is considered acceptable. However, the first floor addition at the rear is excessive and will affect the consistency between the group of three heritage items. Neither one of the properties in this group of heritage item has a first floor addition. Therefore, any new first floor addition should be made in a more sympathetic manner in order to ensure no impact occur to the streetscape presentation of the group heritage item.

 

The Heritage Impact Statement notes that the first floor addition’s height will be lower than the ridge height of the existing bungalow; however, the drawings clearly indicate that the new addition will be more than 1 metre higher than the existing ridge height. The new addition is not considered to be a subservient to the existing bungalow. The proposed first floor addition will, in fact, adversely affect the heritage significance of the subject site as part of a group of heritage item, identified as being of an excellent group of three later style bungalows. As such, it is recommended that a site inspection is organised and consultation with the applicant is conducted onsite to refine the design.

 

Recommendation

Provided that the following design modifications have been made and additional information submitted to the Council, the proposed development can be supported in its new form. In the case of the changes are not made, and additional information noted below is not incorporated into the drawings and provided to the Council, the proposed development, in particular the design of the first floor addition, is not supported in relation to the heritage matters, in its current form.

 

Any consent should be subject to the following design modifications and requirements:

 

1.   The height of the rear two-storey addition to be reduced at least by 700mm.

2.   The garage is to be shifted to the other side of the rear yard/boundary. The layout of the rear addition could be shifted accordingly if required.

3.   Missing façade elements should be reinstated to match existing original details. Such as the window awning above the right hand side window of the front façade is to be replaced with a flat rendered hood to match the left hand side window hood (similar to the no. 31 Baird Avenue) with the decorative rendered detailing around. Existing chimney is to be included on the elevation drawings and noted as to be retained.

4.   All restoration and reinstatement works should either be noted on the drawings (plansand elevations) or written as notes on the drawings or as a separate letter.

5.   All internal original detailing where no modifications are proposed to be retained and reinstated to match existing.

6.   The applicant should provide additional information on the proposed materials, finishes and colours. Repointing should be done to match existing original dark (black) colour mortar joints with the timber elements of the front gable and bargeboard are painted in shades of grey (similar to the colour sample currently applied), window frames and painted sections of the façade and the veranda elements painted in off-white or crème colours. The front fence should be repointed to match the mortar colour of the neighbouring house at 31 Baird Avenue.

 

The above comments were issued by Council’s external heritage consultant in response to the original set of plans lodged by the applicant with the DA on 14 March 2016. Following discussions with Council’s external planning consultant and comments received from Council’s heritage consultant, the applicant lodged an amended set of plans on 3 July 2016. The amended proposal involved:

 

§  Reduction in the height of the rear, two storey addition to the dwelling house by 0.7m

§  Reduction in the height of the rear garage structure by 2.2m and removal of the storage space within the roof form.

 

This report addresses those amended plans. Notwithstanding the heritage consultant’s support of the amended plans (subject to further conditions), it is nonetheless considered that the amended proposal does not satisfy the controls and objectives pertaining to heritage conservation in Clause 5.10 of the RLEP 2012 or Part B2 of the RDCP 2013, for the reasons set out below:.

 

·         The rear, two storey addition will be excessive in scale and bulk and inconsistent in form and character with the existing single storey heritage bungalow on the subject site and with those on either adjoining site.

 

·         The proposal contains major or prominent design elements which will compete with the architectural features or detailing of the existing building. In particular, the upper floor of the rear addition is inconsistent with the existing building.

 

·         The single storey common elements and features of the streetscape (particularly the group of three heritage bungalows) are not incorporated into the design. The upper floor of the rear extension will be readily visible from the street.

 

·         The rear garage will have an adverse impact in the heritage setting of the property at 31 Baird Street as it will present an unarticulated blank wall with insufficient setback from that property, with resulting overshadowing and visual massing.

 

Scale and Form

As discussed above and given the small size of the relevant lots, the proposed two storey rear addition will be excessive in scale and form. The proposed addition will dominate the principal built form and will not be interpreted as a secondary structure or addition, which is the preferred design solution for additions to heritage items. The proposal will be inconsistent with the existing dwelling house and the streetscape and will cause visual massing of the property to the south at 31 Baird Avenue.

 

Privacy

The proposed first floor terrace will cause significant overlooking into the rear yards of both 27 and 31 Baird Avenue. Overlooking could be reduced by a condition requiring installation of higher side privacy screens (eg to 1.8m above floor level), however this would increase the visual massing caused by the rear addition.

 

Garage

In contravention of the RDCP, the proposed rear garage has a 0.3m side setback from the southern side boundary. The non-compliant side setback will result in visual massing to the rear yard and heritage setting of 31 Baird Avenue.

 

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

 

Based on the assessment of the application, it is recommended that the application be refused in its current form primarily as a result of the excessive bulk and scale and unsympathetic treatment of the proposed rear addition.  The development will not be in the public interest as it will set an undesirable precedent and is contrary to the objectives of the zone.  The rear section of the proposal will result in uncharacteristic massing and unacceptable privacy implications and visual bulk. 

 

Approval of the proposal will set a poor precedent in terms of the treatment of the rear yards of the adjoining heritage bungalows. Furthermore, it is not possible to impose a condition which will remedy the adverse impacts of the proposal in terms of its visual dominance and overshadowing / amenity impacts. The entire rear addition and rear garage will need to be reconfigured. These adjustments require amended plans.

 

 


 

Recommendation

 

A.        That Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/142/2016 for Ground and first floor alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a double garage fronting laneway (Heritage item) at No. 29 Baird Avenue for the following reasons:

 

1.     The proposed development does not comply with the objectives of the R2 “Low Density Residential” zone of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the two storey rear addition will be inconsistent with the single storey presentation of the existing bungalow and of adjoining properties and will have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of privacy, overshadowing and visual massing.

 

2.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Clause 5.10 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the two storey rear addition will be inconsistent with and will dominate the single storey common elements and features of the group of three heritage bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue and the garage setback will adversely impact the heritage setting of 31 Baird Avenue.

 

3.     The proposed development does not comply with Part B2, Clause 1.13 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the Heritage Impact Statement is silent on the internal demolition and modifications as well as the proposed garage, and does not provide any internal images of the bungalow or the rear yard of the site.

 

4.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part B2, Clauses 2.2 and 2.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the excessive scale and unsympathetic form of the proposed rear two storey addition will not respect the heritage values of the group of three heritage bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue and will have an adverse impact on the streetscape.

 

5.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part B2, Clause 2.4 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the insufficient setback of the rear garage will adversely affect the heritage setting of the adjoining heritage bungalow at 31 Baird Avenue in terms of visual massing and overshadowing.

 

6.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part C1, Clause 5.1 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the excessive scale of the proposed rear addition and inadequate setback of the garage from the southern side boundary will result in the neighbouring property at 31 Baird Avenue not receiving adequate solar access.

 

7.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part C1, Clause 5.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the proposed first floor terrace will adversely impact on the visual privacy of the rear yards of both adjoining properties.

 

8.     The proposed development does not comply with Part C1, Clause 6.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the garage entry off Baird Lane has a zero setback from the lane boundary and the garage has an inadequate side setback.

 

9.     The proposal is not in the public interest.  The proposal is contrary to objectives of the zone; will result in adverse environmental impacts and will set a poor precedent with regard to the treatment of the rear yard of neighbouring properties (i.e. siting, design, location and relationship with the existing topography and neighbouring properties).

 

 


Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report 29 Baird Avenue, Matraville

Included under separate cover

 

 


DA Compliance Report - 29 Baird Avenue, MATRAVILLE

Attachment 2

 

 

 

 

Development Application Compliance Report

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Folder /DA No:

DA/142/2016

PROPERTY:     

 

29 Baird Avenue, MATRAVILLE  NSW  2036

Proposal:

Ground and first floor alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a double garage with first floor storage above fronting laneway (Heritage item).

Recommendation:

Refusal

 

Relevant Environment Planning Instruments:

 

1.      SEPPs

 

1.1   SEPP No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land applies to all land and aims to provide for a State-wide planning approach to the remediation of contaminated land.

 

Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires the consent authority to consider whether land is contaminated prior to granting consent to the carrying out of any development on that land.  If the land is contaminated, the consent authority must be satisfied that the land is suitable in its current state or will be suitable after remediation for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out. 

 

There is no evident risk to human health and the environment in this case to warrant a more detailed investigation given the following:

 

§   The immediate surrounds have been used for residential purposes for a considerable number of years. 

§   There is no evidence to suggest that potential land contaminating activities, such as those listed in Table 1 and Appendix A of the contaminated land planning guidelines of SEPP 55, have been carried out on the subject site or adjoining properties.

§   The subject site is not identified under Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 (RLEP) as constituting contaminated land or land that must be subject to a site audit statement. 

§   The subject site is not subject to a notice, order, management proposal or site audit statement under the Contaminated Land Management Act 1997.

§   Should the application be approved, standard conditions are recommended to be included in a consent to require all necessary legislative and policy requirements (in particular Australian Standard  2601 (2001) Demolition of Structures) be adhered to with respect to demolition works and the removal of any asbestos containing materials from the site.  This will avoid any surface contamination, subject to conditions.

 

Accordingly, nothing restricts Council, under SEPP 55, from consenting to the carrying out of the development. 

 

 

 

 

1.2   SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

The plans are accompanied by an amended BASIX Certificate (Certificate No.: A243825).

Should the application be approved, standard conditions of consent are recommended to ensure the commitments of the certificate are adopted and a compliance certificate is submitted to Council verifying this prior to obtaining an occupation certificate.

 

2.      Randwick LEP 2012

 

The subject site is zoned R2 ‘Low Density Residential’ under Randwick LEP 2012. The proposal development is classified as a dwelling house and is permissible in the zone. The zoning objectives are addressed as follows.

 

The objectives of the zone are:

§  To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment.

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

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

§  To protect the amenity of residents.

§  To encourage housing affordability.

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

The proposal will not represent a desirable addition given the existing pattern of built forms on site and in the immediate site context.  The treatment will add unsympathetically to the bulk and scale of the existing heritage item and provide an inconsistent massing.  The massing is not characteristic of the surrounding built forms or desired future character.  In this regard, the proposal will be contrary to the third objective of the zone.

 

The proposal will have an adverse impact on the surrounding amenity in terms of privacy and visual bulk.  As such, the amended proposal does not achieve the fourth objective of the zone.

The above issues are discussed further in this report.

 

The following Clauses of RLEP 2012 apply to the proposal:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

Floor Space Ratio (Maximum)

0.75:1 (276sqm)

(site area = 369sqm

0.44:1 (163sqm)

Yes

Height of Building (Maximum)

9.5m

5.93m (existing RL 26.44)

Yes

 

Clause 5.10 Heritage Conservation

 

The subject site comprises part of Local Heritage Item I233, being a group of three bungalows at 27-31 Baird Street.

 

Clause 5.10(4) of RLEP 2012 requires that the consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause in respect of a heritage item or heritage conservation area, consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item or area concerned.

 

The proposal will have an adverse effect on the heritage significance of the item for the following reasons:

·         The rear, two storey addition will be excessive in scale and bulk and inconsistent in form and character with the existing single storey heritage bungalow on the subject site and with those on both adjoining sites.

·         The proposal contains major or prominent design elements which will compete with the architectural features or detailing of the existing building. In particular, the upper floor of the rear addition is inconsistent with the existing building.

·         The single storey common elements and features of the streetscape (particularly the group of three heritage bungalows) are not incorporated into the design. The upper floor of the rear, two storey addition will be readily visible from the street.

·         The rear garage will have an adverse impact in the heritage setting of the property at 31 Baird Street as it will present a blank wall with insufficient setback from that property, with resulting overshadowing and visual massing.

The objectives of Clause 5.10 are:

(a)      to conserve the environmental heritage of Randwick,

(b)      to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views,

(c)      to conserve archaeological sites,

(d)      to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance.

For the reasons set out above, the proposal will have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of the existing heritage items at 27-31 Baird Street  and will therefore not achieve objectives (a) and (b) above.

3.      Randwick Comprehensive DCP

 

3.1     C1 Table:  Low Density Residential

 

Randwick Development Control Plan

 

The DCP provisions are structured into two components, Objectives and Controls. The Objectives provide the framework for assessment under each requirement and outline key outcomes that a development is expected to achieve. The controls contain both numerical standards and qualitative provisions. Any proposed variations from the controls may be considered only where the applicant successfully demonstrates that an alternative solution could result in a more desirable planning and urban design outcome.

 

The relevant provisions of the DCP are addressed in the table below. (Note: a number of control provisions that are not related to the proposal have been deliberately omitted.)

 

DCP Clause

Controls

Proposal

Compliance

2.3

Site coverage

 

301 to 450 sqm = 55%

Site = 369sqm

Existing =33% (123sqm)

Proposed = 45% (169sqm)

Yes

2.4

Landscaping and permeable surfaces

 

i)     301 to 450 sqm = 25%

ii)    Deep soil minimum width 900mm.

iii)   Maximise permeable surfaces to front

iv)   Retain existing or replace mature native trees

v)    Minimum 1 canopy tree (8m mature). Smaller (4m mature) If site restrictions apply.

vi)   Locating paved areas, underground services away from root zones.

Site = 369sqm

Existing = 53% site area (195sqm)

Proposed = 36% site area (134sqm)

Yes

2.5

Private open space (POS)

 

Dwelling & Semi-Detached POS

 

 

 

301 to 450 sqm = 6m x 6m

Site = 369sqm

Existing = 12m x 11.8m

Proposed = 9m x 5.2m-11.85m

Partial non-compliance (but satisfactory as any non-compliance in dimension is minor and overall area is adequate)

3

Building envelope

3.1

Floor space ratio LEP 2012 = 0.75:1 (276sqm)

 

Site area = 369sqm

Existing FSR =0.33:1 (123sqm)

Proposed FSR = 0.44:1 (163sqm)

Yes

3.2

Building height

 

 

 

Maximum overall height LEP 2012  = 9.5m

Existing = 5.8m

Proposed = 5.93m

Yes

 

i)   Maximum external wall height = 7m (Minimum floor to ceiling height = 2.7m)

ii)   Sloping sites = 8m

iii)  Merit assessment if exceeded

Existing = 3.2m

Proposed = 5.93m

Yes

3.3

Setbacks

3.3.1

Front setbacks

i)   Average setbacks of adjoining (if none then no less than 6m) Transition area then merit assessment.

ii)   Corner allotments: Secondary street frontage:

-    900mm for allotments with primary frontage width of less than 7m

-    1500mm for all other sites

iii)  do not locate swimming pools, above-ground rainwater tanks and outbuildings in front

Minimum = 4.2m

Existing = 4.2m

Proposed = 4.2m

N/A (no change to front setback)

3.3.2

Side setbacks:

Dwellings:

·     Frontage b/w 9m and 12m = 900mm (Gnd & 1st floor)

 

Refer to 6.3 and for parking facilities

Minimum = 900mm

Existing = 900m

Proposed = 1038m

Yes

3.3.3

Rear setbacks

i)   Minimum 25% of allotment depth or 8m, whichever lesser. Note: control does not apply to corner allotments.

ii)   Provide greater than aforementioned or demonstrate not required, having regard to:

-    Existing predominant rear setback line - reasonable view sharing (public and private)

-    protect the privacy and solar access

iii)  Garages, carports, outbuildings, swimming or spa pools, above-ground water tanks, and unroofed decks and terraces attached to the dwelling may encroach upon the required rear setback, in so far as they comply with other relevant provisions of this DCP.

iv)  For irregularly shaped lots = merit assessment on basis of:-

-    Compatibility

-    POS dimensions comply

-    minimise solar access, privacy and view sharing impacts

 

Refer to 6.3  for parking facilities

Minimum = 7.78m

Existing = 12m

Proposed = 9m

Yes

4

Building design

4.4

Roof Design and Features

 

 

 

i)   Rooftop terraces on dwelling (not roof)

ii)   Roof terraces above garages (low side)

i)  Rooftop terrace on dwelling

 

i)        Yes

 

4.5

Colours, Materials and Finishes

 

i)   Schedule of materials and finishes

ii)   Finishing is durable and non-reflective.

iii)  Minimise expanses of rendered masonry at street frontages (except due to heritage consideration)

iv)  Articulate and create visual interest by using combination of materials and finishes.

v)  Suitable for the local climatic to withstand natural weathering, ageing and deterioration.

vi)  recycled and re-use sandstone

(See also section 8.3 foreshore area.)

iv) Rear addition insufficiently articulated

No

5

Amenity

5.1

Solar access and overshadowing

 

Solar access to proposed development:

 

 

 

i)   Portion of north-facing living room windows must receive a minimum of 3 hrs direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June

ii)   POS (passive recreational activities) receive a minimum of 3 hrs of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

i)  The north-facing living room windows will receive a minimum of 3 hrs direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June (subject to overshadowing from 27 Baird Street).

ii)  A useable portion of the rear private open space will receive a minimum of 3 hrs of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

 

i)  Satisfactory

ii) Yes

 

Solar access to neighbouring development:

 

 

 

iii) Portion of the north-facing living room windows must receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

iv)  POS (passive recreational activities) receive a minimum of 3 hrs of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

v)  solar panels on neighbouring dwellings, which are situated not less than 6m above ground level (existing), must retain a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June. If no panels, direct sunlight must be retained to the northern, eastern and/or western roof planes (not <6m above ground) of neighbouring dwellings.

vi)  Variations may acceptable be subject to:

·     Degree of meeting the FSR, height, setbacks and site coverage controls.

·     Orientation of the subject and adjoining allotments and subdivision pattern of the urban block.

·     Topography of the subject and adjoining allotments.

·     Location and level of the windows in question.

·     Shadows cast by existing buildings on the neighbouring allotments.

iii) North-facing living room windows will not be significantly impacted by the proposal.  The existing level of solar access between 8am and 4pm on 21 June will be maintained.

iv) POS (passive recreational activities) receives less than 3 hrs of direct sunlight between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

v) Some additional impact on northern roof planes on neighbouring dwelling.

 

iii) Satisfactory

iv)    Yes

v) Yes

5.2

Energy Efficiency and Natural Ventilation

 

i)   Provide day light to internalised areas within the dwelling (for example, hallway, stairwell, walk-in-wardrobe and the like) and any poorly lit habitable rooms via measures such as:

·     Skylights (ventilated)

·     Clerestory windows

·     Fanlights above doorways

·     Highlight windows in internal partition walls

·     living rooms contain windows and doors opening to outdoor areas

Note: The sole reliance on skylight or clerestory window for natural lighting and ventilation is not acceptable

Internalised areas within the rear addition will receive adequate daylight

Yes

5.3

Visual Privacy

 

Windows

 

 

 

i)   Minimise any direct viewing habitable of proposed and neighbours habitable room windows by one or more of the following measures:

-    windows are offset or staggered

-    minimum 1600mm window sills

-    Install fixed and translucent glazing up 1600mm minimum effective sill.

-    Install fixed privacy screens to windows.

-    Creating a recessed courtyard (minimum 3m x 2m).

ii)   Orientate living and dining windows away from similar opposite (that is front or rear or side courtyard

i)  Proposed kitchen window has sill of 0.9m above floor level but is on the ground floor.

ii) Dining room windows oriented to rear, have minimum sill height >1600mm, or treated with external privacy louvres

i)  Yes

ii) Yes

 

Balcony

 

 

 

i)   Upper floor balconies to street or rear yard of the site. (wrap around balcony to have a narrow width at side)

ii)   Privacy screens

iii)  minimise overlooking of POS via privacy screens (fixed, minimum of 1600mm high and achieve  minimum of 70% opaqueness (glass, timber or metal slats and louvers)

iv)  Supplementary privacy devices:  Screen planting and planter boxes Not sole privacy protection measure)

v)  vi) For sloping sites, step down and avoid large areas of ground floor decks or terraces.

The proposed first floor terrace and first floor southern and northern windows will cause significant overlooking of the rear yards of both 27 and 31 Baird Street.

No

5.4

Acoustic Privacy

 

i)   noise sources not located adjacent to adjoining dwellings bedroom windows

Attached dual occupancies

ii)   Reduce noise transmission between dwellings by:

-    Locate noise-generating areas and quiet areas adjacent to each other.

-    Locate less sensitive areas adjacent to the party wall to serve as noise buffer.

The proposed first floor terrace subject to a redesign would minimise its impacts.

 

5.5

Safety and Security

 

i)   dwellings main entry on front elevation (unless narrow site)

ii)   Street numbering at front near entry.

iii)  1 habitable room window (glazed area min 2 square metres) overlooking the street or a public place.

iv)  Front fences, parking facilities and landscaping does not to obstruct casual surveillance (maintain safe access)

No change

N/A

5.6

View Sharing

 

i)   Reasonably maintain existing view corridors or vistas from the neighbouring dwellings, streets and public open space areas.

ii)   retaining existing views from the living areas are a priority over low use rooms

iii)  retaining views for the public domain takes priority over views for the private properties

iv)  fence design and plant selection must minimise obstruction of views

v)  Adopt a balanced approach to privacy protection and view sharing

vi)  Demonstrate any steps or measures adopted to mitigate potential view loss impacts in the DA.

(certified height poles used)

The proposal will not adversely affect significant views.

Yes

6

Car Parking and Access

6.1

Location of Parking Facilities:

 

 

 

i)   Maximum 1 vehicular access

ii)   Locate off rear lanes, or secondary street or

iii)  Locate behind front façade, within the dwelling or positioned to the side of the dwelling.

Note: See 6.2 parking facilities forward of the front façade alignment may be considered.

iv)  Single width garage/carport if frontage <12m;

-    Consistent with pattern in the street;

-    Landscaping provided in the front yard.

v)  Minimise excavation for basement garages and scale of the front elevation

vi)  Avoid long driveways (impermeable surfaces)

i)  1 vehicular access

ii) Located off rear lane

iii) Located behind front façade

iv)    Double width garage

v) No excavation

vi)    No driveway

i)  Yes

ii) Yes

iii) Yes

iv)    No (but satisfactory given requirement to provide two parking spaces)

v) Yes

vi)    Yes

6.3

Setbacks of Parking Facilities

 

i)   Garages and carports comply with Sub-Section 3.3 Setbacks.

ii)   1m rear lane setback

iii)  Nil side setback where:

-    nil side setback on adjoining property;

-    streetscape compatibility;

-    safe for drivers and pedestrians; and

-    Amalgamated driveway crossing

 

i) 0.3m to southern side setback at Ground and First Floor

ii) Entry to garage off rear lane setback 0m from lane boundary

iii) 0.3m side setback is incompatible with nearby street character (of heritage items)

i) No

ii) No

iii)No

6.4

Driveway Configuration

 

Maximum driveway width:

-    Single driveway – 3m

-    Double driveway – 5m

Must taper driveway width at street boundary and at property boundary

 

Double driveway – 4.8m

Yes

6.5

Garage Configuration

 

i)   recessed behind front of dwelling

ii)   The maximum garage width (door and piers or columns):

-    Single garage – 3m

-    Double garage – 6m

iii)  5.4m minimum length of a garage

iv)  2.6m max wall height of detached garages

v)  recess garage door 200mm to 300mm behind walls (articulation)

vi)  600mm max. parapet wall or bulkhead

vii) minimum clearance 2.2m AS2890.1

i)   Recessed behind front of dwelling

ii)   Garage width (door and piers or columns):

6m

iii)  5.6m length

iv)  3.4m wall height

v)  Garage door not recessed 200mm behind walls

 

i)   Yes

ii)   Yes

iii)  Yes

iv)  No

v)  No

 

8

Area Specific Controls

8.1

Development in Laneways

 

i)   Max. 6m height. Max. 4.5m external wall height. Mass and scale to be secondary to primary dwelling and upper level contained within roof form (attic storey).

ii)   1 operable window to laneway elevation (casual surveillance)

iii)  Aligns with consistent laneway setback pattern (if no consistent setback then 1m rear setback). (Refer to Sub-Section 6 for controls relating to setback to garage entry.)

iv)  Nil side setback allowed subject to:

-    adjoining building similarly constructed

-    no unreasonable visual, privacy and overshadowing impacts

v)  Screen or match exposed blank walls on adjoining properties (ie on common boundary).

i) 3.6m max height and 3.4m max external wall height

iii) There is no consistent setback pattern, but building is aligned to laneway.

iv)    The rear garage has a 0.3m setback from the southern side boundary, which will contribute to significant overshadowing and unarticulated visual massing to the rear yard of 31 Baird Street.

 

i)   Yes

iii) No

iv) No

 

3.2     B2 Table:  Heritage

 

DCP Clause

Control

Proposal

Compliance

1.12

Development in the vicinity of a heritage item

 

All new development adjacent to or in the vicinity of a heritage item or heritage conservation area needs to be considered for its likely effect on heritage significance and setting.

The proposed rear addition will be have an adverse impact on heritage bungalow on the subject site and those on either adjoining site.

No

1.13

Heritage Management Documents

 

A Heritage Impact Statement considers the extent to which a proposal would affect the heritage significance of a heritage item or heritage conservation area. A Heritage Impact Statement establishes the heritage significance of a place, makes an assessment of the impact of the development on this significance, and proposes measures to minimise impact. For major changes or demolition, the required Heritage Impact Statement should be prepared by a specialist heritage consultant able to advise on options to minimise heritage impact.

The Heritage Impact Statement is silent on the internal demolition and modifications as well as the proposed garage, and does not provide any internal images of the bungalow or the rear yard of the site.

No

2

Development Controls

2.2

Design and character

i)

Development must demonstrate how it respects the heritage values of the heritage item

For the reasons set out above, the proposal will not respect the heritage values of the existing heritage item (including all three adjoining heritage bungalows)

No

ii)

Common elements and features of the streetscape are to be identified in a streetscape analysis and incorporated into the design

The single storey common elements and features of the streetscape (particularly the group of three heritage bungalows) are not incorporated into the design. The upper floor of the rear extension will be readily visible from the street.

No

iii)

New development should be consistent with important horizontal lines of buildings in the streetscape, in particular ground floor levels and eaves lines, where appropriate

The single storey common elements and features of the streetscape (particularly the group of three heritage bungalows) are not incorporated into the design. The upper floor of the rear extension will be readily visible from the street.

No

iv)

Large blank areas of brick or rendered walls should be avoided.

Rear garage will present a blank wall to the south with insufficient setback from the southern side boundary

No

v)

Street elevations and visible side elevations must not be significantly changed. Additions must be located to the rear or to one side of the building to minimise impact on the streetscape.

Proposed first floor will be inconsistent with streetscape presentation of the group of three heritage items.

No

vi)

Any proposed additions or alterations must complement the existing building in its scale, form and detailing.

The rear, two storey addition will be excessive in scale and bulk and inconsistent in form and character with the existing single storey heritage bungalow on the subject site and with those on either adjoining site.

No

2.3

Scale and Form

i)

In streetscapes where development is of a consistent single storey height, upper floor additions are appropriate only if not readily visible from the street. However, ground floor rear addition remains the preferred option.

The rear, two storey addition will dominate and be excessive in scale and bulk and inconsistent in form and character with the existing single storey heritage bungalow on the subject site and with those on either adjoining site. The upper floor of the rear extension will be readily visible from the street.

No

iv)

Additions must not visually dominate, compete with or conceal the original form and massing of the existing buildings.

The rear, two storey addition will dominate and be excessive in scale and bulk and inconsistent in form and character with the existing single storey heritage bungalow on the subject site and with those on either adjoining site.

No

v)

Additions to heritage items must not contain any major or prominent design elements which compete with the architectural features or detailing of the existing building.

The proposal contains major or prominent design elements which will compete with the architectural features or detailing of the existing building. In particular, the upper floor of the rear addition is inconsistent with the existing building.

No

2.4

Siting and setbacks

i)

Development must conform to the predominant front setbacks in the streetscape.

Proposed works are located to  the rear of the existing dwelling

Yes

ii)

Development must respect side setbacks and rear alignments or setbacks of surrounding development.

Rear garage will present a blank wall to the heritage item to the south with insufficient setback from the southern side boundary

 

iii)

Front and rear setbacks should be adequate to ensure the retention of the existing landscape character of the heritage item or conservation area and important landscape features.

Existing landscaping in the rear yards of the heritage group is limited. While no landscaping plan is provided, the proposal will allow for landscaping in the north-eastern corner of the site.

Yes

2.9

Garages

i)

Existing rear lane access or side street access (where available) must be utilised for carparking in preference to front access.

Rear lane access for car parking

Yes

 

3.3   B7:  Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access

 

B7:  Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access

2 Sustainable Transport

 

All development in addressing transport, parking and access requirements must consider and integrate transport measures that provide for greater use of public transport, walking and cycling.

1.   On site bicycle parking will be available within the garage to cater for both occupants and visitors.

2.   The surrounding area consists of a well-established pedestrian network.

Satisfactory

3.2 Parking Requirement:

 

Development must comply with the vehicle parking rates a 1 Vehicle Parking Rates.

Parking Requirement:  2 car parking spaces

Proposed: 2 car spaces 

Yes

3.7 - Parking layout, configuration & dimensions

 

Minimum car space dimensions: 2.4m x 5.4m

Proposed car space dimensions: 2.4m x 5.5m

(for each car space only)

Yes

 

4.      79C Matters for consideration

 

Section 79C ‘Matters for Consideration’

Comments

Environmental Planning Instruments

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

The relevant provisions have been discussed above.

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

There are no draft instruments applicable in this case.

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

The relevant provisions have been discussed above.

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

N/A

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

The relevant clauses of the Regulations have been satisfied.

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

The environmental impacts of the proposed development on the natural and built environment, are addressed in this report, are discussed in the paragraphs above and are considered to be adverse. The proposed development is inconsistent with the dominant residential character in the locality.

The proposal is not considered to result in detrimental social or economic impacts on the locality.

 

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

The related impacts discussed above indicate the site is not suitable for the development.

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

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

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

The proposal is contrary to objectives of the zone and will result in adverse environmental impacts. Accordingly, the proposal is considered not to be in the public interest.

 

5.      Referral Comments

 

Council’s Heritage Consultant has provided the following comments:

 

Heritage Comments

 

The subject residence at 29 Baird Avenue, Matraville is a brick Californian Bungalow located on the eastern side of Baird Avenue towards the southern end of the street block. The subject site is listed as a group heritage item which includes three neighbouring bungalows located at 27-31 Baird Avenue Item no. I233). The site is not located within proximity to any other heritage items and is not located within a Heritage Conservation Area. It is a single storey dwelling with a tiled roof and later additions to the rear. The residence features a symmetrical façade with a veranda towards the western elevation surmounted by a gable end. Alike neighbouring properties 27 and 31 Baird Avenue, the subject site is set back from the street and includes a small front garden. The street boundary of the property is defined by a brick dwarf fence with a metal gate.

 

The surrounding neighbourhood of the subject site is dominated by single and double storey residential development with the majority of the houses featuring high pitched roofs and intact facades.

 

The following description and statement of significance has been extracted from the Randwick Heritage Study form for group heritage item (Perumal Murphy, October 1987): An excellent group of three later style Bungalows with some very good detailing, c. 1935. Liver brick, tuck pointed. Hipped terra cotta roofs with projecting central gables over large front porch areas. Recessed doorway flanked by small diamond-shaped windows with original leadlight. Decorative brick balustrades with heavy piers and stub columns.

 

Decorative 1930’s style render over windows. All retain original front fence. Most impressive. All almost intact, but for minor alterations, down to original garden and gates. In need of some repair. Some of the better surviving examples of Bungalow design in the area.Good streetscape grouping.

 

Heritage Status and Significance

The site of the subject house at 29 Baird Avenue, Matraville is listed as a group heritage item as identified under Schedule 5 of the Randwick LEP 2012. As detailed above, the heritage item encompasses the bungalows located at 27-31 Baird Avenue. The subject bungalow and its group enhances the streetscape of Baird Avenue.

 

The Proposal

The proposal is for alterations and additions to the subject bungalow and is limited to the rear of the subject site. The proposal includes:

 

·    Demolition of the existing rear addition;

·    Construction of a two storey rear addition;

·    Construction of a new garage towards the rear.

 

Background

No previous consultation has been noted. Following provision of comments on the preliminary assessment of the proposed development, a site inspection has been carried out on 6th June 2016. The inspection provided an opportunity to discuss the proposed works in particular the rear two-storey extension, the location of the garage and the conservation / reinstatement works to the main dwelling. Subsequently, the recommendations of the Heritage referral dated 3 May 2016 have been amended in this report.

 

Submission

The documentation provided by Randwick City Council for this application included a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by John Robert Boers (February 2016) and a set of drawings (floor plans and elevations) prepared by Moshonis Building, Designers and Engineers. Drawings of the existing house and its elevations as it currently stands have not been provided. Limited detail regarding finishes and colours has been provided.

 

Comments

Following review of the submitted documentation including the Heritage Impact Assessment, the proposed drawings and the immediate neighbourhood of the subject dwelling, the proposed works are assessed for their impact on the subject site as a group heritage item. As detailed above, the documentation submitted to Council provides limited information regarding the proposed development and the existing dwelling in particular its internal features and rear yard. The Heritage Impact Statement is silent on the internal demolition and modifications as well as the proposed garage, and does not provide any internal images of the bungalow or the rear yard of the site. Notwithstanding, due to the previous additions to the rear of the subject bungalow, the proposed works to the ground floor including modifications to insert bathroom, laundry and pantry in association with new dining, living and kitchen extension is considered acceptable. However, the first floor addition at the rear is excessive and will affect the consistency between the group of three heritage items. Neither one of the properties in this group of heritage item has a first floor addition. Therefore, any new first floor addition should be made in a more sympathetic manner in order to ensure no impact occur to the streetscape presentation of the group heritage item.

 

The Heritage Impact Statement notes that the first floor addition’s height will be lower than the ridge height of the existing bungalow; however, the drawings clearly indicate that the new addition will be more than 1 metre higher than the existing ridge height. The new addition is not considered to be a subservient to the existing bungalow. The proposed first floor addition will, in fact, adversely affect the heritage significance of the subject site as part of a group of heritage item, identified as being of an excellent group of three later style bungalows. As such, it is recommended that a site inspection is organised and consultation with the applicant is conducted onsite to refine the design.

 

Recommendation

Provided that the following design modifications have been made and additional information submitted to the Council, the proposed development can be supported in its new form. In the case of the changes are not made, and additional information noted below is not incorporated into the drawings and provided to the Council, the proposed development, in particular the design of the first floor addition, is not supported in relation to the heritage matters, in its current form.

 

Any consent should be subject to the following design modifications and requirements:

 

1.        The height of the rear two-storey addition to be reduced at least by 700mm.

2.        The garage is to be shifted to the other side of the rear yard/boundary. The layout of the rear addition could be shifted accordingly if required.

3.        Missing façade elements should be reinstated to match existing original details. Such as the window awning above the right hand side window of the front façade is to be replaced with a flat rendered hood to match the left hand side window hood (similar to the no. 31 Baird Avenue) with the decorative rendered detailing around. Existing chimney is to be included on the elevation drawings and noted as to be retained.

4.        All restoration and reinstatement works should either be noted on the drawings (plans and elevations) or written as notes on the drawings or as a separate letter.

5.        All internal original detailing where no modifications are proposed to be retained and reinstated to match existing.

6.        The applicant should provide additional information on the proposed materials, finishes and colours. Repointing should be done to match existing original dark (black) colour mortar joints with the timber elements of the front gable and bargeboard are painted in shades of grey (similar to the colour sample currently applied), window frames and painted sections of the façade and the veranda elements painted in off-white or crème colours. The front fence should be repointed to match the mortar colour of the neighbouring house at 31 Baird Avenue.

 

The above comments were issued by Council’s external heritage consultant in response to the original set of plans lodged by the applicant with the DA on 14 March 2016. Following discussions with Council’s external planning consultant and comments received from Council’s heritage consultant, the applicant lodged an amended set of plans on 3 July 2016. The amended proposal involved:

 

§  Reduction in the height of the rear, two storey addition to the dwelling house by 0.7m

§  Reduction in the height of the rear garage structure by 2.2m and removal of the storage space within the roof form.

 

This report addresses those amended plans. Notwithstanding the heritage consultant’s support of the amended plans (subject to further conditions), it is nonetheless considered that the amended proposal does not satisfy the controls and objectives pertaining to heritage conservation in Clause 5.10 of the RLEP 2012 or Part B2 of the RDCP 2013, for the reasons set out below:.

 

Reason for refusal:

 

1.     The proposed development does not comply with the objectives of the R2 “Low Density Residential” zone of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the two storey rear addition will be inconsistent with the single storey presentation of the existing bungalow and of adjoining properties and will have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of privacy, overshadowing and visual massing.

 

2.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Clause 5.10 of the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in that the two storey rear addition will be inconsistent with and will dominate the single storey common elements and features of the group of three heritage bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue and the garage setback will adversely impact the heritage setting of 31 Baird Avenue.

 

3.     The proposed development does not comply with Part B2, Clause 1.13 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the Heritage Impact Statement is silent on the internal demolition and modifications as well as the proposed garage, and does not provide any internal images of the bungalow or the rear yard of the site.

 

4.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part B2, Clauses 2.2 and 2.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the excessive scale and unsympathetic form of the proposed rear two storey addition will not respect the heritage values of the group of three heritage bungalows at 27-31 Baird Avenue and will have an adverse impact on the streetscape.

 

5.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part B2, Clause 2.4 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the insufficient setback of the rear garage will adversely affect the heritage setting of the adjoining heritage bungalow at 31 Baird Avenue in terms of visual massing and overshadowing.

 

6.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part C1, Clause 5.1 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the excessive scale of the proposed rear addition and inadequate setback of the garage from the southern side boundary will result in the neighbouring property at 31 Baird Avenue not receiving adequate solar access.

 

7.     The proposed development does not comply with the relevant objectives and controls of Part C1, Clause 5.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the proposed first floor terrace will adversely impact on the visual privacy of the rear yards of both adjoining properties.

 

8.     The proposed development does not comply with Part C1, Clause 6.3 of the Randwick Comprehensive Development Control Plan 2013 in that the garage entry off Baird Lane has a zero setback from the lane boundary and the garage has an inadequate side setback.

 

9.     The proposal is not in the public interest.  The proposal is contrary to objectives of the zone; will result in adverse environmental impacts and will set a poor precedent with regard to the treatment of the rear yard of neighbouring properties (i.e. siting, design, location and relationship with the existing topography and neighbouring properties).

 

 


Mediation outcome - DA/142/2016, 29 Baird Avenue, MATRAVILLE

Attachment 3

 

 


Planning Committee                                                                                                 13 September 2016

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Development Application Report No. D67/16

 

Subject:              20 Moore Street, Coogee (DA/551/2015) (Deferred)

Folder No:                DA/551/2015

Author:                     Matthew Choi, Senior Environmental Planning Officer     

 

 

Introduction:

 

The subject application involves the demolition of all structures on site and construction of a part two, part three residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles, associated site and landscaped works.

 

The application was recommended for approval and reported to the Planning Committee Meeting on the 12 July 2016. At the meeting, it was resolved:

 

“(Matson/Shurey): that the application be deferred for mediation”.

 

Mediation Proceedings:

 

A mediation session was held on the 18 August 2016 between the applicant and the objectors from the following addresses:

 

·     1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     22 Moore Street, Coogee

·     24 Moore Street, Coogee

·     31 Moore Street, Coogee

·     21 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     23 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

 

During the course of the mediation session the following matters were raised and discussed:

 

·     Overlooking and visual privacy impacts to 22 Moore Street

·     Overshadowing to the east facing living/dining room windows at 1/16-18 Moore Street

·     Additional traffic impacts within the surrounding street network

·     Loss of on-street parking

·     Landscaping including bamboo located along the north-eastern corner and a tree in the north-western corner.

·     The provision of a complete set of amended plans.

 

At the conclusion of the mediation, the applicant agreed to make the following changes as requested by the objectors in attendance.

 

·     Delete Condition no. 2(a) relating to the installation of a 1.6 metre high privacy screen along the full western edge of the second floor balcony.

 

·     Remove the ‘Gordonia Axillaris’ trees located within the north-western corner of the subject site.

 

·     Landscaping shall not include any plant climbers on the side boundary walls or fences.

 

Other than those raised above, there were no further agreements with regards to the subject application.

 

Assessment:

 

Deletion of condition no. 2(a):

The inclusion of condition no. 2(a) was to address submissions relating to privacy concerns of the western adjoining neighbours, with particular regards to apartment nos. 1 and 4, 16-18 Moore Street. In considering a mutual agreement has been reached between the applicant and the objector, the deletion of condition no. 2(a) is acceptable and can be removed as part of this consent.

 

·     Delete Condition no. 2(a)

 

Deletion of proposed trees located within the north-western corner:  

The application was discussed with Council’s landscape officer and advised that he has no objection to the removal of the ‘Gordonia Axillaris’ (Fried Egg Plant) located within the north-western corner and northern boundary of the subject site. The proposed ‘Emerald Lustre Vibumum’ hedge located along the northern boundary will visually soften the proposed residential flat development and the removal of the trees would improve the view corridor from the western adjoining neighbours. Council has no objection to the removal of the trees located along the northern/north-western boundary and shall be removed as part of a condition of consent. 

 

·     The ‘Gordonia Axillaris’ (Fried Egg Plant) as shown located along the north-western corner and northern boundary of the subject site shall be deleted as part of this consent.

 

Deletion of plant climbers along the side boundary walls/fence:

The proposal includes ‘Pandorea Jasminoides’ (Bower of Beauty) to a steel cable fixed to the fence located along the eastern boundary and ‘Bambus Textilis var. Gracilis’ (Slender Weavers Bamboo) along the western boundary. Council has no objections to the removal of the plant climbers along the side boundaries and shall be removed as part of a condition of consent.   

 

·     This consent does not grant approval for the use of climber planters along the side boundary walls/fence.

 

·     The ‘Pandorea Jasminoides’ (Bower of Beauty) and ‘Bambus Textilis var. Gracilis’ (Slender Weavers Bamboo) along the side boundaries shall be deleted as part of this consent.

 

·     Delete Condition no. 37

 

Relationship to City Plan

 

The relationship with the City Plan is as follows:

 

Outcome 4:       Excellence in urban design and development.

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

 

Financial impact statement

 

There is no direct financial impact for this matter.

Conclusion

 

The mediation held between the applicant and objectors resulted in some minor agreements. However, as there is general no agreement in support of the development application, the application is referred back to Council for determination.

 

 

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 and 4.4 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012, relating to Height of Buildings and Floor Space Ratios respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning & Infrastructure 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. 551/2015 for the demolition of all structures on site and construction of a new part two part three residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles, associated site and landscaping works (variation to height of buildings and floor space ration control), at No. 20 Moore Street, Coogee, subject to the following conditions:

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

 

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

 

Approved Plans & Supporting Documentation

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

 

Plan

Drawn by

Dated

DA-101 (Revision B)

Sgammotta Architects

26 February 2016

DA-102 (Revision D)

Sgammotta Architects

9 March 2016

DA-200 (Revision B)

Sgammotta Architects

26 February 2016

DA-201 (Revision B)

Sgammotta Architects

26 February 2016

 

 

Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.        The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements and details are to be included in the Construction Certificate:

 

a.      The openings within the timber panelling of the proposed front fence shall be a minimum of 30% open when viewed from the street to maintain the amenity to the adjoining residential development and the streetscape.

 

b.      Consent is not granted for the construction of the dividing boundary fences on the eastern and western boundaries unless the boundary fences meet the relevant requirements under the Dividing Fences Act 1991 or the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

c.      A new window opening must be installed along the ground floor eastern external wall of bedroom no. 1 to apartment no.2 that extends between the door frame and the dividing fence between apartment nos. 1 and 2. The window shall have a sill height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level.

 

d.      The rear first floor balcony including associated balustrading shall be deleted. The sliding door on the northern elevation shall be replaced with a suitably sized window. The bottom sill of the window shall be a minimum 1 metre above the finished first floor level to provide for equitable sharing of views. The BASIX certificate shall be amended to reflect the above changes.

 

e.      The first floor north-facing bedroom no. 1 shall be setback an additional 1 metre from the rear boundary and maintain a similar building alignment as the adjoining bedroom no. 2 in apartment no. 4 to ensure an equitable sharing of views from the western neighbour. 

 

f.       The first floor south-facing balcony and any associated balustrading must be setback an additional 900mm from the south-eastern edge of the balcony.

 

g.      The rear second floor balcony and any associated balustrading must be setback an additional 700mm from the rear boundary and maintain a similar alignment as the balcony at no. 22 Moore Street.

 

h.      The following windows must have a minimum sill height 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:

 

·    First floor, east facing bedroom no. 1 window (apartment no. 3)

·    First floor, east facing study room window (apartment no. 4)

·    Second floor, east facing dining room windows (measured 2.4 metres from the eastern boundary) (apartment no. 4)

·    First floor, west facing foyer room window (foyer room)

 

i.       The ‘Gordonia Axillaris’ (Fried Egg Plant) as shown located along the north-western corner and northern boundary of the subject site shall be deleted as part of this consent.

 

j.       The ‘Pandorea Jasminoides’ (Bower of Beauty) and ‘Bambus Textilis var. Gracilis’ (Slender Weavers Bamboo) along the side boundaries shall be deleted as part of this consent.

 

k.      This consent does not grant approval for the use of climber planters along the side boundary walls/fence.

 

REQUIREMENTS BEFORE A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE CAN BE ISSUED

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

 

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

 

Consent Requirements

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

 

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.

 

5.        In accordance with Section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a prescribed condition that all of the required commitments listed in the relevant BASIX Certificate for this development are fulfilled.

 

An amended BASIX certificate must be consistent with the plans referenced in Condition 1 of this determination and a copy shall be submitted to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development.

 

Section 94A Development Contributions

6.        In accordance with Council’s Section 94A Development Contributions Plan effective from 21 April 2015, based on the development cost of $1,500,000 the following applicable monetary levy must be paid to Council: $15,000.

 

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. Please contact Council on telephone 9399 0999 or 1300 722 542 for the indexed contribution amount prior to payment.

To calculate the indexed levy, the following formula must be used:

IDC = ODC x CP2/CP1

 

Where:

IDC = the indexed development cost

ODC = the original development cost determined by the Council

CP2 = the Consumer Price Index, All Groups, Sydney, as published by the ABS in  respect of the quarter ending immediately prior to the date of payment

CP1 = the Consumer Price Index, All Groups, Sydney as published by the ABS in respect of the quarter ending immediately prior to the date of imposition of the condition requiring payment of the levy.

 

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

 

Long Service Levy Payments

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

 

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

 

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

 

Security Deposit

8.        The following damage / civil works security deposit requirement must be complied with, as security for making good any damage caused to the roadway, footway, verge or any public place; and as security for completing any public work; and for remedying any defect on such public works, in accordance with section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979:

 

·         $3000.00   -       Damage / Civil Works Security Deposit

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Sydney Water

9.        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.

         

New Street Tree

10.      The applicant must submit a payment of $107.25 (including GST) to cover the cost for Council to supply, plant and maintain 1 x 25 litre street tree, Banksia serrata (Saw Toothed Banksia) on the Moore Street verge, an equal distance between the western edge of the new vehicle crossing and western site boundary, upon the completion of all site works.

 

This fee must be paid into Tree Amenity Income at the Cashier on the Ground Floor of the Administrative Centre prior to a Construction Certificate being issued for the development.

 

The applicant must contact Council’s Landscape Development Officer on 9399-0613 (quoting the receipt number), and giving at least four working weeks notice (allow longer for public holidays or extended periods of rain) to arrange for planting of the new tree.

 

          Landscape Plan

11.      The Certifying Authority/PCA must ensure that the Landscape Plan submitted as part of the approved Construction Certificate is substantially consistent with the Landscape Plan by Taylor Brammer, dwg no LA01, revision A, dated 28th July 2015.

 

Protection of neighbours tree

12.      In order to ensure retention of the Olea europaea subsp. ‘Africanna’ (Wild Olive) located on the adjoining private property site to the west, no.16-18, adjacent the northeast corner of this neighbouring dwelling, hard up against the common boundary, in good health, the following measures are to be undertaken:

 

a.        All documentation submitted for the Construction Certificate application must show its retention, with the position and diameter of both its trunk and canopy to be clearly and accurately shown on all plans in relation to the proposed works.

 

b.        Any excavations associated with the installation of new services, pipes, stormwater systems or similar in the western side setback of the subject site must be located as close as practically possible to the western wall of the new building.

 

c.        The Construction Certificate plans must show that the western wall of the basement level will be setback off the western site boundary, in accordance with the offsets that are shown on the Basement & Ground Floor Plan, dwg DA-101, revision C, dated 07.03.16

 

d.       All initial excavations for the western wall of the basement level, within a radius of 3 metres (measured off the outside edge of its trunk at ground level), must be performed by hand, to a minimum depth of 600mm.

 

e.        Where roots are encountered in this area which are in direct conflict with the approved works, they may be cut cleanly by hand (using only hand held tools, not machinery), with the affected area to be backfilled with clean site soil as soon as practically possible.

 

f.        Any new common boundary fencing within a radius of 3 metres of its trunk can only be a system which is supported on localised pad footings, not strip footings, with notations confirming compliance to be shown on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

g.       Other than the approved works/footprint, there must be no other structures within the western side setback, for a radius of 3 metres of its trunk, such as continuous strip footings, planter boxes or similar, and must remain as undisturbed, deep soil.

 

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 this 3 metre radius throughout the course of works, with all Site Management Plans needing to acknowledge these requirements.

 

i.         The PCA must ensure compliance with all of these requirements, both on the plans as well as on-site during the course of construction, and prior to issuing any type of Occupation Certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

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

 

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

 

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia & Relevant Standards

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

 

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

 

BASIX Requirements

15.      In accordance with section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and clause 97A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, the requirements and commitments contained in the relevant BASIX Certificate must be complied with.

 

The required commitments listed and identified in the BASIX Certificate must be included on the construction certificate plans, specifications and associated documentation, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.

 

The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

Site stability, Excavation and Construction work

16.      A report must be obtained from a suitably qualified and experienced professional engineer, which includes the following details, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority for the development:-

 

a)      Geotechnical details which confirm the suitability and stability of the site for the development and relevant design and construction requirements to be implemented to ensure the stability and adequacy of the development and adjacent land.

 

b)      Details of the proposed methods of excavation and support for the adjoining land (including any public place) and buildings.

 

c)      Details to demonstrate that the proposed methods of excavation, support and construction are suitable for the site and should not result in any damage to the adjoining premises, buildings or any public place, as a result of the works and any associated vibration.

 

d)     The adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times throughout demolition, excavation and building work, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

e)      Written approval must be obtained from the owners of the adjoining land to install any ground or rock anchors underneath the adjoining premises (including any public roadway or public place) and details must be provided to the Certifying Authority.

 

Traffic Conditions

17.      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.

 

18.      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

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

 

The design alignment level/s at the property boundary as issued by Council and their relationship to the footpath must be indicated on the building plans for the construction certificate. 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.

 

20.      The above alignment levels and the site inspection by Council’s Development Engineering Section have been issued at a prescribed fee of $634 calculated at $52.00 (inclusive of GST) per metre of site frontage. This amount is to be paid prior to a construction certificate being issued for the development.

 

Stormwater Drainage

21.      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

iv.       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.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

i.       Directly to the kerb and gutter or drainage system in front of the subject site in Moore Street; or

 

ii.      Directly to Council’s underground drainage system located in the adjacent reserve (Kildare Lane) via a new pit located in front of the site within the lane and length of 375mm diameter pipe to connect onto the existing pit in front of 2A Major Street. 

 

c.        The maximum discharge to Council’s kerb and gutter or underground drainage system shall not exceed a maximum of 25L/S for all storms up to the 1 in 20yr storm event. An on-site stormwater detention system may be required to ensure this amount is not exceeded.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

e.        Should a pump system be required to drain any portion of the site the system must be designed with a minimum of two pumps being installed, connected in parallel (with each pump capable of discharging at the permissible discharge rate) and connected to a control board so that each pump will operate alternatively. The pump wet well shall be sized for the 1 in 100 year, 2 hour storm assuming both pumps are not working.

 

          The pump system must also be designed and installed strictly in accordance with Randwick City Council's Private Stormwater Code.

 

f.        The written approval of Council is required to be obtained in relation to all drainage and infrastructure works which are located externally from the site within the adjacent reserve. Detailed plans and specifications of the proposed works 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 professional 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.

 

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 and must not encroach across a neighbouring property’s frontage unless approved in writing by Council’s Development Engineering Coordinator.

 

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

 

p.        Should a charged system be required to drain any portion of the site, the charged system must be designed with suitable clear-outs/inspection points at pipe bends and junctions.

 

Site seepage

23.      The proposed development shall comply with the following requirements to ensure the adequate management of any seepage waters:

 

a)    Seepage water and subsoil drainage (from planter boxes etc) must not be collected & discharged directly or indirectly to  Council’s street gutter or underground drainage system

 

b)    Adequate provision is to be made for the seepage water to drain around the basement carpark (to ensure the basement will not dam or slow the movement of the seepage waters through the development site).

 

c)    The walls of the basement level of the building are to be waterproofed/tanked to restrict the entry of any seepage water and subsoil drainage into the basement level/s of the building and the stormwater drainage system for the development.

 

d)    Sub-soil drainage systems may discharge via infiltration subject to the hydraulic consultant/engineer being satisfied that the site and soil conditions are suitable and the seepage is able to be fully managed within the site, without causing a nuisance to any premises and ensuring that it does not drain or discharge (directly or indirectly) to the street gutter.

                 

e)    Details of the proposed stormwater drainage system including methods of tanking the basement levels and any sub-soil drainage systems (as applicable) must be prepared or approved by a suitably qualified and experienced Professional Engineer to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority and details are to be included in the construction certificate. A copy of the proposed method for tanking the basement levels must be forwarded to Council if Council is not the Certifying Authority.

 

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.

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

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

 

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

 

Certification and Building Inspection Requirements

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

c)      a principal contractor must be appointed for the building work and the requirements of the Home Building Act 1989 must be satisfied accordingly; and

 

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

 

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

 

Home Building Act 1989

27.      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 relevant 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

28.      A dilapidation report prepared by a professional engineer or suitably qualified and experienced building surveyor shall be submitted to the certifying authority prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works detailing the current condition and status of all buildings and ancillary structures located upon all of the premises adjoining the subject site (e.g. dwellings, residential flat buildings, commercial/industrial building, garages, carports, verandah’s, fences, retaining walls, swimming pools and driveways etc).

 

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

 

Construction Site Management Plan

29.      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 site fencing / hoardings;

·            location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

·            location of building materials for construction;

·            provisions for public safety;

·            dust control measures;

·            details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

·            site access location and construction

·            details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

·            protective measures for tree preservation;

·            location and size of waste containers/bulk bins;

·            provisions for temporary stormwater drainage;

·            construction noise and vibration management;

·            construction traffic management details;

·            provisions for temporary sanitary facilities.

 

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

30.      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 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 Noise & Vibration Management Plan

31.      A Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan, prepared in accordance with the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Guidelines for Construction Noise and Assessing Vibration, by a suitably qualified person, is to be developed and implemented prior to commencing site work and throughout the course of construction.

 

a)      Noise and vibration emissions during the construction of the building and associated site works must not result in damage to nearby premises or result in an unreasonable loss of amenity to nearby residents. 

 

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

 

b)      The Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan must include details of measurements, analysis and relevant criteria and demonstrate that the noise and vibration emissions from the work satisfy the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, current EPA Guidelines for Construction Noise and Assessing Vibration and Councils conditions of consent.

 

c)      A further report/correspondence must be obtained from the consultant as soon as practicable upon the commencement of works, which reviews and confirms the implementation and suitability of the noise and vibration strategies in the Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan and which demonstrates compliance with relevant criteria.

 

d)     Any recommendations and requirements contained in the Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan and associated reports are to be implemented accordingly and should noise and vibration emissions not comply with the terms and conditions of consent, work must cease forthwith and is not to recommence until details of compliance are submitted to Council and the PCA.

 

A copy of the Construction Noise & Vibration Management Plan and associated acoustic/vibration report/s must be maintained on-site and a copy must be provided to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority accordingly.

 

Construction Traffic Management

32.      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 Moore Street for the duration of the demolition & construction works. 

 

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

 

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

 

33.      A detailed Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by Council, prior to the 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 & Maritime Services, 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

 

The approved Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be complied with at all times, and any proposed amendments to the approved Construction Site Traffic Management Plan must be submitted to and be approved by Council in writing, prior to the implementation of any variations to the Plan.

 

34.      Any necessary approvals must be obtained from NSW Police, Roads & Maritime Services, Transport, and relevant Service Authorities, prior to commencing work upon or within the road, footway or nature strip.

 

           Public Utilities

35.      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.

 

36.      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

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

 

Building & Demolition Work Requirements

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

 

·         Work Health and Safety Act 2011 & Regulations

·         Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 2001

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

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

·         Australian Standard 2601 (2001) – Demolition of Structures

·         The Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

·         Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005

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

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

 

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

 

Removal of Asbestos Materials

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

 

·            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.

 

Excavations, Back-filling & Retaining Walls

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

 

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

 

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

 

Support of Adjoining Land

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

 

Sediment & Erosion Control

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

 

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

 

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

 

Dust Control

43.      During demolition excavation and construction works, dust emissions must be minimised, so as not to result in a nuisance to nearby residents or result in a potential pollution incident.

 

Adequate dust control measures must be provided to the site prior to the works commencing and the measures and practices must be maintained throughout the demolition, excavation and construction process, to the satisfaction of Council.

 

Dust control measures and practices may include:-

·       Provision of geotextile fabric to all perimeter site fencing (attached on the prevailing wind side of the site fencing).

·       Covering of stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material with adequately secured tarpaulins or plastic sheeting.

·       Installation of a water sprinkling system or provision hoses or the like.

·       Regular watering-down of all loose materials and stockpiles of sand, soil and excavated material.

·       Minimisation/relocation of stockpiles of materials, to minimise potential for disturbance by prevailing winds.

·       Landscaping and revegetation of disturbed areas.

 

Temporary Site Fencing

44.      Temporary site safety fencing or site hoarding must be provided to the perimeter of the site throughout demolition, excavation and construction works, to the satisfaction of Council, in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a)      Temporary site fences or hoardings must have a height of 1.8 metres and be a cyclone wire fence (with geotextile fabric attached to the inside of the fence to provide dust control), or heavy-duty plywood sheeting (painted white), or other material approved by Council.

 

b)      Hoardings and site fencing must be designed to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work from falling into the public place or adjoining premises and if necessary, be provided with artificial lighting.

 

c)      All site fencing and hoardings must be structurally adequate, safe and be constructed in a professional manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement mesh as fencing is not permissible.

 

d)     An overhead (‘B’ Class) type hoarding is required is be provided to protect the public (unless otherwise approved by Council) if:

 

·        materials are to be hoisted (i.e. via a crane or hoist) over a public footway;

·        building or demolition works are to be carried out on buildings which are over 7.5m in height and located within 3.6m of the street alignment;

·        it is necessary to prevent articles or materials from falling and causing a potential danger or hazard to the public or occupants upon adjoining land;

·        as may otherwise be required by WorkCover, Council or the PCA.

 

Notes:

·       Temporary site fencing may not be necessary if there is an existing adequate fence in place having a minimum height of 1.5m.

 

·       If it is proposed to locate any site fencing, hoardings, amenities or articles upon any part of the footpath, nature strip or public place at any time, a separate Local Approval application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Health, Building & Regulatory Services before placing any fencing, hoarding or other article on the road, footpath or nature strip.

 

Public Safety & Site Management

45.      Public safety and convenience must be maintained at all times during demolition, excavation and construction works and the following requirements must be complied with to the satisfaction of Council:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

d)     Access gates and doorways within site fencing, hoardings and temporary site buildings or amenities must not open outwards into the road or footway.

 

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

 

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

 

Site Signage

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 1.00pm only

·   Saturday - No work permitted

·   Sunday & public holidays - No work permitted

Additional requirements for all development

·   Saturdays and Sundays where the preceding Friday and/or the following Monday is a public holiday - No work permitted

 

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

 

Survey Requirements

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

 

·            prior to construction (pouring of concrete) of footings and boundary retaining structures,

·            prior to construction (pouring of concrete) of each floor slab,

·            upon completion of the building, prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate,

·            as otherwise may be required by the PCA.

 

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

 

Building Encroachments

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

 

Site Seepage & Stormwater

50.      Details of the proposed connection and or disposal of any site seepage, groundwater or construction site stormwater to Council’s stormwater drainage system must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Development Engineering Coordinator, prior to commencing these works, in accordance with section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

Details must include the following information:

 

·       Site plan

·       Hydraulic engineering details of the proposed disposal/connection of groundwater or site stormwater to Council/s drainage system

·       Volume of water to be discharged

·       Location and size of drainage pipes

·       Duration, dates and time/s for the proposed works and disposal

·       Details of water quality and compliance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Act 1997

·       Details of associated plant and equipment, including noise levels from the plant and equipment and compliance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Act 1997 and associated Regulations and Guidelines

·       Copy of any required approvals and licences from other Authorities (e.g.  A water licence from the Department of Planning/Department of Water & Energy).

·       Details of compliance with any relevant approvals and licences

 

Road/Asset Opening Permit

51.      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

52.      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.

 

53.      All work, including the provision of barricades, fencing, lighting, signage and traffic control, must be carried out in accordance with the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority publication - ‘Traffic Control at Work Sites’ and Australian Standard AS 1742.3 – Traffic Control Devices for Works on Roads, at all times.

 

54.      All conditions and requirements of the NSW Police, Roads & Maritime Services, Transport and Council must be complied with at all times.

 

Stormwater Drainage

55.      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 from Moore Street

56.      The applicant must remove and dispose of (wholly at their own cost) the existing Grevillea shrub from the Moore Street verge, centrally across the width of the site, so as to accommodate the new vehicle crossing/basement entry ramp along the eastern site boundary as shown, as well as to facilitate the planting of a new street tree, and must satisfy themselves as to the location of all site services, prior to the commencement of any works on public property.

 

           Tree Removal with site

57.      Due to their small size and insignificance, no objections are raised to removing any existing vegetation throughout the subject site where necessary so as to accommodate the proposed works as shown, subject to full implementation of the approved landscaping.

 

Pruning of Neighbours Tree

58.      Permission is granted for the minimal and selective pruning of only those branches from the eastern aspect of the Olea europaea subsp. ‘Africanna’ (Wild Olive) that is located within the adjoining site to the west, no.16-18, adjacent the northeast corner of this neighbouring dwelling, hard up against the common boundary, 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.

 

59.      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.

 

60.      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

61.      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.

 

Fire Safety Certificates

62.      Prior to issuing an interim or final Occupation Certificate, a single and complete Fire Safety Certificate, encompassing all of the essential fire safety measures contained in the fire safety schedule must be obtained and be submitted to Council, in accordance with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.  The Fire Safety Certificate must be consistent with the Fire Safety Schedule which forms part of the Construction Certificate.

 

A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be displayed in the building entrance/foyer at all times and a copy must also be forwarded to Fire and Rescue NSW.

 

Structural Certification

63.      A Certificate must be obtained from a professional engineer, which certifies that the building works satisfy the relevant structural requirements of the Building Code of Australia and approved design documentation, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority. A copy of which is to be provided to Council.

 

BASIX Requirements & Certification

64.      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 any relevant BASIX commitments and requirements have been satisfied.

 

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

 

Noise Control Requirements & Certification

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

 

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

 

66.      A report must be obtained from a suitably qualified and experienced consultant in acoustics, which demonstrates and certifies that noise and vibration from any plant and equipment (e.g. mechanical ventilation systems and air-conditioners) satisfies the relevant provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage (EPA) Noise Control Manual, Industrial Noise Policy and Council’s development consent.

 

A copy of the report must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority and Council prior to an occupation certificate being issued.

 

Council’s Infrastructure, Vehicular Crossings & Road Openings

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

a)       Construct a full width concrete vehicular crossing and layback at kerb opposite the vehicular entrance to the site, to Council’s specifications and requirements .

b)       Re/construct a 1.3m wide concrete footpath along the full site frontage.  Any unpaved areas on the nature strip must be turfed and landscaped to Council’s specification.

 

68.      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.

 

69.      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.

 

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.

 

Undergrounding of Site Power

71.      As a mains power distribution pole is located on the same side of the street and within 15m of the development site, the applicant/developer must meet the full cost for Ausgrid to relocate the existing overhead power feed between the mains distribution pole in Moore Street and the development site to an underground (UGOH) connection.

 

Stormwater Drainage

72.      If stormwater detention has been provided, 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.

 

73.      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).

 

74.      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.

 

75.      The applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) and Council certification from a suitably qualified and experienced professional engineer, confirming that the walls of the basement have been fully tanked and waterproofed to prevent the entry of all groundwater in the basement level/s and that any required sub-soil drainage systems have been provided in accordance with the conditions of this consent..

 

Landscaping

76.      The nature-strip upon Council's footway shall be excavated to a depth of 150mm, backfilled with topsoil equivalent with 'Organic Garden Mix' as supplied by Australian Native Landscapes, and re-turfed with Kikuyu Turf or similar. Such works shall be installed prior to the issue of a final Occupation Certificate.

 

77.      Prior to issuing any type of 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 Taylor Brammer, dwg no LA01, revision A, dated 28th July 2015, and any other relevant conditions of consent.

 

78.      Suitable strategies must be implemented to ensure that the landscaping is maintained in a healthy and vigorous state until maturity, for the life of the development.

 

Waste Management

79.      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.

 

80.      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.

 

Use of parking spaces

81.      The car spaces within the development are for the exclusive use of the occupants of the building. The car spaces must not be leased to any person/company that is not an occupant of the building. 

 

Fire Safety Statements

82.      A single and complete Fire Safety Statement (encompassing all of the fire safety measures upon the premises) must be provided to the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000

 

The Fire Safety Statement must be provided on an annual basis each year following the issue of the Fire Safety Certificate, and other period if any of the fire safety measures are identified as a critical fire safety measure in the Fire Safety Schedule

 

The Fire Safety Statement is required to confirm that all the fire safety measures have been assessed by a properly qualified person and are operating in accordance with the standards of performance specified in the Fire Safety Schedule.

 

A copy of the Fire Safety Statement must be displayed in the building entrance/foyer at all times and a copy must also be forwarded to Fire & Rescue NSW.

 

Environmental Amenity

83.      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.

 

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

 

In this regard, an Application must be submitted to and approved by Council’s Director of City Planning, together with the required fee, for the allocation of appropriate street and unit numbers for the development.

 

Stormwater Detention/Infiltration  System

85.      Any provided detention areas/infiltration system must be regularly cleaned and maintained to ensure they function as required by the design.

 

Residential Parking Permits

86.      All prospective owners and tenants of the building must be notified that Council will not issue any residential parking permits to occupants/tenants of this development.

 

87.      A notice shall be placed in the foyer/common areas of the building advising tenants/occupiers that they are in a building which does not qualify for on-street resident parking permits.

 

GENERAL ADVISORY NOTES

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

 

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

 

Failure to comply with these requirements is an offence, which renders the responsible person liable to a maximum penalty of $1.1 million.  Alternatively, Council may issue a penalty infringement notice (for up to $3,000) for each offence.  Council may also issue notices and orders to demolish unauthorised or non-complying building work, or to comply with the requirements of Council’s development consent.

 

A2       In accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, building works, including associated demolition and excavation works (as applicable) must not be commenced until:

 

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

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

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

 

A3       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.

 

A4       This determination does not include an assessment of the proposed works under the Building Code of Australia (BCA), Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010 and other relevant Standards.  All new building work (including alterations and additions) must comply with the BCA and relevant Standards.  You are advised to liaise with your architect, engineer and building consultant prior to lodgement of your construction certificate.

 

A5       Any proposed amendments to the design and construction of the building may require a new development application or a section 96 amendment to the existing consent to be obtained from Council, before carrying out such works

 

A6       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.

 

A7       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.

 

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       External paths and ground surfaces are to be constructed at appropriate levels and be graded and drained away from the building and adjoining premises, so as not to result in the entry of water into the building, or cause a nuisance or damage to any adjoining land.

 

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

 

A10     The necessary development consent and a construction certificate or a complying development certificate (as applicable) must be obtained for proposed external plant and equipment, if not included in this consent.

 

A11     The design of the building must not be inconsistent with the development consent and any proposed variations to the building to achieve the BASIX commitments may necessitate a new development consent or amendment to the existing consent to be obtained, prior to a construction certificate being issued.

 

A12     An application must be submitted to an approved by Council prior to the installation and operation of any proposed greywater or wastewater treatment systems, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Greywater/Wastewater treatment systems must comply with the relevant requirements and guidelines produced by NSW Health, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage and other relevant regulatory requirements.

 

A13     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.

 

A14     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.

 

A15     Further information and details on Council's requirements for trees on development sites can be obtained from the recently adopted Tree Technical Manual, which can be downloaded from Council’s website at the following link, http://www.randwick.nsw.gov.au - Looking after our environment – Trees – Tree Management Technical Manual; which aims to achieve consistency of approach and compliance with appropriate standards and best practice guidelines.

 

 

Attachment/s:

 

1.

20 Moore Street, Coogee (DA/551/2015)

 

2.

DA Compliance Report - 20 Moore Street, COOGEE

 

 

 

 


20 Moore Street, Coogee (DA/551/2015)

Attachment 1

 

 

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Development Application Report No. D57/16

 

Subject:                    20 Moore Street, Coogee (DA/551/2015)

Folder No:                DA/551/2015

Author:                     Matthew Choi, Senior Environmental Planning Officer      

 


Proposal:                  Demolition of all structures on site and construction of a new part two part three residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles, associated site and landscaping works (variation to height of buildings and floor space ratio control)

Ward:                        North Ward

Applicant:                Sgammotta Architects

Owner:                     Mr P H Dermatis and Mrs I Dermatis

Summary

Recommendation:   Approval

http://interactivemapping/Geocortex/Essentials/prod/REST/TempFiles/Export.jpg?guid=3ea02077-fc08-43ef-b807-e5f09d81d78b&contentType=image%2Fjpeg

 

Subject Site

 

 

 

 

Submissions received

 

 

Ù

North

 

Locality Plan

 

Development Application Executive summary report

 

The application is referred to the Planning Committee meeting for determination at the request of Councillors Neilson, Matson and Shurey.

 

Proposal

 

The proposal involves demolition of all structures on site and construction of a two part three part residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles, associated site and landscape works.

 

Amended plans were received by Council on the 7 March 2016, subject to a mediation between the objectors with alterations to the first and second floor plan with new balcony at rear, increased rear setback at first and second floor level and deletion of privacy screening at western edge of balcony at rear. The subject site is located within the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area as prescribed within the Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012.

 

Site

 

The subject site is legally described as Lot 12 DP 2349 and also known as 20 Moore Street. The subject site is located on the northern side of Moore Street and is located between the intersections of Gordon Avenue and Major Street. The allotment is rectangular in shape and consists of the following dimensions:

 

Boundary

Length

Site Area

Northern (rear) boundary

12.19 metres

 

 

465.6m2

Eastern boundary

38.25 metres

Western boundary

38.12 metres

Southern (front) boundary

12.19 metres

 

·     Clause 4.6: Variations to a Development Standard

 

Floor Space Ratio

The proposal contravenes the maximum floor space ratio development standard contained in clause 4.4(2) of RLEP 2012. The applicant has submitted a written request seeking to justify the contravention of the standard pursuant to Clause 4.6 of RLEP 2012. The variation is summarized in the table below:

 

Proposed gross floor area

365.4sqm (0.79:1)

Maximum permissible gross floor area

349.7sqm (0.75:1)

FSR exceeding LEP control

15.7sqm (4%)

 

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

 

Pursuant to clause 4.6(3) of RLEP 2012 development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

 

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

 

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

 

Further, the consent authority must be satisfied that:

 

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

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

 

The concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment must also be obtained for development that contravenes a development standard. However, pursuant to the Notification of assumed concurrence under clause 4.6(4) (and the former clause 24(4)) of the Standard Instrument contained in Planning Circular PS 08–003 (dated 9 May 2008) the concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment under clause 4.6(4)(b) of RLEP 2012 may be assumed in certain cases.

 

In relation to the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3) there are various ways that may be invoked to establish that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary as discussed by Chief Justice Preston of the NSW Land and Environment Court in the case of in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827. Although the Wehbe case was decided in relation to State Environmental Planning Policy No 1—Development Standards (“SEPP 1”) and not clause 4.6 of RLEP 2012 it remains of some assistance in relation to identifying the ways in which an applicant may demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Has the applicant’s written request adequately addressed that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

In the Wehbe case Justice Preston said the most commonly invoked way to establish that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary is to demonstrate that the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard. The objectives of the floor space ratio buildings standard are set out in clause 4.4 (1) of RLEP 2012 as follows:

 

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

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

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

 

The applicant’s written justifications in the following key arguments for the departure from the standard are as below:

 

 

 

Will the proposed development be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out?

 

1.       Consistency with the objectives of the Floor Space Ratio standard in the LEP objectives:

 

2.       The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

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

 

Assessment:

The development will establish a suitable scale to the streetscape and the building design appropriately responds to the site characteristics and the adjoining developments. The additional gross floor area is considered imperceptible given the form and massing of the development is commensurate to the built form with a mixture of two to three storey building heights within the immediate streetscape along Moore Street. The development will generally retain the existing character of the area that is permissible within the R3: Medium Density zone and the additional FSR does not contribute to the apparent visual bulk and scale impacts that are visible from the existing streetscape.

 

The current design scheme incorporates a number of articulations and modulations to all elevations at ground, first and second floor levels which complies with Council’s controls for Building Design with no part of the external wall extending more than 10 metres in length without dividing the elevation into sections, bays or modules. The proposal adopts a number of urban design measures including appropriately recessed wall planes, side courtyards/terraces at the ground floor level and a mixture of various building materials and finishes which alleviates the visual massing of the building visible from the existing streetscape and the neighbouring dwellings. The third floor level provides an additional setback to the side boundaries than the lower residential levels and the timber paling finish to the external walls help to soften the amount of concrete insitu and render providing a contemporary finish to the building design.

 

With regards to environmental and energy needs of the building, each apartment consists of a number of orientations which will allow for natural ventilation, light and solar access to the living rooms and habitable room areas. Whilst apartment no. 1 will receive limited solar access given its southern orientation, apartment nos. 2 and 4 will receive well above the required two hours of direct solar access with a northern aspect and apartment no. 3 includes a new clerestory roof element fronting Moore Street which will improve the amount of natural light and daylight into the south-facing living space. All apartments  have a depth of less than 10 metres from glass line to glass line which promotes cross ventilation into the habitable rooms and no single aspect apartments are proposed as part of the dwelling mix. The development will generally comply with the design guidance of the ADG requirements and will promote the environmental and energy needs of the objectives for floor space.

 

 

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

 

Assessment:

The subject site is not located in close proximity to any adjoining heritage items or heritage conservation areas and will remain suitably scaled within the existing streetscape.

 

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

 

Assessment:

The non-compliance to the maximum floor space ratio development standard will not result in any significant amenity impacts to the neighbouring dwellings and is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

·     The visual privacy impacts to the eastern and western neighbours have been suitably addressed with the inclusion of appropriate conditions of consent to minimise overlooking from living and habitable room windows to the immediate eastern and western neighbouring dwellings. This includes the second floor east facing dining room windows (measured 2.4 metres from the eastern boundary) and a privacy screen to be installed along the full western edge of the second floor balcony to maintain visual privacy to the east facing window openings. The above will ensure a reasonable level of visual privacy is provided to the neighbouring premises and will not give rise to any adverse privacy impacts.

 

·     The extent of the solar access impacts to the eastern and western neighbouring dwellings is unavoidable given the orientation of the allotment. As discussed within the relevant solar access section of this report, the development will shadow the east and west facing window openings to nos. 16-18 and 22 Moore Street during a two hour period and outside of these hours the window openings will overshadow themselves. Subsequently, the extent of overshadowing is not a consequence of poor building design rather is largely attributable to the orientation of the window openings as east/west aspect and the degree of shadowing that is cast from any reasonably sized development that is compliant with the building envelope controls. Furthermore, it should be noted that the current scheme incorporates a number of design measures which are conducive of minimizing overshadowing to the neighbouring dwellings including an additional side setback at the third floor level above the minimum requirements and amended plans which provide an additional rear setback with a consistent rear building alignment as the neighbouring buildings to the east and west. The development is acceptable in minimizing solar access and overshadowing impacts.

 

·     The additional FSR does not give rise to view loss impacts to the neighbouring dwellings. Amended plans have been submitted by the applicant, which seeks to maintain a more consistent rear building alignment as the neighbouring dwellings within the existing streetscape. This included a reconfiguration and redistribution of the building bulk at the first and second floor levels to ensure a predominant rear building alignment is provided. Notwithstanding this, as discussed the view loss section of this report, suitable conditions of consent have been included that the first floor balcony be deleted and the north-western bedroom no. 1 incorporate an additional rear setback to maintain the easterly viewing aspects from the first floor east facing windows of 4/16-18 Moore Street to the headland view of Clovelly. The above will preserve the easterly corridor views to Clovelly and attributes to a more sensitively and skillfully designed development that ensures reasonable view sharing between the neighbouring premises.

 

2.       Consistency with the objectives of the R3: Medium Density Residential Zone 

 

        Objectives of zone:

 

·      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 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.

 

Assessment:

The proposed demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new part 2, part 3 storey residential flat building will be in keeping with the zoning objectives of the R3: Medium Density Residential Zone. The design scheme will remain sympathetic with the existing two and three storey scale of the existing buildings within the streetscape and generally reflects one that is typified of a residential flat building. The marginal non-compliance of 15sqm is imperceptible from the streetscape given the building will retain a similar visual bulk and scale of the existing developments within the streetscape. The breach to the maximum permissible floor space ratio development standards does not give rise to any adverse environmental impacts to the neighbouring dwellings and is acceptable in providing a reasonable level of amenity with regards to visual privacy, overshadowing and views. Furthermore, the subject site is considered to be an area undergoing transition given the mixture of low and medium density residential developments along Moore Street and the permissible zoning which allows for higher density forms of residential development. The additional setbacks will retain the desirable elements of the buildings within the streetscape in maintaining viewing corridors to the adjoining neighbours.

 

3.     Consistency with the State and Regional Planning Policies

 

Assessment:

The proposed development is consistent with the BASIX requirements as provided by the State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 and provisions within the Apartment Design Guide as required by the State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality for Residential Apartment Development.

 

4.     The variation for a better planning outcome

 

Assessment:

The design scheme maintains a three storey scale and will fit comfortably within the subject allotment. The additional floor area does not contribute to unreasonable bulk that form a detracting feature compromising the streetscape character and the development will continue to comply with the building envelope objectives with regards to appropriate setbacks, building height and areas to provide adequate landscaping. As prescribed above, the variation to the floor space ratio development standard will not contribute to any significant adverse environmental impacts to the neighbouring dwellings or within the streetscape and demonstrate a compliant development in terms of solar access, visual privacy and views.

 

5.     There are sufficient environmental grounds to permit the variation

 

The following assessment demonstrates that there are sufficient environmental grounds to permit the FSR variation:

 

·     The additionalfloor area of approximately 15sqm is considered to be minor and will not contribute to any unreasonable loss of amenity to the neighbouring properties and will not significantly contribute to the visual bulk and scale of the development.

 

·     The second floor level consists of a side setback which mostly extends beyond the minimum 2 metre Council control. The predominant side setback is between 3.15 – 4.5 metres and 3.175 metres from the western and eastern boundaries, respectively. The additional setbacks alleviates the visual bulk of the second floor level and will improve the amenity of the adjoining neighbours by providing greater building separation and minimise the extent of shadows being cast from the eastern and western neighbours at no. 16-18 and 22 Moore Street. The additional setback will improve the level of amenity to the neighbouring premises in comparison to a compliant side setback consistent with Council’s controls. 

 

·     The building envelope has been modelled to appropriately respond to the adjoining neighbours and the amended plans propose a similar front and rear building alignment which will be consistent with the development patterns along Moore Street. The proposal generally complies with the suite of building envelope controls including setbacks, landscaping, design and siting of the building block (aside from a minor breach to the building height at the rear of the building block) which will promote the building configuration, massing and scale of the development remains consistent with the desired future character of the immediate locality. The development will seamlessly integrate within the built form character of the adjoining buildings.

 

·     The proposal is of high quality architectural merit which incorporates a number of articulations and modulations as part of the building design. This incorporates a number of significant recesses to the external walls to provide side courtyards and areas of private open space to each unit, modulations to the facades through a combination of staggered wall planes and varying materials and finishes to relieve the form and massing of the development visible from the adjoining neighbours and the existing streetscape.  

 

·     The new development does not give rise to any adverse amenity impacts to the neighbouring buildings in terms of overshadowing, visual privacy, visual bulk and scale or view loss.

 

6.       The Variation is within the Public Interest

 

Assessment:

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

 

Has the applicant’s written request adequately addressed that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard?

 

The proposal has been carefully designed to achieve the planning objectives for the locality and to fit in with the scale and character of development in the immediate context, whilst minimising potential adverse impacts on surrounding properties. 

 

The applicant’s written request has successfully demonstrated that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

Does the Council have delegation to exercise the concurrence function of the Department of Planning and Environment for development that contravenes a development standard? If so:

 

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

 

(b) The public benefit of maintaining the development standard.

 

Comments:

Pursuant to the Notification of assumed concurrence under clause 4.6(4) (and the former clause 24(4)) of the Standard Instrument contained in Planning Circular PS 08–003 (dated 9 May 2008) the concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment under clause 4.6(4)(b) of RLEP 2012 may be assumed to the granting of development consent to the development that contravenes the development standard for the maximum floor space ratio in clause 4.4 of RLEP 2012.

 

Variation from the adherence to the numerical floor space ratio standard will not be detrimental to the orderly use of the site and there is no public benefit in maintaining the development standard in this instance.

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard does not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, strict adherence to the numerical standard will be unnecessary in this case for maintaining the low density housing forms envisaged under the LEP for the locality.

 

Height of Buildings

The proposal contravenes the maximum Height of Buildings development standard contained in clause 4.3(2) of RLEP 2012. The applicant has submitted a written request seeking to justify the contravention of the standard pursuant to Clause 4.6 of RLEP 2012. The variation is summarized in the table below:

 

Proposed height of building

10.42 metres

Maximum height of building

9.5 metres

Height exceeding LEP control

920mm (9.6%) 

 

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

 

Pursuant to clause 4.6(3) of RLEP 2012 development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

 

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

 

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

 

Further, the consent authority must be satisfied that:

 

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

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

 

The concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment must also be obtained for development that contravenes a development standard. However, pursuant to the Notification of assumed concurrence under clause 4.6(4) (and the former clause 24(4)) of the Standard Instrument contained in Planning Circular PS 08–003 (dated 9 May 2008) the concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment under clause 4.6(4)(b) of RLEP 2012 may be assumed in certain cases.

 

In relation to the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3) there are various ways that may be invoked to establish that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary as discussed by Chief Justice Preston of the NSW Land and Environment Court in the case of in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827. Although the Wehbe case was decided in relation to State Environmental Planning Policy No 1—Development Standards (“SEPP 1”) and not clause 4.6 of RLEP 2012 it remains of some assistance in relation to identifying the ways in which an applicant may demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

 

Has the applicant’s written request adequately addressed that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

 

In the Wehbe case Justice Preston said the most commonly invoked way to establish that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary is to demonstrate that the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard. The objectives of the floor space ratio buildings standard are set out in clause 4.3(1) of RLEP 2012 as follows:

 

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

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

c)     To ensure that the size and scale of development is compatible with the desired future character of the locality.

 

The applicant’s written justifications in the following key arguments for the departure from the standard are as below:

 

 

Will the proposed development be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out?

 

1.  Consistency with the objectives of the Floor Space Ratio standard in the LEP objectives:

 

2.  The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

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

 

Assessment:

The proposed development will result in a minor breach to the height of building and the area of non-compliance varies between 350mm to 920mm from the southern end to the northern end of the residential flat building. The variation to the maximum building height of buildings development standard is relatively minor and will not result in any unreasonable level of visual bulk and is compatible with the scale of the neighbouring buildings to the east and west at nos. 16-18 and 22 Moore Street, Coogee. The proposed building height with a maximum RL39.6 will sit within the building height plane between the western neighbour with an RL40.4 and the eastern neighbour at RL37.8. The minor breach to the height of building is imperceptible given the form and massing of the development is commiserate to the built form of the two storey developments along Moore Street and the development will retain the desired future character of the locality. 

 

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

 

Assessment:

The subject site is not located in close proximity to any adjoining heritage items or heritage conservation areas and will remain suitably scaled within the existing streetscape.

 

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

 

Assessment:

 

·     The visual privacy impacts to the eastern and western neighbours have been suitably addressed with the inclusion of appropriate conditions of consent to minimise overlooking from living and habitable room windows to the immediate eastern and western neighbouring dwellings. This includes the second floor east facing dining room windows (measured 2.4 metres from the eastern boundary) and a privacy screen to be installed along the full western edge of the second floor balcony to maintain visual privacy to the east facing window openings. The above will ensure a reasonable level of visual privacy is provided to the neighbouring premises and will not give rise to any adverse privacy impacts.

 

·     The extent of the solar access impacts to the eastern and western neighbouring dwellings is unavoidable given the orientation of the allotment. As discussed within the relevant solar access section of this report, the development will shadow the east and west facing window openings to nos. 16-18 and 22 Moore Street during a two hour period and outside of these hours the window openings will overshadow themselves. Subsequently, the extent of overshadowing is not a consequence of poor building design rather is largely attributable to the orientation of the window openings as east/west aspect and the degree of shadowing that is cast from any reasonably sized development that is compliant with the building envelope controls. Furthermore, it should be noted that the current scheme incorporates a number of design measures which are conducive of minimizing overshadowing to the neighbouring dwellings including an additional side setback at the third floor level above the minimum requirements and amended plans which provide an additional rear setback with a consistent rear building alignment as the neighbouring buildings to the east and west. The development is acceptable in minimizing solar access and overshadowing impacts.

 

·     The additional building height does not give rise to view loss impacts to the neighbouring dwellings. Amended plans have been submitted by the applicant which seeks to maintain a more consistent rear building alignment as the neighbouring dwellings within the existing streetscape. This included a reconfiguration and redistribution of the building bulk at the first and second floor levels to ensure a predominant rear building alignment was provided. Notwithstanding this, as advised within the view loss section of this report, suitable conditions of consent have been included that the first floor balcony be deleted and the north-western bedroom no. 1 incorporate an additional rear setback to maintain the easterly viewing aspects from the first floor east facing windows of 4/16-18 Moore Street to the headland view of Clovelly. The above will preserve the easterly corridor views to Clovelly and attributes to a more sensitively and skillfully designed development that ensures reasonable view sharing between the neighbouring premises.

 

2.       Consistency with the objectives of the R3: Medium Density Residential Zone 

 

        Objectives of zone:

 

·      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 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.

 

Assessment:

The proposed demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a new part 2, part 3 storey residential flat building will be in keeping with the zoning objectives of the R3: Medium Density Residential Zoning. The design scheme will remain sympathetic with the existing two and three storey scale of the existing buildings within the streetscape and generally reflects one that is typified of a residential flat building. The marginal non-compliance with the height of buildings development standards is acceptable and does not attribute to any adverse visual bulk and scale impacts given the built form will be consistent with the building heights of the adjacent dwellings with particular regard to the eastern and western neighbour. The new built form will result in consistent form and massing across the streetscape and will not result in a development that extends beyond the building height plane that has been established by the adjacent dwellings. The new addition will generally retain the desired built form character within the streetscape and is not expected to contribute to any adverse environmental impacts to the residents. It is considered that the development is consistent with the objectives of the zone and strict compliance with the building height development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the instance.

 

3.     Consistency with the State and Regional Planning Policies

 

Assessment:

The proposed development is consistent with the BASIX requirements as provided by the State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 and provisions within the Apartment Design Guide as required by the State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality for Residential Apartment Development.

 

4.     The variation for a better planning outcome

 

Assessment:

The design scheme maintains a three storey scale and will comfortably fit within the subject allotment. The additional building height to a maximum of 920mm does not contribute to any unreasonable visual bulk and scale impacts visible from the existing streetscape or the neighbouring buildings. The variation to the height of buildings development standard will not give rise to any unreasonable level of visual privacy, overshadowing and view loss impacts to the neighbouring dwellings. The variation from the development standards will continue to provide a better planning outcome. 

 

5.     There are sufficient environmental grounds to permit the variation

 

The following assessment demonstrates that there are sufficient environmental grounds to permit the FSR variation:

 

·     The departure from the maximum height of buildings development standard is considered to be negligible given the degree of non-compliance from the front building alignment is limited to approximately 520mm at the south-eastern corner and 350mm at the south-western corner. The additional building height is insignificant and will not compromise the appearance of the building within the existing streetscape setting. The height of the proposed building will generally remain compatible with the adjoining neighbours.

 

·     The upper most level comprises of a ridge level of RL39.6 and the new built form will comfortably sit within the established building height plane to the adjacent dwellings at nos. 16-18 Moore Street at RL40.4 and 22 Moore Street at RL37.8. The non-compliant building height will not give rise to any perceivable visual bulk and scale impacts and the apparent scale of the building will remain within the context of the local character.

 

·     The degree of non-compliance to the rear of the subject site is largely attributed to the sloping nature of the site with a fall of approximately 500mm from Moore Street property boundary to the rear building alignment of the residential flat development. The extent of non-compliance from the rear is in respect to sloping typography of the site as the site falls from the southern to the northern end of the subject site.

 

·     The proposal does not given rise to any adverse environmental amenity impacts to the neighbouring dwellings. The amended design scheme will improve the views from the neighbouring premises by redistributing the building bulk at the first and second floor level from the rear of the subject site and will protect the view corridor by ensuring the rear building alignment is consistent with the predominant rear setback alignment established by the neighbouring buildings within the urban block. The overshadowing impact to the immediately adjoining neighbours is acceptable given the orientation of the allotments and is not contributory to an excessive size and scale or poor urban design of the building. Lastly, suitable conditions of consent have been included to minimise any overlooking impacts to the neighbouring premises.  

 

6.       The Variation is within the Public Interest

 

Assessment:

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

 

Has the applicant’s written request adequately addressed that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard?

 

The proposal has been carefully designed to achieve the planning objectives for the locality and to fit in with the scale and character of development in the immediate context, whilst minimising potential adverse impacts on surrounding properties. 

 

The applicant’s written request has successfully demonstrated that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

Does the Council have delegation to exercise the concurrence function of the Department of Planning and Environment for development that contravenes a development standard? If so:

 

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

 

(b) The public benefit of maintaining the development standard.

 

Comments:

Pursuant to the Notification of assumed concurrence under clause 4.6(4) (and the former clause 24(4)) of the Standard Instrument contained in Planning Circular PS 08–003 (dated 9 May 2008) the concurrence of the Department of Planning and Environment under clause 4.6(4)(b) of RLEP 2012 may be assumed to the granting of development consent to the development that contravenes the development standard for the maximum floor space ratio in clause 4.3 of RLEP 2012.

 

Variation from the adherence to the numerical height of buildings standard will not be detrimental to the orderly use of the site and there is no public benefit in maintaining the development standard in this instance.

 

The proposed development and variation from the development standard does not raise any matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. However, strict adherence to the numerical standard will be unnecessary in this case for maintaining the low density housing forms envisaged under the LEP for the locality.

 

Submissions

 

The owners of adjoining and likely affected neighbouring properties were notified of the proposed development in accordance with the DCP – Public Notification. As a result of this notification, the following submissions were received:

 

·     21 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     30 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     22 Moore Street, Coogee 

·     23 Moore Street, Coogee

·     24 Moore Street, Coogee

·     25-27 Moore Street, Coogee

·     26 Moore Street, Coogee 

·     2/2 Major Street, Coogee

 

Issue

Comment

The proposal is considered an overdevelopment of the site.

The applicant has submitted Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards and the applicant has provided reasonable grounds to vary the standard and the applicant’s written request has provided sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the contravening the development standards of floor space ratio and height of buildings. The size and scale of the development  is acceptable  given the building will remain within the building height plane between the two neighbouring premises and will not contribute to any appreciable visual bulk and scale impacts. It will otherwise remain in keeping with the appearance of the existing streetscape.

The proposal exceeds the maximum permissible floor space ratio as per the RLEP2012.

Refer to Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards within this report for further details.

The proposal exceeds the maximum permissible height of buildings as per the RLEP2012.

Refer to Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards within this report for further details.

The proposed vehicular crossover will result in the loss of two on-street parking spaces.

The new vehicular crossover at 3 metres in width will result in the loss of one parking space. Notwithstanding this, the new driveway to the basement parking area will provide for an additional 7 off-street parking spaces. The proposed vehicular driveway achieves a minimum width and is reasonable in that it provides for a single car width only.

The proposal will result in view loss.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The proposal will cast significant shadowing to the living areas of the objectors premises.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The external wall exceeds 8 metres and does not comply with Council’s controls within the RDCP2013.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The overshadowing impacts are inaccurate and do not indicate the extent of shadowing cast to the objectors premises.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details regarding solar access and overshadowing impacts.

The building exceeds the established rear setback line and will result in view loss and overlooking impacts to the objectors premises.

Noted. Suitable conditions of consent have been imposed to ensure the rear building alignment will generally remain consistent with the neighbouring buildings within the urban block. Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The proposal will result in visual privacy impacts. 

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliances within this report for further details.

The objector is concerned with the structural integrity of the adjoining buildings given the extent of excavation works.

Noted. Suitable conditions of consent have been included that that the adjoining land and buildings be adequately supported at all times. Further, 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. A dilapidation report must also be submitted to the affected neighbours prior to the commencement of any works.

The driveway access must comply with Australian Standards.

The proposed driveway has been reviewed by Council’s development engineering officer and no objections have been received regarding the vehicular driveway grades with access from Moore Street.

The acoustic noise impacts will compromise the amenity to the objectors premises.

The proposal is not expected to result in any significant adverse noise impacts other than that which are reasonably expected as part of a residential flat development. The building provides for ample building separation to the habitable room areas consistent with the side setback requirements of the RDCP2013 at 2 metres from the eastern and western boundaries. Furthermore, suitable conditions of consent have been included to ensure the balconies are reduced in size at the rear to a maximum of two metres in depth to ensure the balcony sizes remain consistent with the Apartment Design Guide and will further reduce any additional noise intrusion to the neighbouring dwellings.

Any conditions of consent included by Council may not be followed by the applicant.

The applicant is required to appoint a principal certifying authority to ensure the proposed works are carried out in accordance with the development consent. Any conditions regarding the operations of the premises are ongoing to ensure the consent is complied by.

The proposal does not comply with the landscaping requirements of the RDCP2013.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The car parking at the basement level does not provide access through Kildare Lane and does not comply with the RDCP2013.

Council’s development engineering unit have advised that the vehicle access from the rear laneway (Kildare Lane) would not be supported. The laneway is only 3.05 metres wide, is half the width of typical laneways in Randwick LGA and far too narrow to facilitate satisfactory vehicle access and manoeuvring into the property. Subsequently, no rear lane access can be provided.

The application form does not indicate whether the site is above 10,000sqm or not and whether a site specific DCP is required.

The subject site has a site area of 577sqm and does not require a site specific DCP. No further additional information is required.

The increase to 7 off-street parking spaces will increase the amount of vehicular fumes from the premises.

The development complies with Council’s controls to the required vehicular parking rate of the RDCP2013 and any exhaust fumes are not expected to be significant and ancillary to a residential flat development.

The ground floor pathway and driveway access on the eastern end of the building will result in additional noise impacts to the eastern neighbour.

The additional noise impacts are considered to be ancillary to a residential flat building which is permissible with consent in this zone and all internal areas comply with the minimum setback requirements of the RDCP2013.

The proposal will cast additional shadowing to the existing solar panels at no. 22 Moore Street.

Whilst there are no specific controls relating to shadowing to solar panels as per the C3: Medium Density Residential Controls, the C1: Low Density controls can be applied as a guide to a merits based assessment. The controls prescribe that solar panels must receive a minimum of three hours of direct solar access between 8am – 4pm, 21 June. The solar panels will receive more than the required three hours during the morning periods and subsequently comply with Council’s controls for shadowing to existing solar collectors. 

The subject site is located within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area as prescribed within the RLEP2012.

Noted. Refer to Section 79C assessment within this report for further details.

The proposal will contribute to additional vehicular demand within the existing street network.

The proposal complies within Section B7: Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access for off-street parking demand and subsequently will not reduce the on-street parking demand.

The development will further reduce the availability of on-street parking.

The proposal complies with the vehicular parking rates as per the RDCP2013 and will not reduce any existing off-street parking.

The objector requests that Council check the proposed floor space ratio of the development.

Noted. The floor space calculation has been checked. Refer to Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards for further details.

 

The application was re-notified following amended plans being submitted by applicant received by Council on the 6 May which included the following modifications to the original plans:

 

·     Increase the rear setback of the first floor level external wall from 5.718 metres to 9.275 metres from the rear boundary.

·     Increase the side setback of the first floor level from the north-western and north-eastern portions of the building by 2.72 metres

·     Increase the building footprint of the second floor level to unit no. 4

 

An additional objection was received from the following objectors:

 

·     22 Moore Street, Coogee

·     24 Moore Street, Coogee

·     4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee  

 

Issue

Comment

The building is not consistent with the predominant rear setback alignment as established by the neighbouring buildings within the urban block.

Noted. Suitable conditions of consent have been included which seek to provide an additional setback from the rear boundary at the ground and first floor levels which will maintain a consistent rear building alignment which will be consistent with the neighbouring buildings. Refer to the key issues and areas of non-compliance for further details.

The size and scale of the development is considered to be inappropriate.

The applicant has submitted Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards and has provided reasonable grounds for approval the applicant’s written request adequately states there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standards of floor space ratio and height of buildings. The size and scale of the development  is acceptable  given the building will remain within the height plane between the two neighbouring premises and will not contribute to any appreciable visual bulk and scale impacts and it will otherwise remain in keeping with the appearance of the existing streetscape.

The new clerestory roof element is forward of the first floor front building alignment of no. 22 Moore Street.

The first floor clerestory roof form to the south-facing unit of apartment no. 3 sits between the first floor front building alignment of no. 16-18 Moore Street and no. 22 Moore Street and will provide a transition between the first floor levels of the neighbouring buildings.

The proposal will require more than 7 off-street parking spaces.

The development will continue to comply with the vehicular parking rates as contained within Part B7 – Transport, traffic, parking and access and will comply with the off-street parking provisions.

The proposal will result in significant overshadowing impacts.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The landscaping is inconsistent with the neighbouring buildings within the urban block.

The proposal will result in an equitable distribution of landscaping to the subject site and will align with other areas of permeable landscaping to the neighbouring premises within the front, rear and side setbacks of the building. 

The proposal includes new landscaping at the rear of the subject site to a height of 6 metres between the common boundary of the subject site no. 20 Moore Street and along the rear boundary adjacent Kildare Lane.

Council’s landscaping officer has reviewed the development application and a condition has been included as part of any consent:

 

In order to maintain existing water views for the adjoining property to the west, the screen planting of Bambusa Textilis var. Gracillis (Slender Weavers Bamboo) must be deleted from the planting plan and is to be replaced with an alternative species which will not exceed a high at maturity that is greater than the finished height of the dividing 1800mm high fencing.

The proposal will cast additional shadowing to the existing solar panels at no. 22 Moore Street.

Whilst there are no specific controls relating to shadowing to solar panels as per the C3: Medium Density Residential Controls, the C1: Low Density controls can be applied as a guide to a merits based assessment. The controls prescribe that solar panels must receive a minimum of three hours of direct solar access between 8am – 4pm, 21 June. The existing solar panels will continue to comply with Council’s controls in that the solar panels will receive more than the required three hours during the morning periods and subsequently comply with Council’s controls for shadowing to existing solar collectors. 

The proposal will contribute to additional visual and acoustic privacy impacts.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The proposal will accommodate too many people within the allotment of land.

The current design scheme and the apartment layout complies with the Apartment Design Guide as per the SEPP65: Design Quality for Residential Development and the C2: Medium Density Residential of the RDCP2013. 

The proposal will result in adverse solar access and overshadowing impacts.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The amended plans were not available on Council’s online DA tracking website.

A set of elevation plans were made available for public viewing on Council’s website and provided as part of Council’s public notification policy. The objector was advised and made aware that this plan was made available on Council’s website. 

The proposal will result in view loss from the neighbouring premises at 4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The rear balconies at the first and second floor levels include privacy screens and blade walls that will minimise the view from the objectors premises.

The current design scheme does not incorporate any blade walls or privacy screens to the balconies and suitable conditions of consent have been included to ensure equitable sharing of views from the objectors premises.

The external wall heights exceed Council’s minimum requirements as prescribed within the RDCP2013.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The shadow diagrams are an inaccurate reflection on potential solar access and overshadowing impacts.

The shadow diagrams have been checked by Council’s planning officers and the development is expected to contribute to additional overshadowing to the east and west facing window openings of the immediate adjoining neighbours. Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

The proposal exceeds the maximum permissible floor space ratio development standards as prescribed within the RLEP2012.

Noted. Refer to Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards for further details.

The objector requests that fixed acoustic and privacy screens be provided for all balconies and windows which overlook the objectors premises at no. 1/16-18 Moore Street.

No privacy screens will be installed on the second level balcony in order to provide equitable sharing of headland views that are visible from the dwellings to the west. Any overlooking to the objectors private open space is considered to be largely oblique given apartment no. 4 cantilevers over the private open space of 1/16-18 Moore Street. 

The objector is concerned with the structural integrity of the adjoining buildings given the extent of excavation works.

Noted. Suitable conditions of consent have been included that that the adjoining land and buildings located upon the adjoining land must be adequately supported at all times. Further, 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. A dilapidation report must also be submitted to the affected neighbours prior to the commencement of any works.

The existing pedestrian pathways on the western side of the dwelling and driveway will give rise to additional noise impacts. 

The additional noise impacts are considered to be ancillary to a ‘residential flat building’ which is a permissible form of development within the R3: Medium Density Residential Zone.

The second floor balcony will result in direct overlooking into the objectors premises.

Refer to key issues and non-compliances within this report for further details. 

The proposal is not within the public interest.

The proposal is considered to be within the public interest in considering the amenity impacts to the neighbouring premises and the appearance of the building within the existing streetscape.

 

Mediation

 

A mediation session was held on the 11 February 2016 between the applicant and the objectors with the following in attendance.

 

·     21 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     30 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     22 Moore Street, Coogee 

·     23 Moore Street, Coogee

·     24 Moore Street, Coogee

·     25-27 Moore Street, Coogee

·     26 Moore Street, Coogee 

·     2/2 Major Street, Coogee

 

The issues raised as part of the mediation sessions included the following:

 

·     View loss from adjoining and surrounding properties;

·     Overshadowing; loss of direct sunlight; loss of daylight to affected properties;

·     Overlooking and loss of privacy;

·     Extent of building footprint and building form towards the rear;

·     Traffic impacts arising from additional density and cars;

·     Loss of kerbside car parking;

·     Scale and appearance of building viewed from Kildare Lane;

·     FSR in excess of RLEP standard and

·     Impact of excavation on subterranean water course and on adjoining properties.

 

At the conclusion of the mediation the applicant proposed to make the following amendments to the plans which included:

 

·     The rear setback of the first floor to be increased from 5.7m, as originally proposed, to 8.27 metres from the rear boundary;

·     The side boundary setback of the north-western section of the first floor to be increased from 2 metres to 4 metres

·     The use of the first floor to be changed from living area to bedrooms and the second floor to be changed from bedrooms to living area.

·     Rear of first floor to include a small balcony off the bedroom in the order of 1 metre in depth.

 

No agreement was reached between the applicant and the objectors.

 

 

Key Issues

 

·     SEPP 65 – Design Quality for Residential Apartment Development (Apartment Design Guidelines)

 

Part 3B Orientation:

 

Surrounding development:

The design guidance within the ADG specifies that overshadowing of neighbouring properties must be consistent with Part 4A solar and daylight access. Part 4A requires that living rooms and private open spaces of neighbouring dwellings of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of two hours of direct sunlight between 9am – 3pm and a maximum of 15% of apartments not receive any direct sunlight between 9am – 3pm, 21 June. The new residential flat development will result in additional shadowing which will fall on the east facing windows of the western neighbour (16-18 Moore Street) between the hours of 8am – 11am and will fall on the west facing windows of the eastern neighbour (22 Moore Street) between the hours of 12pm – 4pm. There are inherent difficulties in retaining direct solar access to the habitable room windows of the eastern and western neighbour.

 

The ground floor western neighbour at apartment 1/16-18 Moore Street consists of an east facing ground floor living/dining room window which will be shadowed by the proposed development. However, the window will not receive any solar access due to its eastern orientation which is shadowed by the proposed development during the morning period and overshadows itself in the afternoon. An elevational shadow diagram prepared by the applicant and subsequently checked by Council officers indicates that the ground floor east facing living room window will be shadowed by the proposed development between the hours of 9am – 11am and the objectors premises will shadow itself during the hours of 12pm – 5pm. The extent of the shadowing is considered to be unavoidable given any development with a compliant building envelope (in terms of side and rear setbacks and building height) would completely shadow the window openings to its entirety and subsequently the extent of solar access received into the subject window opening is a site constraint. 

 

The proposed building envelope will shadow the ground floor east facing windows between the hours of 9am – 11am. A minor breach to the floor space provisions by 17sqm and building height by 780mm to the rear portion of the built form does not contribute to further shadowing impacts beyond those of a compliant building envelope. Therefore the extent of shadowing cast does not arise from poor urban design given the development generally complies with the suite of building envelope controls including the landscaping, setbacks and front and rear building alignments to the neighbouring dwellings (as conditioned). In fact, the proposal provides an additional side setback above the minimum requirements at 2.72 metres and 3.3 metres along the north-western corner of the building at the first and second floor levels, respectively. The additional setbacks will provide greater building separation and will alleviate the solar access impacts beyond those of a development which complies with the side setback provisions. In considering the general compliant nature of the development, the eastern orientation of the window opening and its ground floor positioning it would be unreasonable to expect that the window could retain a minimum of two hours of direct solar access in accordance with the ADG requirements.  

 

Notwithstanding the above, it should be noted that at least 75% of the apartments within the block at 16-18 Moore Street will comply with a minimum of two hours of solar access received between the hours of 9am – 3pm as per the ADG numerical controls.

 

The ground floor eastern semi-detached dwelling at no. 22 Moore Street will not contribute to adverse shadowing impact and will retain the required two hours of direct solar access.

 

Proposed development:

The above control also indicates living rooms and private open spaces of new development of at least 70% of apartments must receive a minimum of two hours of direct sunlight between 9am – 3pm and a maximum of 15% of apartments not receiving any direct sunlight between 9am – 3pm, 21 June. Apartment nos. 1 and 3 comprise of a southern orientation and are unlikely to receive any direct solar access between the hours of 9am – 3pm and therefore do not comply with the ADG requirements with only 50% of apartments receiving the minimum two hours, less than 70% of apartments and 50% of the apartments receiving no solar access, less than 15% of apartments. The departure from the ADG requirements is acceptable in considering the merits of the proposal and compliance with the respective design guidance as per the ADG. The building configuration aims to maximise the amenity to the occupants within the southern orientated apartments which currently enjoy multiple aspects to the apartments with no proposed single orientated south-facing apartments.  The number of dual aspect apartments will optimise the amount of natural daylight and solar access into the south-facing windows. Furthermore, the apartment configurations are acceptable in complying with the minimum apartment depth requirements and will achieve appropriate cross ventilation into the south facing apartments. The deviation from the Council controls for cross-ventilation is acceptable and will continue to comply with the ADG requirements.

 

·     Randwick Development Control Plan 2012 (Part C2: Medium Density Residential)

 

Clause 2.2: Landscaped Open Space

The proposed development will slightly reduce the amount of landscaped open space and deep soil areas to 48% (222.13sqm) less than the minimum requirements of 50% as prescribed within the RDCP2013. The minor variation to the Council controls is acceptable given the development will continue to satisfy the objectives for landscaped open space. The landscaped open space will provide for an equitable distribution of built and unbuilt upon areas; soft landscaping treatment has been accommodated adjacent the site boundaries to minimise stormwater runoff to the neighbouring premises; the landscaped open space areas located within the front and rear setbacks are suitably sized and consistent with similar landscaping treatments to the neighbouring dwellings to the existing developments along Moore Street and the landscaped areas have been provided in the form of terraces and courtyards along the eastern and western external walls of the dwelling to provide increased articulation and additional setbacks to the immediate neighbours. The slight reduction from the minimum landscaping requirements is acceptable and will comply with Council’s controls.   

 

Clause 2.3.2 Communal Open Space

The Council controls require that communal open space for residential flat buildings is of a sufficient contiguous area and not divided up for allocation of individual units. The proposal does not comply with the Council requirements given that no communal open space is provided on site. In addition to this, the SEPP 65: Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development requires consideration of the Better Apartment Design Guide which also requires that communal open space be provided with a minimum of 25% of the site.

 

However, the guidelines advise that on smaller allotments it may be difficult to provide for communal spaces and should communal areas not be provided the design scheme should incorporate larger balconies and increased private open space areas for apartments. In considering the allotment size and the small number of apartments proposed, the preference should be given on ensuring that adequate private outdoor spaces are provided which are usable and can accommodate the recreational needs of the occupants. The development provides ample areas of private open space with terraces provided to the ground floor units and balconies with a minimum depth of 2 metres to accommodate the upper floor units.  Notwithstanding this, demonstrating compliance with the communal open space requirements and achieving a minimum of 25% of the site area would not result in a better planning outcome given it would compromise the quality of the private open spaces and the occupants amenity.

 

In considering the subject sites nominal site area, the small no. of units and the sites incapacity to provide for communal open space, on balance, the necessity in providing a greater private open space to each unit would better serve the needs of the residents than an subservient communal area. 

 

Clause 3.4: Setbacks

The RDPC2013 requires that the front setback be consistent with the prevailing front setback alignment of the neighbouring dwellings. The ground floor level maintains a similar setback to the western neighbour at 4.1 metres, however the first floor south-facing balcony encroaches within the established setback line of the adjoining buildings within the urban block at 2.4 metres. 

 

Export

 

In order to establish greater consistency with the front building alignments of the neighbouring dwellings a condition has been included as part of any consent that an additional setback of 900mm must be provided along the full south-eastern edge of the first floor balcony. The reduced protrusion of the first floor balcony beyond the predominant front setback alignment will reduce the area of non-compliance to the south-western corner of the balcony and will return to a similar setback alignment as no. 22 Moore Street. The inclusion of an additional condition will provide a greater transition of the first floor balcony between the front building alignments of the eastern and western neighbour whilst still providing ample private open space which will continue to comply with the ADG requirements with a depth of 2metres and an area of 8m2. The condition of consent will result in a sympathetic built form and will minimise the excessive balcony projection from the streetscape and remain compatible with the neighbouring buildings within the streetscape. 

 

Notwithstanding the above, the rear first and second floor level setbacks of the residential flat development do not comply with the objectives for setbacks.

 

First floor level:

The first floor level is inconsistent with the predominant rear building and balcony alignments of the neighbouring buildings within the urban block. The objectives for setbacks prescribe that adequate separation must be provided between buildings for visual and acoustic privacy, solar access, air circulation and views. The amended plans show that the balcony will extend 1.6 metres from the balcony of the eastern neighbour (22 Moore Street) and 2.3 metres from the western neighbour (16-18 Moore Street). The balcony is not supported given that it will allow for overlooking into the north and west facing first floor living room windows of the western neighbour. Furthermore, the new balcony interrupts the easterly viewing corridor which is largely uninterrupted by the adjoining dwellings to provide for equitable view sharing between the neighbouring dwellings within the urban block. It is noted that an increased rear setback that is consistent with the predominant street of the adjoining allotments would significantly improve significant headland views visible from the western neighbour.

 

The first floor north-facing bedroom no. 1 also extends approximately 3 metres beyond the rear building alignment of the eastern neighbour and 600mm from the western neighbour. The additional building depth is likely to impact the first floor east facing window of the western neighbour and will decimate the significant water views of an existing headland. A sensitive and skilful design which incorporates an additional rear setback and maintains the rear building alignment of the neighbouring premises would significantly enhance the viewing opportunities from the adjacent unit to the headland view. To address the above, the following conditions have been recommended as part of any consent:

 

·     The rear first floor balcony including associated balustrading shall be deleted. The sliding door on the northern elevation shall be replaced with a suitably sized window. The bottom sill of the window shall be a minimum 1 metre above the finished first floor level to provide for equitable sharing of views. The BASIX certificate shall be amended to reflect the above changes.

·     The first floor north-facing bedroom no. 1 shall be setback an additional 1 metre from the rear boundary and maintain a similar building alignment as the adjoining bedroom no. 2 in apartment no. 4 to ensure an equitable sharing of views from the western neighbouring premises. 

  

The inclusion of the above conditions would contribute a more sympathetic design scheme which considers the viewing opportunities for the adjoining neighbours in ensuring a reasonable level of amenity is achieved.

 

Second floor level:

At the second floor level the rear balcony extends beyond the balcony alignment of the neighbouring dwellings to the east by 700mm. To ensure the alignment remains consistent with the prevailing rear setback line that is established by the adjoining neighbours and does not encroach into the easterly viewing corridor at the rear the following condition has been included as part of any consent:

 

·     The second floor balcony and any associated balustrading be setback an additional 700mm from the rear boundary and maintain a similar alignment as the balcony at no. 22 Moore Street.

 

Clause 4.4: External Wall Height

The proposed building envelope results in a maximum external wall height of 10.28 metres and exceeds the maximum permissible external wall height of 8 metres. The departure to the Council control and the maximum permissible height of buildings development standard is directly attributed to the third floor level of the residential flat building. The objectives of external wall heights are as follows:

 

·     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 of 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 departure from the Council’s control to the external wall height requirement is acceptable given the proposal incorporates a number of design measures which minimises the perceivable visual bulk and scale of the development. The non-compliant portion of the external wall at the second floor level exhibits extensive side setbacks above the minimum requirements between 2m to 4.5m which alleviates the visual bulk of the building by providing an additional building separation to the immediately adjoining northern neighbour. Notwithstanding this, the design and sitting of the new upper floor levels provides an additional setback of 5 metres from the front building alignment and will maintain the rear building alignment of the neighbouring dwellings.

 

The visual bulk and scale of the skillion roof form will also remain consistent with the existing residential flat buildings within the immediate streetscape along Moore Street and its low profile nature will ensure that the overall building height remains compatible with the building height plane of the eastern and western neighbour. The design scheme of the upper floor level also incorporates a number of materials and finishes including a combination of timber panelling and cement rendering which varies from the finishes provided at the lower levels which further accentuates the modulated elements of the first floor level. Finally, the area of non-compliance is not expected to result in any adverse environmental impacts to the amenity of the neighbouring dwellings. The new window openings have been appropriately conditioned to minimise visual privacy impacts to the adjoining neighbours, the development will provide a reasonable level of solar access in considering the orientation of the allotments and the development will not contribute to view loss impacts given the amendments to the rear building alignment and will maintain a view corridor to the east. In considering the above, the development is reasonable in providing an acceptable level of amenity and does not contribute to any excessive visual bulk and scale impacts arising from the non-compliant external wall height.

 

Clause 5.3: Visual Privacy

The Council objectives for visual privacy prescribe the following:

 

·     A high level of amenity is achieved by providing for reasonable level of visual privacy for dwellings and neighbouring properties

·     Development should also be designed so that its occupants enjoy visual and acoustic privacy, whilst maintaining the existing level of privacy of adjoining and nearby properties. 

 

The privacy impacts are as follows:

 

Eastern elevation:

The first floor bedroom no. 1 window of apartment no. 3 and the first floor study of apartment no. 4 are directly opposite a west-facing first floor bedroom window. The second floor dining room windows measured 2.4 metres from the eastern boundary are also directly opposite the first floor bedroom no.1 window and will result in direct overlooking into the habitable room window. To maintain a reasonable level of visual privacy a condition of consent has been included that the window openings must have a minimum sill height 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.

 

Western elevation:

The first floor foyer room window is directly opposite the habitable room windows of the apartments no. 1 and 4 of 16-18 Moore Street and will compromise the level of visual privacy to the neighbouring premises. To maintain a reasonable level of visual privacy a condition of consent has been included that the window opening must have a minimum sill height 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.

 

        Rear balconies:

The proposal also includes new first and second floor balconies at the rear of the subject site. In order to maintain equitable view sharing between the neighbouring dwellings within the urban block (in particular those to the west of the subject site) and to maintain the predominant rear building alignment of the adjoining neighbours a condition of consent has been included that the rear first floor balcony including associated balustrading shall be deleted. The sliding door on the northern elevation shall be replaced with a suitably sized window. See view loss for further details.   

 

The new second floor balcony is also located immediately adjacent a west facing living room window to apartment no. 4/16-18 Moore Street. To minimise the opportunities for overlooking a condition of consent has been included that the balcony and associated balustrading be setback an additional 1 metre from the rear boundary and a 1.6 metre high privacy screen be installed along the full western edge of the rear second floor balcony. The privacy screen will not restrict the easterly viewing corridor from the west given the screen will maintain a similar rear building alignment as the neighbouring dwellings to the west (16-18 Moore Street) and an approved 1.6 metre high privacy screen along the full western edge of the first floor balcony to the eastern neighbour (22 Moore Street)(DA/941/2011/C). Notwithstanding this, the inclusion of a second floor privacy screen will not restrict the viewing aspect from the first floor east facing window of the western neighbour given the top of the window sill is at RL36.6 and the finished floor level of the balcony at RL36.5 will not compromise existing views.

 

Clause 5.5: View Sharing

Loss of views has been raised by several objectors from the immediate neighbours:

 

·     21 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     30 Gordon Avenue, Coogee

·     1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

·     4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee 

 

The originally submitted plans received by Council on the 13 August 2015 included a first floor level rear setback of 6.5 metres measured from the external wall and a minimum 3.9 metres from the balcony to the rear boundary. A number of objections were received from the western neighbours regarding potential view loss impacts to the adjoining premises and subsequently mediation was held between the applicant and the objectors to address the areas of non-compliance. The applicant submitted amended plans on the 6 May 2016 which included modifications to the building envelope which included an additional rear setback of 7.15 metres from the balcony alignment and between 9.275m-10.3m from the building alignment. The amended plans also include a new balcony at the second floor level setback 8.5 metres from the rear boundary.

 

Councils planning officer contacted the objectors to carry out a view loss inspection. The western neighbour at no. 30 Gordon Avenue was not available to carry out a site inspection and no. 21 Gordon Avenue provided written confirmation that no site access would be necessary given the new works would not contribute to any appreciable view loss impacts to the neighbouring dwellings. The apartments at no. 1 and 4 of 16-18 Moore Street, Coogee were available to carry out view loss assessments. To assess whether the extent of view loss which would result from the proposal is reasonable, an analysis has been undertaken with reference to the Land and Environment Court Planning Principle established in the matter of Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140:

 

1.  Quality of Views:

 

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

 

Planners Assessment:

 

1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

No water views are visible from any internal areas of the subject premises. An easterly water view is available at the rear of the subject site within the common area beyond the existing low line side boundary fencing. The water view is considered to be a partial water view and obtained between the rooftops of the buildings. The view is mostly obscured by an existing tree located on the objectors premises and the immediate northern neighbour.  

 

IMG_7258

Existing view standing within the communal area

 

IMG_7252

View beyond the existing trees

 

4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The water view is visible the first floor level of the east facing living room window. The view is considered to be a significant which includes a headland and a transition between land and water.

 

IMG_7234

Existing view from the east facing window opening

 

IMG_7236

Existing view from the east facing window opening

 

 

 

2.   Reasonable Expectation of View Retention:

 

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

 

1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The views obtained are from the private open space/communal area located at the rear of the ground floor unit. The view is to the east which is across a side boundary and is currently highly obscured by the existing natural vegetation located along the eastern side boundary. The view can only be appreciated in a standing position.

 

4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The views that are obtained from the east facing apartments are over the existing eastern side boundary. The reasonable expectation of view retention explicitly states that ‘views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries’ and ‘the expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic’. The views from the apartments of the western affected neighbour are only appreciable through side boundary views and are obtainable through a standing position adjacent a window opening.  

 

3.   Extent of Impact:

 

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

 

1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The proposal will result in the total loss of distant water views. However, the existing views are considered to have low retention value given the views are obscured by the existing natural vegetation located along the side boundary, is not visible from any internal living areas/bedrooms/service areas and is an existing side view. The views are visible only from a communal open space/private open space and is only appreciable given that the existing side boundary fence is lower than a standard 1.8 metre high fence level. Any new side boundary fencing with a standard height of 1.8 metres from the ground level (existing) will result in the complete loss of views. Qualitatively the view loss is considered to be minor.  

 

4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The amended plans submitted on the 6 May 2016 will reduce view impacts from those resulting from the original design scheme. However, the first floor level bedrooms located at the rear of apartment no. 4 protrude slightly beyond the rear building alignment of the western neighbour by 600mm. The first floor level will result in the total loss of the easterly headland view of Clovelly visible from the images above. Qualitatively the view loss is considered to be severe/devastating.     

 

4.   Reasonableness of Proposed Development:

 

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

 

1/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The area of view loss is attributed to the rear ground floor addition consisting of a living/dining room of apartment no.2 at the rear of the residential flat building. The new rear addition is considered to be a reasonable form of development given the building is compliant with the rear setback controls as prescribed within the RDCP2013 with a setback of 5.7 metres from the rear boundary. Furthermore, the extent of view loss is not contributory to the non-compliance to the height of buildings development standards as prescribed by the RLEP2012 and the incremental increase to the floor area above the maximum requirements of 18sqm is minor and does not involve wholesale changes to the current design scheme that would otherwise improve views over Coogee. With regards to the building envelope the proposed development provides ample setbacks above the minimum requirements and will generally provide a compliant site landscaping with an equitable distribution of built and unbuilt upon areas which are consistent with the buildings that are typified within the adjoining allotments. The additional area is considered acceptable in terms of the reasonableness of the proposal. 

 

4/16-18 Moore Street, Coogee

The rear building alignments are generally characterised by developments with balcony structures. The external walls and the balconies maintain a similar alignment in order to provide equitable view sharing at the first floor levels of the dwelling. However, the first floor external wall of the proposed development extends beyond the predominant building wall alignment and maintains a similar alignment as the existing the balcony levels of the adjoining neighbours. In fact the first floor bedroom no. 1 protrudes approximately 600mm beyond the first floor building alignment of apartment no. 4/16-18 Moore Street and will likely result in total loss of the existing headland views. In order to provide equitable view sharing from the neighbouring premises, maintain the easterly viewing corridor and preserve the predominant rear building/balcony alignment between the adjoining neighbours the following conditions of consent has been included:

 

·     The rear first floor balcony including associated balustrading shall be deleted. The sliding door on the northern elevation shall be replaced with a suitably sized window. The bottom sill of the window shall be a minimum 1 metre above the finished first floor level to provide for equitable sharing of views. The BASIX certificate shall be amended to reflect the above changes.

 

·     The first floor north-facing bedroom no. 1 shall be setback an additional 1 metre from the rear boundary and maintain a similar building alignment as the adjoining bedroom no. 2 in apartment no. 4 to ensure an equitable sharing of views from the western neighbouring premises. 

 

The above conditions of consent will significantly improve the views which include a headland view of Clovelly with a transition between land and water. The reduction to the bedroom size will continue to comply with the ADG requirements for apartment sizes given the minimum dimension of 3 metres is achieved (subject to the deletion of a robe) and will comply with the minimum size requirement of 9 metres. Notwithstanding this, the deletion of the first floor balcony is acceptable given apartment no. 4 will continue to have access to an area of private open space at the second floor level and is considered to be a more purposeful space given it immediately adjoins the second floor living space. The conditions above will improve the views from the neighbouring premises and will continue to demonstrate a reasonable form of development.

 

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 demolition of the existing structures on site and construction of a new part 2/part 3 storey residential flat development comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles and associated site and landscape works will not contribute to any unreasonable adverse impacts to the neighbouring dwellings and will remain in keeping with the streetscape character. The variation to the building height and floor space ratio is consistent with the objectives of Clause 4.3 and Clause 4.4, respectively and does not give rise to any adverse visual bulk and scale or compromise the amenity of the neighbouring dwellings.

 

The inclusion of non-standard conditions regarding an additional rear setback of the building will improve view sharing from the western adjoining neighbours and will maintain the headland view corridor of Clovelly. In terms of solar access and overshadowing the building generally satisfies the design criteria of Part 3B: Orientation and is acceptable in terms of the amount of solar access received in considering the overall site constraints. The subject application is recommended for approval.

 

 


 

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 and 4.4 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012, relating to Height of Buildings and Floor Space Ratios respectively, on the grounds that the proposed development complies with the objectives of the above clauses, and will not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, and that the Department of Planning & Infrastructure 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. 551/2015 for the demolition of all structures on site and construction of a new part two part three residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles, associated site and landscaping works (variation to height of buildings and floor space ration control), at No. 20 Moore Street, Coogee, subject to the following non standard conditions and the standard conditions contained in the development application compliance report:

 

Non standard conditions

 

        Amendment of Plans & Documentation

2.        The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements and details are to be included in the Construction Certificate:

 

a.      A privacy screen having a height of 1.6m is to be provided along the full western edge of the second floor balcony and details of compliance are to be provided in the construction certificate plans.  The privacy screen must be constructed of either obscured or sandblasted glazing.

 

b.      The openings within the timber panelling of the proposed front fence shall be a minimum of 30% open when viewed from the street to maintain the amenity to the adjoining residential development and the streetscape.

 

c.      Consent is not granted for the construction of the dividing boundary fences on the eastern and western boundaries unless the boundary fences meet the relevant requirements under the Dividing Fences Act 1991 or the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

d.      A new window opening must be installed along the ground floor eastern external wall of bedroom no. 1 to apartment no.2 that extends between the door frame and the dividing fence between apartment nos. 1 and 2. The window shall have a sill height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level.

 

e.      The rear first floor balcony including associated balustrading shall be deleted. The sliding door on the northern elevation shall be replaced with a suitably sized window. The bottom sill of the window shall be a minimum 1 metre above the finished first floor level to provide for equitable sharing of views. The BASIX certificate shall be amended to reflect the above changes.

 

f.       The first floor north-facing bedroom no. 1 shall be setback an additional 1 metre from the rear boundary and maintain a similar building alignment as the adjoining bedroom no. 2 in apartment no. 4 to ensure an equitable sharing of views from the western neighbour. 

 

g.      The first floor south-facing balcony and any associated balustrading must be setback an additional 900mm from the south-eastern edge of the balcony.

 

h.      The rear second floor balcony and any associated balustrading must be setback an additional 700mm from the rear boundary and maintain a similar alignment as the balcony at no. 22 Moore Street.

 

i.       The following windows must have a minimum sill height 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:

 

·    First floor, east facing bedroom no. 1 window (apartment no. 3)

·    First floor, east facing study room window (apartment no. 4)

·    Second floor, east facing dining room windows (measured 2.4 metres from the eastern boundary) (apartment no. 4)

·    First floor, west facing foyer room window (foyer room)

 

 


Attachment/s:

 

1.

DA Compliance Report - 20 Moore Street, Coogee

Included under separate cover

 

 


DA Compliance Report - 20 Moore Street, COOGEE

Attachment 2

 

 

 

 

Development Application Compliance Report

RCC LOGO_Stacked_COLOUR_RGB

 

Folder /DA No:

DA/551/2015

PROPERTY:     

 

20 Moore Street, COOGEE  NSW  2034

Proposal:

Demolition of all structures on site and construction of a two part three part residential flat building comprising 3 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings and basement parking for 7 vehicles, associated site and landscape works (variation to floor space ratio control).

 

Recommendation:

Approval

 

Relevant Environment Planning Instruments:

 

1.      SEPPs

 

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

 

The development application is accompanied by a BASIX Certificate, however amendments have since been received and the proposal is inconsistent with the original application. Subsequently, a condition has been included that an amended BASIX certificate must be consistent with the plans referenced in Condition 1 of this determination and a copy shall be submitted to Council and the Principal Certifying Authority prior to an occupation certificate being issued for the development.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (Design Quality for Residential Apartment Development)

 

INTRODUCTION

 

It was noted that this was a Development Application and the first Panel meeting with the applicant.

 

A copy of the ten SEPP 65 Design Quality Principles is attached. The Panel’s comments, set out below, are to assist Randwick Council in its consideration of the application, and to assist applicants to achieve better design outcomes in relation to these principles.

 

The absence of a comment under any of the heads of consideration does not necessarily imply that the Panel considers the particular matter has been satisfactorily addressed, as it may be that changes suggested under other heads will generate a desirable change.

 

The Panel draws the attention of applicants to the Residential Flat Design Code, as published by Planning NSW (September 2002), which provides guidance on all the issues addressed below.

 

This document is available from the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources.

 

Note:  The Panel members’ written and verbal comments are their professional opinions, based on their experience.

 

To address the Panel’s comments, the applicant may need to submit amended plans.  Prior to preparing any amended plans, the applicant should discuss the Panel’s comments and any other matter that may require amendment with the assessing Planning Officer.

 

When addressing the Panel’s comments by way of amendments, if the applicant does not propose to address all or the bulk of the Panel’s comments, and wishes to make minor amendments only, then it should be taken that the Panel considers the proposal does not meet the SEPP 65 requirements.  In these instances it is unlikely the scheme will be referred back to the Panel for further review.

 

PANEL COMMENTS

 

The DA is seeking consent for the demolition of an existing cottage and pool and the erection of a building on three levels containing four apartments and basement parking for seven cars.

 

This is the first occasion that the Panel has reviewed this proposal.  The Panel has visited the site and is familiar with the locality.

 

1.      Relationship to the Context of the Proposal 

 

The site of the proposal is close to the sea, immediately to the south of Gordons Bay and within easy walking distance of Coogee Beach.

 

The building to be demolished is a “remnant” house in a street that has been redeveloped with two and three storey apartment buildings built at various times and in various styles.  The 14.192m wide site extends to a narrow unmade lane along its rear boundary that is not wide enough to provide vehicle access.  The building is proposed to be longer than its neighbours to protrude into the line of the back yards to the north, which may cause overlooking into neighbours’ private open space and restrict the openness of their views.

 

2.      The Scale of the Proposal

 

Generally the height of the proposal would be in scale with its surroundings.

 

3.      The Built Form of the Proposal

 

·     The proposed building is aligned at Moore Street with its northern neighbour with a balcony that is closer to the street at its western end, complementing the outdoor staircase of No 16-18 Moore Street.  It has two metre wide side setbacks with three metre deep recesses at various locations.  The south balcony could be set in from the side boundaries further to reduce the building’s bulk to the street and be more in keeping with the type of protrusion the staircase creates which is low and well set in from the sides.

 

Note from Planning Officer: A condition of consent has been included that the balcony be setback an additional 900mm from the south-eastern edge of the balcony to maintain a transition between the eastern and western neighbour of the dwelling.

 

·     A number of the north facing windows within these recesses that have the effect of protecting the privacy of neighbours, may not comply with current fire regulations and their compliance should be checked and methods of compliance noted on the drawings.

 

Note from Planning Officer: A condition of consent has been included that the proposal must comply with the Building Code of Australia (BCA). Any non-compliance must seek an alternative solution to the BCA requirements.

 

·     There are a number of terraces on the sides of the building and it is unclear what effects these might have on the privacy of the adjoining properties.  This should be checked.

 

Note from Planning Officer: The new terraces are appropriately setback from the eastern and western facing window openings of the neighbouring premises. The side courtyards are immediately adjacent an existing 1.8 metre high boundary fence and will minimise any cross viewing from the ground floor levels.

 

·     The proposed building extends to the north some four metres beyond its neighbours.  It is unclear if this additional length would jeopardize its neighbours views.  If it is found that it would, the width of the proposed north-facing veranda could easily be reduced.  This should be investigated for its benefits.

 

Note from Planning Officer: The applicant has submitted amended plans and suitable conditions of consent have been included to ensure an increased rear setback be provided to ensure it remains consistent with the building envelopes within the existing streetscape.

 

·     The size of some of the hoods and awnings is considered excessive and they will increase the apparent bulk of the building.  The northern hood and column seem unnecessary and privacy could be better achieved with a low tree.

 

Note from Planning Officer: The north-facing hood on the southern side of the premises is necessary in order to maximize solar access and natural daylight into the first floor south facing apartment no. 3. Suitable conditions of consent have been included which delete the north-facing balconies and provide an additional setback which would minimise the visual bulk and scale of the building that is visible at the rear of the subject premises.

 

·     The basement appears to be tight and it would be helpful if turning circles were to be provided.

 

Note from Planning Officer: The applicant has submitted amended plans which include turning circles to demonstrate that the vehicles can adequately fit within the basement level. Council’s development engineering unit has reviewed the turning maneuvers and is supportable.

 

4.      The Proposed Density

 

The density of 0.78:1 that is proposed exceeds the statutory FSR of 0.75:1.  Improvements to the design and attention to the issues raised in this report would be needed for the Panel to support the additional FSR.

 

5.      Resource and Energy Use and Water Efficiency

 

·     Some windows, particularly on the western façade appear to require solar protection.  Others appear to have sliding screens and some rather unclear curved hoods above the ground floor.   A consistent approach should be taken.

·     Clerestory windows over the living area have the potential to in provide the environmental performance however the operation and cleaning should also be considered.  To reduce the height of the clerestory would not be difficult and would reduce bulk and may improve the elevations.

·     The units should cross ventilate satisfactorily, however a few minor improvements could be made by, for example, locating small windows in the south facing walls of the U1 and U2 kitchens and in other similar situations as there are a number of fixed glass windows that will not contribute to ventilation.

·     Ceiling fans should be provided in habitable rooms, as these reduce the need for air conditioning.  They should be indicated on the drawings.

 

6.      The Proposed Landscape

 

The Panel notes that the only area on the site where there would be space to establish sizeable trees is in the north-west corner of the site where a large tree may cause loss of view to No 16-18 Moore St. This needs to be checked.

The Panel suggests that the Applicant should confer with the Council about the establishment of a street tree in Moore Street.

 

7.      The Amenity of the Proposal for its Users

 

·     The proposed units should provide good amenity for their users.

 

8.      The Safety and Security Characteristics of the Proposal

 

As noted above, the boundary distance and protection of windows in the east and west walls of the building should be checked for compliance with fire regulations.

 

9.      Social Issues

 

This is a desirable well-serviced location for more apartments.

 

10.    The Aesthetics of the Proposal

 

It is the Panel’s opinion that the exterior design treatment is over-complicated for a small building and that it would benefit from a reduction in the number of materials and forms being used and a ationalization of openings.  In particular, it is unclear why in-situ concrete is being proposed in various above ground locations as this would be expensive, would weather poorly and would be out of character in this sea-side location.  The curved sun-hoods of unknown material and finish are not supported due to their extent.

 

1:50 scale typical cross drawings should be provided to indicate construction methods proposed.   Roof thickness and falls need to be properly accounted for.

 

Note from Planning Officer: A condition of consent has been included that a colour schedule be submitted prior to the issue of any construction certificate.

 

2.      Randwick LEP 2012

 

The subject site is zoned R3: Medium Density Residential under the Randwick LEP 2012. The proposal development is classified as a ‘residential flat development’ and is permissible in the zone. The zoning objectives are addressed as follows:

 

The following Clauses of RLEP 2012 apply to the proposal:

 

Description

Council Standard

Proposed

Compliance

(Yes/No/NA)

Floor Space Ratio (Maximum)

0.75:1 (349.7sqm)

0.79:1 (365.4sqm)

No*

Height of Building (Maximum)

9.5 metres

10.42 metres (variation 9.6%)

No*

Lot Size (Minimum)

Not applicable

Not applicable

Not applicable

*Refer to Clause 4.6: Exceptions to Development Standards for assessment within the executive summary report for further details.

 

3.      Randwick Comprehensive DCP

 

3.1     C1 Table:  Low Density Residential

 

State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality Residential Flat Buildings

 

SEPP No. 65 aims to promote quality design of Residential Flat Buildings. The proposal is subject to the policy as it involves the development of a residential flat building being 3 storeys and more in height. The proposal has been considered by Council’s Design Review Panel. The Panel’s comments are included in Section 7. An assessment has been carried out in accordance with Part 3: Siting the Development and Part 4: Designing the Building of the Apartment Design Guide against the design criteria requirements. Any non-compliance to the design criteria includes a merits based assessment as per the design guidance of the Apartment Design Guide.

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

Part 3: Siting the Development

3A-1

Site Analysis

 

 

 

Each element in the Site Analysis Checklist should be

addressed

 

Complies

3B-1

Orientation

 

 

 

Buildings along the street frontage define the street, by

facing it and incorporating direct access from the street (see figure 3B.1)

The proposal will provide direct access from Moore Street and existing right of way at the rear of the subject site.

Complies

 

Where the street frontage is to the east or west, rear

buildings should be orientated to the north

Not applicable.

Not applicable

 

Where the street frontage is to the north or south,

overshadowing to the south should be minimised and

buildings behind the street frontage should be orientated to

the east and west (see figure 3B.2)

The new residential flat building enjoys a north/southern orientation and the extent of shadowing which falls on the existing roadway of Moore Street is minimised given the reduced two storey building element on the southern façade.

Complies

3B-2

Orientation

 

 

 

Living areas, private open space and communal open space should receive solar access in accordance with sections 3D Communal and public open space and 4A Solar and daylight access

Less than 70% of the living areas and private open spaces of the apartments to the neighbouring building will receive less than the required three hours of direct solar access between the hours of 9am to 3pm, 21 June.

Does not comply. Refer to key issues.

 

Solar access to living rooms, balconies and private open

spaces of neighbours should be considered

Refer to key issues

Refer to key issues.

 

Where an adjoining property does not currently receive

the required hours of solar access, the proposed building ensures solar access to neighbouring properties is not reduced by more than 20%

Refer to key issues

Refer to key issues.

 

If the proposal will significantly reduce the solar access of neighbours, building separation should be increased beyond

minimums contained in section 3F Visual privacy

Refer to key issues

Refer to key issues.

 

Overshadowing should be minimised to the south or downhill by increased upper level setbacks

The proposal includes an increased side setback at the second floor level of the residential flat development.  

Complies

 

It is optimal to orientate buildings at 90 degrees to the boundary with neighbouring properties to minimise overshadowing and privacy impacts, particularly where minimum setbacks are used and where buildings are higher than the adjoining development

The building is orientated 90 degrees from the property boundary and will generally maintain a similar building alignment as the neighbouring buildings within along the existing streetscape.

Complies.

 

A minimum of 4 hours of solar access should be retained to

solar collectors on neighbouring buildings

The proposal will not have any impact to existing solar collectors to the neighbouring premises. 

Complies.

3F-1

Visual Privacy

 

 

 

Separation between windows and balconies is provided to ensure visual privacy is achieved. Minimum required separation distances from

buildings to the side and rear boundaries are as follows:

 

Building height

Habitable rooms and balconies

Non-habitable rooms

Up to 12m (4 storeys)

6m

3m

Up to 25m (5-8 storeys)

9m

4.5m

>25m (9+ storeys)

12m

6m

 

Note: Separation distances between buildings on the same

site should combine required building separations depending on the type of room (see figure 3F.2). Gallery access circulation should be treated as habitable space when measuring privacy separation distances between neighbouring properties.

 

Western neighbour:

Ground floor: 2m – 3.4m

First floor: 2m – 3.2m

Second floor: 2m – 4.5m

 

Eastern neighbour:

Ground floor: 2m – 4.1m

First floor: 2m – 3.45m

Second floor: 2m – 3.175m 

Does not comply. Refer to issues within this report.

Part 4: Designing the Building

4A

Solar and Daylight Access

 

 

 

Living rooms and private open spaces of at least 70% of apartments in a building receive a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area and in the Newcastle and Wollongong local government areas.

Only two (50%) of apartments will receive the minimum of two hours of direct sunlight between the hours of 9am – 3pm on the 21 June.

Does not comply. Refer to key issues within this report. 

 

A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm at mid-winter

25% of apartments will not receive any direct sunlight between the hours of 9am – 3pm on the 21 June.

Does not comply. Refer to key issues within this report.

4B

Natural Ventilation

 

 

 

At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building.

Apartments at ten storeys or greater are deemed to be cross ventilated only if any enclosure of the balconies at these levels allows adequate natural ventilation and cannot be fully enclosed

All apartments (100%) will receive cross ventilation with a cross over apartment layout.

Complies.

 

Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18m, measured glass line to glass line

The apartment depths within the building block are less than 18 metres as measured from glass line to glass line. 

Complies.

4C

Ceiling Heights

 

 

 

Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are:

 

Minimum Ceiling height for apartment and mixed use buildings

Habitable rooms

2.7m

Non-habitable

2.4m

For 2 storey apartments

2.7m for main living area floor; 2.4m for second floor where its area does not exceed 50% of the apartment area

Attic spaces

1.8m at edge of room with a 30 degree minimum ceiling slope

If located in mixed used areas

3.3m for ground and first floor to promote future flexibility of use.

 

These minimums do not preclude higher ceilings if desired.

 

The proposal includes a 2.7 metre floor to ceiling height for all levels.  

Complies.

4D

Apartment Size and Layout

 

 

 

Apartments are required to have the following minimum internal areas:

 

Apartment Type

Minimum Internal Area

Studio

35m2

1 bedroom

50m2

2 bedroom

70m2

3bedroom

90m2


The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5m2each

 

A fourth bedroom and further additional bedrooms increase the minimum internal area by 12m2 each.

Apartment no. 1 (2 bedrooms): 78.68sqm

 

Apartment no. 2 (2 bedrooms): 76.87sqm

 

Apartment no. 3 (2 bedrooms): 83.34sqm

 

Apartment no. 4 (3 bedrooms): 143.15sqm

Complies.

 

Every habitable room must have a window in an external wall with a total minimum glass area of not less than 10% of the floor area of the room. Daylight and air may not be borrowed from other rooms

All habitable rooms comprise of a window opening and will not comprise with less than 10% of the floor area of the room.

Complies.

 

Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of

2.5 x the ceiling height

Complies.

Complies.

 

In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window

Open plan layouts are located within an 8 metres depth of a habitable room window

Complies.

 

Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10m2 and

other bedrooms 9m2 (excluding wardrobe space)

Bedrooms and master bedrooms will achieve the minimum area requirements in 9m2 and 10m2, respectively.

Complies

 

Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobe space)

The first floor bedroom no. 1 to apartment no. 4 consists of a bedroom width of less than 3 metres, as conditioned. The reduction in the room size is appropriate given the room will maintain a minimum size of 9sqm (excluding wardrobe spaces) and will continue to provide a reasonable level of amenity to the room with compliant floor to ceiling heights and the width of the room is 3 metres.

Complies.

 

Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a

minimum width of:

·     3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom apartments

·     4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments

The studio apartments will consist of a minimum width of 3.6 metres and the 2-3 bedroom apartments a minimum width of 4 metres.

Complies.

 

The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts

The proposed apartment width is 4.152 metres and will comply with the minimum requirements as per the ADG requirements.  

Complies.

4E

Private open space and balconies

 

 

 

All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows:

 

Dwelling Type

Minimum Area

Minimum Depth

Studio Apt.

4m2

-

1 bed Apt.

8m2

2m

2 bed Apt.

10m2

2m

3+ bed Apt.

12m2

2.4m

 

The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m.

The two bedroom roof terrace consist of 51sqm with a minimum depth of 6.3 metres.

 

The 3 bedroom apartments provide an area of 14.7sqm with a minimum depth of 3.5 metres

Complies.

 

For apartments at ground level or on a podium or similar structure, a private open space is provided

instead of a balcony. It must have a minimum area of 15m2 and a minimum depth of 3m

The ground floor terrace comprises of a courtyard with an area of 28.8sqm.  

Complies.

4F

Common Circulation and Spaces

 

 

 

The maximum number of apartments off a circulation core on a single level is eight

Each core will provide entry to a maximum of 3 apartments.

Complies.

 

For buildings of 10 storeys and over, the maximum number of apartments sharing a single lift is 40

The development is less than 10 storeys in height. Not applicable.

Not applicable.

4G

Storage

 

 

 

In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and bedrooms, the following storage is provided:

 

Dwelling Type 

Storage Size Volume

Studio

4m3

1 bedroom

6m3

2 bedroom

8m3

3bedroom

10m3

 

At least 50% of the required storage is to be located within the apartment

The subject site includes ample space to provide storage within each apartment and across the three basement levels. 

Complies.

 

Randwick Comprehensive DCP 2013

 

C2 Table: Medium Density Residential

 

The DCP provisions are structured into two components, Objectives and Controls. The Objectives provide the framework for assessment under each requirement and outline key outcomes that a development is expected to achieve. The controls contain both numerical standards and qualitative provisions. Any proposed variations from the controls may be considered only where the applicant successfully demonstrates that an alternative solution could result in a more desirable planning and urban design outcome.

 

The relevant provisions of the DCP are addressed in the table below. (Note: a number of control provisions that are not related to the proposal have been deliberately omitted.)

 

B7

Transport, Traffic, Parking and Access

3.

Parking & Service Delivery Requirements

 

Car parking requirements:

1space per 2 studios

1 space per 1-bedroom unit (over 40m2)

1.2 spaces per 2-bedroom unit

1.5 spaces per 3- or more bedroom unit

1 visitor space per 4 dwellings

 

6 spaces required.

7 spaces proposed.

Complies.

 

Motor cycle requirements:

5% of car parking requirement

 

0 spaces required.

0 spaces provided.

Complies.

4.

Bicycles

 

Residents:

1 bike space per 2 units

Visitors:

1 per 10 units

2 spaces required.

0 spaces provided.

Conditioned.

C2

Medium Density Residential

2

Site Planning

2.1

Site Layout Options

Site layout and location of buildings must be based on a detailed site analysis and have regard to the site planning guidelines for:

·     Two block / courtyard example

·     T-shape example

·     U-shape example

·     Conventional example

Conventional building block proposed.

The proposed building configuration is consistent with the western residential flat development and the eastern semi-detached dwelling.

2.2

Landscaped open space and deep soil area

2.2.1

Landscaped open space

 

A minimum of 50% of the site area (232.8m2) is to be landscaped open space.

 

222.13sqm (48%)

Does not comply. Refer to key issues and non-compliances within this report for further details.

2.2.2

Deep soil area

 

(i)   A minimum of 25% of the site area (116.4m2) should incorporate deep soil areas sufficient in size and dimensions to accommodate trees and significant planting.

114.87sqm (24.6%)

Complies. Minor variation is acceptable from the Council control is acceptable and will remain in keeping with the objectives for deep soil areas. 

 

(ii)  Deep soil areas must be located at ground level, be permeable, capable for the growth of vegetation and large trees and must not be built upon, occupied by spa or swimming pools or covered by impervious surfaces such as concrete, decks, terraces, outbuildings or other structures.

Deep soil area provided at the ground floor level and adequate in depth to accommodate for the growth of significant planting.

Complies.

 

(iii) Deep soil areas are to have soft landscaping comprising a variety of trees, shrubs and understorey planting.

Deep soil areas are appropriate in size to accommodate the growth of varying trees and shrubs.

Complies.

 

(iv) Deep soil areas cannot be located on structures or facilities such as basements, retaining walls, floor slabs, rainwater tanks or in planter boxes.

No new deep soil areas provided over existing basement parking areas or floor slabs.

Complies.

 

(v)  Deep soil zones shall be contiguous with the deep soil zones of adjacent properties.

Deep soil areas are contiguous with the deep soil zones of adjacent properties.

Complies.

2.3

Private and communal open space

2.3.1

Private open space

 

Private open space is to be:

(i)   Directly accessible from the living area of the dwelling.

(ii)  Open to a northerly aspect where possible so as to maximise solar access.

(iii) Be designed to provide adequate privacy for residents and where possible can also contribute to passive surveillance of common areas.

All apartments enjoy a private open space in the form of either a terrace or balcony that immediately adjoins the living areas of the dwelling. Unit 4 comprises of a split level with two north-facing balconies and Unit 2 with a north-facing terrace at the ground floor level. Unit 1 consists of an east and west facing terrace area and Unit 3 a south-facing balcony. The northern orientated balconies will maximize the amount of direct sunlight. 

 

Adequate casual surveillance provided to communal areas.

Complies.

 

For residential flat buildings:

(vi) Each dwelling has access to an area of private open space in the form of a courtyard, balcony, deck or roof garden, accessible from with the dwelling.

(vii)  Private open space for apartments has a minimum area of 8m2 and a minimum dimension of 2m.

As above.

Complies.

2.3.2

Communal open space

 

 

 

Communal open space for residential flat building is to be:

(a)  Of a sufficient contiguous area, and not divided up for allocation to individual units.

(b)  Designed for passive surveillance.

(c)  Well oriented with a preferred northerly aspect to maximise solar access.

(d)  adequately landscaped for privacy screening and visual amenity.

(e)  Designed for a variety of recreation uses and incorporate recreation facilities such as playground equipment, seating and shade structures.

No common open space proposed.

Refer to Key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report. 

3

Building Envelope

3.3

Building depth

 

For residential flat buildings, the preferred maximum building depth (from window to window line) is between 10m and 14m.

Any greater depth must demonstrate that the design solution provides good internal amenity such as via cross-over, double-height or corner dwellings / units.

 

The proposed building depth from window line to window line will remain less than 10 metres and will provide ample opportunities for natural cross ventilation into the habitable rooms within the building.

Complies.

3.4

Setbacks

3.4.1

Front setback

(i)     The front setback on the primary and secondary property frontages must be consistent with the prevailing setback line along the street.

Notwithstanding the above, the front setback generally must be no less than 3m in all circumstances to allow for suitable landscaped areas to building entries.

(ii)     Where a development is proposed in an area identified as being under transition in the site analysis, the front setback will be determined on a merit basis.

(iii)    The front setback areas must be free of structures, such as swimming pools, above-ground rainwater tanks and outbuildings.

(iv)    The entire front setback must incorporate landscape planting, with the exception of driveways and pathways.

The proposed front setback at the first floor level will protrude forward of the front building alignment from the eastern and western neighbours at nos. 16-18 and 22 Moore Street, Coogee by a maximum by 1.9 metres as measured from the western edge. Notwithstanding this, the neighbouring buildings within the urban block contribute to an established building alignment.

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report.

3.4.2

Side setback

 

Residential flat building

 

(i)     Comply with the minimum side setback requirements stated below:

-    14m≤site frontage width<16m: 2.5m

(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.

(iii)    A fire protection statement must be submitted where windows are proposed on the external walls of a residential flat building within 3m of the common boundaries. The statement must outline design and construction measures that will enable operation of the windows (where required) whilst still being capable of complying with the relevant provisions of the BCA.

The subject site comprises of a frontage width of 12.19 metres and therefore a minimum side setback of 2 metres is required.

 

The proposal will provide a minimum side setback of 2 metres and will comply with the RDCP2013. The eastern and western external walls also provides a number of articulated elements which will result in a setback of more than 2 metres and will create visual interest by providing additional modulation to the built form.

 

 

 

 

 

Suitable conditions of consent have been required to ensure a fire protection statement is included as part of the requirements under the BCA.

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

3.4.3

Rear setback

 

For residential flat buildings, provide a minimum rear setback of 15% (9.06m) of allotment depth or 5m, whichever is the greater.

The proposal complies with the numerical requirements. However, the development does not maintain the predominant rear setback alignment of the neighbouring dwellings. 

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance for further details.

4

Building Design

4.1

Building façade

 

 

(i)     Buildings must be designed to address all street and laneway frontages.

 

 

 

 

 

(ii)     Buildings must be oriented so that the front wall alignments are parallel with the street property boundary or the street layout.

 

 

 

 

 

(iii)    Articulate facades to reflect the function of the building, present a human scale, and contribute to the proportions and visual character of the street.

 

 

 

 

 

(iv)    Avoid massive or continuous unrelieved blank walls. This may be achieved by dividing building elevations into sections, bays or modules of not more than 10m in length, and stagger the wall planes.

 

 

(vi)    Conceal building services and pipes within the balcony slabs.

 

The new residential flat building will address the subject sites property frontage along Moore Street and the rear right of way access.

 

Whilst the first floor south-facing balcony is slightly splayed on an angle from the property boundary, the primary building alignment will remain parallel to the front property boundary.

 

Side elevations incorporate a number of recess courtyards and modulations to the external walls of the building which will break up the perceivable visual massing from the existing building. 

 

No portion of the external wall will extend more than 10 metres in length and are appropriately articulated elements are included to

 

 

All services are hidden within concrete slabs and are not visible from the streetscape.

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

4.2

Roof design

 

 (i)    Design the roof form, in terms of massing, pitch, profile and silhouette to relate to the three dimensional form (size and scale) and façade composition of the building.

 

 

 

 

(ii)     Design the roof form to respond to the orientation of the site, such as eaves and skillion roofs to respond to sun access.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(iii)    Use a similar roof pitch to adjacent buildings, particularly if there is consistency of roof forms across the streetscape.

 

 

 

 

 

 

(iv)    Articulate or divide the mass of the roof structures on larger buildings into distinctive sections to minimise the visual bulk and relate to any context of similar building forms.

 

(v)    Use clerestory windows and skylights to improve natural lighting and ventilation of internalised space on the top floor of a building where feasible. The location, layout, size and configuration of clerestory windows and skylights must be sympathetic to the overall design of the building and the streetscape.

 

(vi)    Any services and equipment, such as plant, machinery, ventilation stacks, exhaust ducts, lift overrun and the like, must be contained within the roof form or screened behind parapet walls so that they are not readily visible from the public domain.

 

(vii)   Terraces, decks or trafficable outdoor spaces on the roof may be considered only if:

-    There are no direct sightlines to the habitable room windows and private and communal open space of the adjoining residences.

-    The size and location of terrace or deck will not result in unreasonable noise impacts on the adjoining residences.

-    Any stairway and associated roof do not detract from the architectural character of the building, and are positioned to minimise direct and oblique views from the street.

-    Any shading devices, privacy screens and planters do not adversely increase the visual bulk of the building.

 

(viii) The provision of landscape planting on the roof (that is, “green roof”) is encouraged. Any green roof must be designed by a qualified landscape architect or designer with details shown on a landscape plan.

 

The proposal includes a low profile skillion roof form and will continue to relate to the scale of the existing streetscape given it continues to fit within the existing building height plane.

 

The roof form appropriately responds to the neighbouring premises and will minimise the apparent loss of direct solar access into the habitable rooms given the roofs low profile nature.

 

The proposal involves a skillion roof form with parapet above which will remain in keeping with other similar forms of development within the immediate streetscape.

 

The roof form has been divided into sections to alleviate the overall length of the roof form. 

 

 

The first floor south-facing unit no. 3 incorporates a clerestory roof element that protrudes above the first floor roof form to optimize the amount of natural light into the south-facing rooms.

 

No services or additional plant and equipment are located on the roof.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No terraces, decks or trafficable outdoor spaces proposed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No landscaping provided on the roof top of the dwelling.

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Complies. 

4.3

Habitable roof space

 

Habitable roof space may be considered, provided it meets the following:

-    Optimises dwelling mix and layout, and assists to achieve dual aspect or cross over units with good natural ventilation.

-    Has a maximum floor space of 65% of the storey immediately below.

-    Wholly contain habitable areas within the roof space.

-    When viewed from the surrounding public and private domain, the roof form has the appearance of a roof. A continuous flat roof with habitable space within it will not satisfy this requirement.

-    Design windows to habitable roof space as an integrated element of the roof.

-    Submit computer generated perspectives or photomontages showing the front and rear elevations of the development.

The proposal does not include any new habitable roof space on the subject premises.

Not applicable.

4.4

External wall height and ceiling height

 

(ii)  Where the site is subject to a 9.5m building height limit under the LEP, a maximum external wall height of 8m applies.

10.42 metres

Does not comply. Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

 

(iii) The minimum ceiling height is to be 2.7m for all habitable rooms.

2.7 metres

Complies.

4.5

Pedestrian Entry

 

 (i)    Separate and clearly distinguish between pedestrian pathways and vehicular access. 

Pedestrian entries are clearly identifiable from Moore Street and the rear right of carriageway.

Complies.

 

(ii)     Present new development to the street in the following manner:

-    Locate building entries so that they relate to the pedestrian access network and desired lines.

-    Design the entry as a clearly identifiable element in the façade composition.

-    Integrate pedestrian access ramps into the overall building and landscape design.

-    For residential flat buildings, provide direct entries to the individual dwellings within a development from the street where possible.

-    Design mailboxes so that they are convenient to residents, do not clutter the appearance of the development at street frontage and are preferably integrated into a wall adjacent to the primary entry (and at 90 degrees to the street rather than along the front boundary).

-    Provide weather protection for building entries.

 

Postal services and mailboxes

(i)     Mailboxes are provided in accordance with the delivery requirements of Australia Post.

(ii)     A mailbox must clearly mark the street number of the dwelling that it serves.

(iii)    Design mail boxes to be convenient for residents and not to clutter the appearance of the development from the street.

The proposed street entries will be visible and identifiable from the existing streetscape and will integrate to the overall design scheme of the building.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As conditioned.

Complies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As conditioned.

4.6

Internal circulation

 

 (i)  Enhance the amenity and safety of circulation spaces by:

-     Providing natural lighting and ventilation where possible.

-     Providing generous corridor widths at lobbies, foyers, lift doors and apartment entry doors.

-     Allowing adequate space for the movement of furniture.

-     Minimising corridor lengths to give short, clear sightlines.

-     Avoiding tight corners.

-     Articulating long corridors with a series of foyer areas, and/or providing windows along or at the end of the corridor.

The circulation spaces are ample in size and will allow for ample pedestrian movement within internal lobbies, foyers, apartment entry doors and common spaces. The low number of apartments at the upper floor levels will also provide ample area for circulation between the building.

 

Refer to the ADG requirements for further details.

Complies

 

(ii)     Use multiple access cores to:

-    Maximise the number of pedestrian entries along a street for sites with wide frontages or corner sites.

-    Articulate the building façade.

-    Limit the number of dwelling units accessible off a single circulation core on a single level to 6 units.

One single core provided with access for two apartments.

Complies.

 

(iii)   Where apartments are arranged off a double-loaded corridor, limit the number of units accessible from a single core or to 8 units.

No double loaded corridors provided.

Complies.

4.7

Apartment layout

 

 (i) Maximise opportunities for natural lighting and ventilation through the following measures:

-     Providing corner, cross-over, cross-through and double-height maisonette / loft apartments.

-     Limiting the depth of single aspect apartments to a maximum of 6m.

-     Providing windows or skylights to kitchen, bathroom and laundry areas where possible.

Providing at least 1 openable window (excluding skylight) opening to outdoor areas for all habitable rooms and limiting the use of borrowed light and ventilation.

Requirements for apartment layout under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

 

Refer to Apartment Design Guide

 

(ii)  Design apartment layouts to accommodate flexible use of rooms and a variety of furniture arrangements.

 

(iii) Provide private open space in the form of a balcony, terrace or courtyard for each and every apartment unit in a development.

 

(iv) Avoid locating the kitchen within the main circulation space of an apartment, such as hallway or entry.

4.8

Balconies

 

(i)       Provide a primary balcony and/or private courtyard for all apartments with a minimum area of 8m2 and a minimum dimension of 2m and consider secondary balconies or terraces in larger apartments.

 

Requirements for private open space under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

Refer to Apartment Design Guide

 

(i)       Provide a primary terrace for all ground floor apartments with a minimum depth of 4m and minimum area of 12m2. All ground floor apartments are to have direct access to a terrace.

 

Requirements for private open space under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

Refer to Apartment Design Guide

4.9

Colours, materials and finishes

 

 (i)    Provide a schedule detailing the materials and finishes in the development application documentation and plans.

(ii)     The selection of colour and material palette must complement the character and style of the building.

(iv)    Use the following measures to complement façade articulation:

-    Changes of colours and surface texture

-    Inclusion of light weight materials to contrast with solid masonry surfaces

-    The use of natural stones is encouraged.

(v)    Avoid the following materials or treatment:

-    Reflective wall cladding, panels and tiles and roof sheeting

-    High reflective or mirror glass

-    Large expanses of glass or curtain wall that is not protected by sun shade devices

-    Large expanses of rendered masonry

-    Light colours or finishes where they may cause adverse glare or reflectivity impacts

(vi)    Use materials and details that are suitable for the local climatic conditions to properly withstand natural weathering, ageing and deterioration.

(vii)   Sandstone blocks in existing buildings or fences on the site must be recycled and re-used.

The proposed colours and materials schedule submitted as part of the application provides a number of materials and finishes to the external walls and façade elements of the building which include a concrete insitu, a rendered paint finish and a timber cladding finish to the second floor level all of which are complimentary to the modulations and the articulated wall elements to the proposed residential flat building.

 

The selected colours, materials and finishes are all complimentary to a building which is contemporary in nature and reflects good quality urban design.

Complies.

4.12

Earthworks Excavation and backfilling

 

 (i)   Any excavation and backfilling within the building footprints must be limited to 1m at any point on the allotment, unless it is demonstrated that the site gradient is too steep to reasonably construct a building within this extent of site modification.

(ii)    Any cut and fill outside the building footprints must take the form of terracing following the natural landform, in order to minimise the height or depth of earthworks at any point on the site.

(iii)   For sites with a significant slope, adopt a split-level design for buildings to minimise excavation and backfilling.

 

The proposal involves excavation works below the existing ground floor level by more than 1 metre to accommodate a new basement parking area. However, the non-compliance is acceptable given suitable conditions of consent have been included to minimise the impact of excavation to the neighbouring buildings. 

Complies, as conditioned.

 

Retaining walls

(iv)    Setback the outer edge of any excavation, piling or sub-surface walls a minimum of 900mm from the side and rear boundaries.

(v)    Step retaining walls in response to the natural landform to avoid creating monolithic structures visible from the neighbouring properties and the public domain.

(vi)    Where it is necessary to construct retaining walls at less than 900mm from the side or rear boundary due to site conditions, retaining walls must be stepped with each section not exceeding a maximum height of 2200mm, as measured from the ground level (existing).

 

The proposed basement garage involves the construction of new retaining walls located up to the side boundaries. The proposal is acceptable given suitable conditions of consent have been included to minimise the impact of excavation to the neighbouring buildings.

Conditioned.

5

Amenity

5.1

Solar access and overshadowing

 

Solar access for proposed development

 

(i)     Dwellings must receive a minimum of 3 hours sunlight in living areas and to at least 50% of the private open space between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

Requirements for solar and daylight access under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

 

Refer to ADG requirements for further details.

 

(ii)     Living areas and private open spaces for at least 70% of dwellings within a residential flat building must provide direct sunlight for at least 3 hours between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

 

(iii)    Limit the number of single-aspect apartments with a southerly aspect to a maximum of 10 percent of the total units within a residential flat building.

 

(iv)    Any variations from the minimum standard due to site constraints and orientation must demonstrate how solar access and energy efficiency is maximised.

 

Solar access for surrounding development

 

(i)   Living areas of neighbouring dwellings must receive a minimum of 3 hours access to direct sunlight to a part of a window between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

 

(ii) At least 50% of the landscaped areas of neighbouring dwellings must receive a minimum of 3 hours of direct sunlight to a part of a window between 8am and 4pm on 21 June.

 

(iii)   Where existing development currently receives less sunlight than this requirement, the new development is not to reduce this further.

Requirements for solar and daylight access under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

 

Refer to ADG requirements for further details.

5.2

Natural ventilation and energy efficiency

 

(i)   Provide daylight to internalised areas within each dwelling and any poorly lit habitable rooms via measures such as ventilated skylights, clerestory windows, fanlights above doorways and highlight windows in internal partition walls.

Requirements for natural ventilation under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

 

Refer to ADG requirements for further details.

 

(ii)  Sun shading devices appropriate to the orientation should be provided for the windows and glazed doors of the building.

 

(iii) All habitable rooms must incorporate windows opening to outdoor areas. The sole reliance on skylight or clerestory windows for natural lighting and ventilation is not acceptable.

 

(iv) All new residential units must be designed to provide natural ventilation to all habitable rooms. Mechanical ventilation must not be the sole means of ventilation to habitable rooms.

 

(v)  A minimum of 90% of residential units should be naturally cross ventilated. In cases where residential units are not naturally cross ventilated, such as single aspect apartments, the installation of ceiling fans may be required.

 

(vi) A minimum of 25% of kitchens within a development should have access to natural ventilation and be adjacent to openable windows.

 

 

(vii)  Developments, which seek to vary from the minimum standards, must demonstrate how natural ventilation can be satisfactorily achieved, particularly in relation to habitable rooms.

5.3

Visual privacy

 

 (i)  Locate windows and balconies of habitable rooms to minimise overlooking of windows or glassed doors in adjoining dwellings.

(ii)  Orient balconies to front and rear boundaries or courtyards as much as possible. Avoid orienting balconies to any habitable room windows on the side elevations of the adjoining residences.

(iii) Orient buildings on narrow sites to the front and rear of the lot, utilising the street width and rear garden depth to increase the separation distance.

(iv) Locate and design areas of private open space to ensure a high level of user privacy. Landscaping, screen planting, fences, shading devices and screens are used to prevent overlooking and improve privacy.

(v)  Incorporate materials and design of privacy screens including:

-    Translucent glazing

-    Fixed timber or metal slats

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

-    Screen planting and planter boxes as a supplementary device for reinforcing privacy protection

 

Requirements for solar and daylight access under the RDCP2013 are superseded by the SEPP65: Apartment Design Guide.

 

Refer to ADG requirements for further details.

5.4

Acoustic privacy

 

 (i)  Design the building and layout to minimise transmission of noise between buildings and dwellings.

(ii)  Separate “quiet areas” such as bedrooms from common recreation areas, parking areas, vehicle access ways and other noise generating activities.

(iii) Utilise appropriate measures to maximise acoustic privacy such as:

-    Double glazing

-    Operable screened balconies

-    Walls to courtyards

-    Sealing of entry doors

 

The proposed open plan living arrangement seeks to provide locates living areas on the northern and southern ends of the residential flat building. However, in considering the low number of units provided to the development it is not expected to result in adverse noise impacts to the apartments.

Complies.

5.5

View sharing

 

 (i)    The location and design of buildings must reasonably maintain existing view corridors and vistas to significant elements from the streets, public open spaces and neighbouring dwellings.

(ii)     In assessing potential view loss impacts on the neighbouring dwellings, retaining existing views from the living areas should be given a priority over those obtained from the bedrooms and non-habitable rooms.

(iii)    Where a design causes conflicts between retaining views for the public domain and private properties, priority must be given to view retention for the public domain.

(iv)    The design of fences and selection of plant species must minimise obstruction of views from the neighbouring residences and the public domain.  

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

(vi)    Clearly demonstrate any steps or measures adopted to mitigate potential view loss impacts in the development application.

An objection has been received from the adjoining neighbours that the proposed works will result in view loss impacts. 

Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details of view loss analysis.

5.6

Safety and security

 

(i)     Design buildings and spaces for safe and secure access to and within the development.

Secure access is provided into the building from Moore Street and the rear lane via Kildare Lane..

Complies.

 

(iii)    For residential flat buildings, provide direct, secure access between the parking levels and the main lobby on the ground floor.

Secure parking access provided between the main lobby and the rear circulation space.

Complies.

 

(iv)    Design window and door placement and operation to enable ventilation throughout the day and night without compromising security. The provision of natural ventilation to the interior space via balcony doors only, is deemed insufficient.

Window and door placement within the main circulation spaces will provide appropriate natural ventilation.

Complies.

 

(v)    Avoid high walls and parking structures around buildings and open space areas which obstruct views into the development.

The proposed garage is located mostly below the ground level existing and will not contribute to any excessive high walls that will obstruct views from the neighbouring dwellings.

Complies.

 

(vi)    Resident car parking areas must be equipped with security grilles or doors.

Conditioned.

Conditioned.

 

(vii)   Control visitor entry to all units and internal common areas by intercom and remote locking systems.

Conditioned.

Conditioned.

 

(viii)  Provide adequate lighting for personal safety in common and access areas of the development.

Conditioned.

Conditioned.

 

(ix)    Improve opportunities for casual surveillance without compromising dwelling privacy by designing living areas with views over public spaces and communal areas, using bay windows which provide oblique views and casual views of common areas, lobbies / foyers, hallways, open space and car parks.

The proposal does not provide any areas of communal open space and therefore there are no additional requirements for casual surveillance into these spaces.

Complies.

 

(x)    External lighting must be neither intrusive nor create a nuisance for nearby residents.

Conditioned.

Conditioned.

 

(xi)    Provide illumination for all building entries, pedestrian paths and communal open space within the development.

Conditioned.

Conditioned.

6.1

Location

 

(i)   Car parking facilities must be accessed off rear lanes or secondary street frontages where available.

The proposal provides a new vehicular parking access from the primary street frontage along Moore Street other than the rear laneway.

Refer to the key issues and areas of non-compliance within this report for further details.

 

(ii)  The location of car parking and access facilities must minimise the length of driveways and extent of impermeable surfaces within the site.

The proposed driveway width is at 3 metres and is the minimum expected depth required to allow for the movement of vehicles in a forward motion.

Complies.

 

(iii) Setback driveways a minimum of 1m from the side boundary. Provide landscape planting within the setback areas.

Driveway is setback a minimum of 1 metre from the side boundary.

Complies.

 

(iv) Entry to parking facilities off the rear lane must be setback a minimum of 1m from the lane boundary.

The subject site has a right of way access at the rear of the allotment, however its minimum width and single car lane width makes it difficult for vehicles to enter and exit into right of way.

Complies.

 

(v) For residential flat buildings, comply with the following:

(a)   Car parking must be provided underground in a basement or semi-basement for new development.

(b)   On grade car park may be considered for sites potentially affected by flooding. In this scenario, the car park must be located on the side or rear of the allotment away from the primary street frontage.

(c)    Where rear lane or secondary street access is not available, the car park entry must be recessed behind the front façade alignment. In addition, the entry and driveway must be located towards the side and not centrally positioned across the street frontage.

Parking is located at basement level. The subject site currently enjoys rear lane right of way access. Refer to key issues and areas of non-compliance for further details.

Complies.

6.2

Configuration

 

(i)   With the exception of hardstand car spaces and garages, all car parks must be designed to allow vehicles to enter and exit in a forward direction.

Adequate turning maneuverability is provided at the basement level to allow vehicles to enter and exit in a forward direction.

Complies.

 

(ii)  For residential flat buildings, the maximum width of driveway is 6m. In addition, the width of driveway must be tapered towards the street boundary as much as possible.

Council’s development engineering have advised the following:

 

“Access form Moore Street is supported as Development Engineering would not support vehicle access from the rear laneway (Kildare Lane). At only 3.05m wide, it is half the width of typical laneways in Randwick LGA and far too narrow to facilitate satisfactory vehicle access and manoeuvring into the property”.

 

Complies.

 

(iv) Provide basement or semi-basement car parking consistent with the following requirements:

(a)   Provide natural ventilation. 

(b)   Integrate ventilation grills into the façade composition and landscape design.

(c)    The external enclosing walls of car park must not protrude above ground level (existing) by more than 1.2m. This control does not apply to sites affected by potential flooding.

(d)   Use landscaping to soften or screen any car park enclosing walls.

(e)   Provide safe and secure access for building users, including direct access to dwellings where possible.

(f)    Improve the appearance of car park entries and avoid a ‘back-of-house’ appearance by measures such as:

-    Installing security doors to avoid ‘black holes’ in the facades.

-    Returning the façade finishing materials into the car park entry recess to the extent visible from the street as a minimum.

-    Concealing service pipes and ducts within those areas of the car park that are visible from the public domain. 

 

The proposed basement parking accommodates 7 parking spaces for 4 units and appropriate ventilation will provided via the existing driveway access handle and the rear access door. The basement parking will mostly be concealed below the ground level existing and will not contribute to any unreasonable visual bulk and scale impacts.

Complies.

7

Fencing and Ancillary Development

7.1

Fencing

 

 (i)  Fences are constructed with durable materials that are suitable for their purpose and can properly withstand wear and tear and natural weathering.

(ii)  Sandstone fencing must not be rendered and painted.

(iii) The following materials must not be used in fences:

-    Steel post and chain wire

-    Barbed wire or other dangerous materials

(ii) Expansive surfaces of blank rendered masonry to street frontages must be avoided.

 

The proposed front fence comprises of a number of materials and finishes including timber paling and cement render which will generally maintain the appearance of front fences within the existing streetscape and reflects a contemporary design.

Complies.

7.2

Front Fencing

 

(i)   The fence must align with the front property boundary or the predominant fence setback line along the street.

The proposed front and rear fencing aligns with the property boundaries.

Complies.