AGENDA - LPP

Meeting:

Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP)

Date:

Thursday, 04 April 2019

Time:

4.00pm

Venue:

Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Hurstville

Participants:

Adam Seton (Chairperson)

Milan Marecic (Expert Panel Member)

Michael Leavey (Expert Panel Member)

Cameron Jones (Community Representative)

Additional Invitees:

Meryl Bishop (Director Environment and Planning)

Nicole Askew (Acting Manager Development and Building)

Cathy Mercer (PA to Manager Development Assessment)

Sue Matthew (Team Leader DA Admin)

Monica Wernej (Admin Assistant)

 

  

1. On Site Inspections - 2.00pm –  3.30pm

a) 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

b) 80-84 Regent Street Kogarah

c) Hurstville Civic Precinct

 

 

 

 

Break - 3.30pm

2. Public Meeting – Consideration of Items 4.00pm  6.00pm

Public Meeting Session Closed - 6.00pm

(Break – Light Supper served to Panel Members)


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 4 April  2019

Page 3

 

 

3. Reports and LPP Deliberations in Closed Session - 6.30pm

 

LPP010-19        468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst - DA2018/0393

(Report by Senior Development Assessment Planner)

LPP011-19        80-84 Regent Street Kogarah - DA2018/0368

(Report by Senior Development Assessment Planner)

LPP012-19        Planning Proposal PP2016/0002 - Hurstville Civic Precinct - PP2016/0002

(Report by Independent Assessment)

 

 

 

 

4. Confirmation of Minutes

 

 


 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 04 April 2019

 

LPP Report No

LPP010-19

Development Application No

DA2018/0393

Site Address & Ward Locality

468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

Blakehurst Ward

Proposed Development

Demolition of all structures on site and the construction of a Residential Flat Building containing a total of forty (40) apartments with basement parking catering for 72 vehicles, associated landscaping and site works

Owners

Pheonix Waterfront and Pheonix Waterfronts No.2/Jeffrey Ernest Ireland

Applicant

Pheonix Builders

Planner/Architect

Architect: Architecture and Building Works Planner:City Plan Services

Date Of Lodgement

20/09/2018

Submissions

1 submission received

Cost of Works

$16, 326, 480.00

Local Planning Panel Criteria

Residential Flat Building subject to SEPP 65, two (2) Clause 4.6 Statements exceeding the development controls by over 10%

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 – Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy – (Infrastructure) 2007, State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017, State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings,

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004, Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No.2 – Georges River Catchment,

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012, Kogarah Development Control Plan

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

Traffic and Parking Report – Varga Traffic Planning

Acoustic Report – Acoustic Vibration and Noise Pty Ltd

Preliminary Acid Sulphate Soil Assessment – EI Australia

Arboricultural Impact Assessment – New Leaf

Report prepared by

Senior Development Assessment Planner

 

 

Recommendation

THAT the application be approved in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Yes  - Clause 4.3 (Height) and Clause 6.4 (Foreshore Building Line)

Two Clause 4.6 Statements have been submitted.

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

No, conditions have been attached; the report and conditions will be available to the Applicant when the report is published.

 

Site Plan

Site outlined in blue

 

Executive Summary

Proposal

1.    The development application (DA) seeks consent for the demolition of all existing structures on the subject site, and the construction of a part six (6) storey, part eight (8) storey residential flat building comprising of forty (40) residential apartments, two levels of basement car parking containing seventy two (72) car spaces, roof top communal open space and associated landscaping and site works, at 468-474 Princes Highway, Kogarah.

 

2.    The application was lodged on 20 September 2018. The proposal was amended on 11 December 2018 and 19 January 2019 in response to the concerns raised by Council.

 

Site and Locality

3.    This application applies to land known as 468-474 Princes Highway, Blakehurst (refer to Figure 1 below). The site has a legal description of Lot A DP 420623, Lot 1 DP 223068 and Lot 10 DP 633892 and comprises of three (3) independent allotments. Combined the sites have a total site area of approximately 2,300sqm.

 

4.    Number 470 Princes Highway accommodates an older style single storey brick house, with an outdoor pool located on a separate allotment known as No. 468 Princes Highway. Due to the topography of the site and siting of development, the front elevation is not visible when viewed from the Princes Highway.

 

5.    Number 472-474 Princes Highway is an older style three (3) storey residential flat building comprising 13 apartments, estimated to be approximately 70 years old. This building is outdated and presents poorly to the street. Due to the steep topography of the site, only the ground floor level of the building is visible when viewed from the Princes Highway. The southern boundary is adjoined by Tom Uglys Point Reserve South.

 

Figure 1: Subject Site at 468-474 Princes Highway, Blakehurst

 

6.    The northern boundary is adjoined by Tom Uglys Point Reserve North (also known as Dover Park North) and the rear eastern boundary is defined by a sandstone block seawall extending along the full length of the site.

 

Zoning and Permissibility

7.    The subject site is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential under the provisions of the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP2012). The proposed residential flat building is a permissible use with consent.

 

Site outlined in blue

 

Submissions

8.    The DA was notified to neighbours in accordance with the Kogarah Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP2013), and given the prominent foreshore location of the Site a very extensive notification was conducted. A total of one (1) submission was received. In summary the concerns raised by the submitter are;

·    The development fails to comply with the 12m height limit.

·    The proposal is non-compliant with the Georges River City Plan.

 

These issues are discussed in greater detail in the body of this report.

 

Reason for Referral to the Local Planning Panel

9.    This application is referred to the Local Planning Panel for determination, as the proposal exceeds the development standards by more than 10% as referenced in the s9.1 (EP&A Act) Ministerial Direction of 23 February 2018 and the application is for a residential flat building which is subject to SEPP 65.

 

10.  Two (2) Clause 4.6 Statements have accompany the application and seek variations to the statutory height control (Clause 4.3) and Foreshore Building Line (Clause 6.4) of the KLEP 2012.

 

Planning and Design Issues

11.  The application exceeds the overall height control of 21m by a maximum of 3.55m (17% variation). The building sits below the statutory height limit at the front when viewed from the Princes Highway. The exceedance of the control is created by the lift overrun located at both ends of the building and the upper level bedrooms of the Unit 4.01 unit structure which are aligned with the lift core and located along the southern side of the building.

 

12.  A Clause 4.6 Variation has been submitted with the application to justify the non-compliance. Council has been consistent in the application of the height control throughout the LGA and in particular areas that have recently been up-zoned. Variations have only been permitted in relation to lift access to the roof where areas of common open space are located. This site is unique however given the consistent approach to achieving compliance with the height control it is in this case requested by way of a condition that the upper level bedrooms, stairs and amenities to Unit 4.01 at the fifth floor be deleted and the unit become a studio apartment. The overall density of the development is unaffected by this change it just reduces the size of one apartment from a 2 bedroom unit to a studio.

 

13.  Parts of the building encroach on the 12m Foreshore Building Line (FBL) at the rear however are intended to be consistent with the FBL of the existing RFB on site (setback 7.2m-7.6m). A Clause 4.6 Statement was submitted to support and justify this variation. Given that most of the building complies with the FBL and the narrowness of the land (without the potential or opportunity to increase its width) the Clause 4.6 is considered to be acceptable and the variation is a reasonable response for the site. Council’s previous KLEP dedicated a 7.6m FBL and this control unfortunately wasn’t transferred across when the current amendment to the LEP occurred.

 

14.  The other areas of non-compliance are the side setbacks of the building which do not comply with the 6m and 9m minimum separation distances pursuant to the provisions of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG). The front setback also fails to comply with the Kogarah Development Control Plan (KDCP) minimum of 5.5m. The site is very unique in its location, constrained by topographic features and isolated in its nature as there are no immediately adjoining residential properties. Given its location and site constraints the non-compliances in this case are considered to be reasonable and will not adversely affect the amenity of residential neighbours and it will not create a negative visual impact on the public domain.

 

15.  A key feature and public benefit of the proposal is the provision (by way of an easement to Council) of a staircase along the northern side of the building and a 2m wide public walkway at the rear of the Site adjacent to the Kogarah Bay. Details of the treatment and design of the accessway will need to be provided in accordance with Council’s Asset Management requirements and guidelines. If approval is granted, appropriate conditions have been included. Ownership and future operational and management arrangements relating to the public accessway have been considered, Council’s preferred option is to have “right of access” over the Site. Conditions have been included which appropriately address this issue.

 

16.  On 25 August 2017 a Planning Proposal (“PP”) was submitted to Council seeking the consolidation of the three allotments and the following is proposed;

a)   Amend the Floor Space Ratio Map to increase the floor space ratio (“FSR”) from 2:1 to 2.5:1.

b)   Amend the Foreshore Building Line map to reduce the foreshore building line (“FBL”).

c)   Amend Schedule 1 Additional Permitted Uses to enable development for the purposes of a “restaurant or café” to be permitted with development consent on the subject site.

 

17.  The PP also included the provision of a 6m wide public boardwalk and associated monetary contribution for associated domain works. The PP remains undetermined as Council is in the preliminary stages of developing a Foreshore Access Policy and it was unclear how the public works were to be structured. Considering the uncertainty and time delays of this process the Applicant decided to submit this Development Application which has been designed to address the current planning controls applicable to the Site.

 

18.  The planning proposal was referred to the Georges River Design Review Panel (DRP). The panel provided an “in principle” approval subject to a series of design suggestions to improve the relationship of the building to Princes Highway and its interface with the waterway at the rear. Details of the DRP assessment are included later in this report. The current design has considered the comments and made relevant changes to address the Panels issues. Council’s Urban Designer has also made comments in regards to the proposed scheme and the Applicant has amended the design to address the issues raised.

 

19.  After several meetings with the Applicant, their design team and Council Officers the proposal was amended on 11 December 2018 and 19 January 2019 to incorporate design amendments which aim to improve the functionality and visual appearance of the building whilst also including a 2m wide public walkway and associated staircase at the rear of the Site to connect the Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve - North (Dover Park) through to Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve - South. The inclusion of direct access to the foreshore and a dedication for public use is a significant public benefit to the locality as this dedication is not a legal requirement.

 

Conclusion

20.  The application has been assessed having regard to the Matters for Consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the provisions of the relevant State Environmental Planning Policies, Local Environmental Plans and Development Control Plans. The proposal is considered to be a suitable urban design solution and reasonable planning response given the Sites context and constraints as a result the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

 

Report in Full

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL 

21.  The DA seeks consent for the demolition of all existing structures on the subject sites, and the construction of a part six-storey, part eight storey residential flat building (RFB) comprising of forty (40) residential apartments (1 x 1 bedroom, 30 x 2 bedroom, 9 x 3 bedroom apartments), two (2) levels of basement car parking containing seventy two (72) car parking spaces and the inclusion of a rooftop communal area.

 

22.  Further details of the proposal are as follows;

 

Demolition

The proposal involves the demolition of all existing structures. The existing structures to be demolished includes the existing part one, part three storey RFB located at 474 Princes Highway, and the single storey dwelling house (No.472 Princes Highway) and associated swimming pool located at 468 Princes Highway, Blakehurst.

 

There are a number of mature trees located at the front of the site which require removal given the location of the building footprint.

 

Lower Basement Plan

- 46 car parking spaces including 3 accessible spaces

- 7 bicycle spaces

- Lifts, staircase access

 

Basement Plan

- 26 car parking spaces including 2 accessible spaces

- 1 designated car wash bay

- Bike racks catering for 18 bicycles

- Lift and stair access

- 2 x garbage rooms (one including a garbage hoist)

- 36 independent storage spaces including a designated storage area for ‘penthouse apartments’.

 

Lower Ground Floor Plan

- Living spaces for 8 apartments (7 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom)

- 8 private courtyards

- Two points of access to the designated area of communal open space at the rear which has an area of 200sqm.

- A 2m wide pathway provided at the rear for public access.

 

Upper Ground Floor

- Upper level bedrooms for units AG01, AG02, BLG01-BLG06.

- 1 x 1 bedroom apartment and 1 x 2 bedroom apartment

- Formal public staircase access along the northern side and associated landscaping to access the rear foreshore area.

 

Ground Floor

- Two main entries, one to the northern part of the building (Building ‘B’) off the secondary road and the second entry to the southern part of the building (Building ‘A’) off Princes Highway

- Two main lobbies each with a lift and stairs

- 6 x 2 bedroom units

- 2m wide public link along the northern side of the site providing access to the foreshore.

- Main vehicular driveway access off the secondary street.

 

Level 1 Plan

- 4 x 2 bedroom apartments with associated balconies (A1.01, A1.02, B1.02, B1.03)

- 2 x 3 bedroom apartments with balconies and amenities (A1.03 and B1.01)

- Two lobbies and  area for services

 

Level 2 Plan

- 4 x 2 bedroom apartments with associated balconies (A2.01, A2.02, B2.02, B2.03)

- 2 x 3 bedroom apartments with balconies and amenities (A2.03 and B2.01)

- Two lobbies and an area for services

 

Level 3

- 4 x 2 bedroom apartments with associated balconies (A3.01, A3.02, B3.02, B3.03)

- 2 x 3 bedroom apartments with associated balconies (A3.03, B3.01)

- Two main lobbies, stair and lift access

 

Level 4

- 4 x 2 bedroom apartments with associated balconies (A4.01, A4.02, B4.02, B4.03)

- 2 x 3 bedroom apartments with balconies and amenities (A4.03 and B4.01)

- Two lobbies and  area for services

 

Level 5

- Roof top communal open space having an area of 580sqm.

- Lift and stair access

- Two bedrooms and associated amenities for unit A4.01.

 

Landscaping

The proposal includes an area of over 428sqm of deep soil area. This area is predominantly at the rear of the site (5m by 85.67m). There are other additional smaller sections of deep soil at the front of the site. 

 

The principal communal open space area for the development will be located on the roof top with an area of some 580sqm. The roof top terrace does not include any additional amenities and a condition will require the inclusion of a WC and BBQ to make the space inviting and for an updated landscape plan to be prepared to include hedges and green spaces on the roof.

 

A small centralised pergola is also considered acceptable as it will provide some protection against the elements and its generally open style reducing its visibility and bulk.

 

The overall deep soil area has been reduced by the dedication of the 2m public link and access stair along the northern side, however, the amount of deep soil that will remain is considered to be greater than the existing currently provided on site.

 

Amendments

The application was amended on 11 December 2018 and 18 January 2019 as requested by Council and the following outlines the schedule of changes;

 

1.      Extension of the fire staircase at the lower basement level which creates a larger setback at the front on the ground floor to allow for increased planting.

2.      The private courtyards on the roof have been removed and the whole rooftop is dedicated as communal open space.

3.      The perimeter planting and associated balustrade around the rooftop has been setback 2m from the edge of the parapet to reduce the visibility of this level.

4.      A secondary internal accessway has been provided along the southern side of the building at the lower ground floor level to improve access to the rear area of communal open space.

5.      The main entries to the building from the Princes Highway have been enlarged and become more formal and legible.

6.      A greater number of planter boxes and landscaping has been provided at the front of the site off the Princes Highway.

7.      Mechanical ventilation and associated vents and shafts have been included along the front of the building.

8.      A public site through link has been created and integrated into the design by the provision of a public staircase along the northern side of the Site and the dedication (via a right of carriageway) of a 2m public walkway along the Foreshore (rear of the Site).

9.      Further details have been provided by a Traffic Consultant to ensure compliant sight distances can be achieved from the driveway when turning onto Princes Highway.

10.    Reconfiguration of Apartment A4.01 to be setback further from the street, eastern and southern sides which reduces the bulk along this corner of the building at the fourth and fifth level.

 

Figure 2: Photomontage of the front of the originally proposed residential flat building

Courtesy: Architecture and Building Works

 

Figure 3: Photomontage of the front of the proposed residential flat building as amended Courtesy: Architecture and Building Works

 

HISTORY

23.  As previously mentioned a Planning Proposal (PP) was submitted in August 2017 and proposed the construction of a 5 - 7 storey building containing 56 apartments and two basement levels catering for 107 car parking spaces. A section through the proposed building is provided at Figure 4 below.

 

24.  Although this scheme proposed a public dedication of a 6m boardwalk, it was quite a large and dominating building offering a Foreshore Building Line setback of only 6m whilst the DA proposes a rear setback of between 7.2m to 12m. The rear setback as proposed is more substantial than the PP option.

 

25.  The PP also included ancillary works that included the construction of a new jetty and stair access along the southern side of the Site. NSW Fisheries provided their concurrence for these proposed works. As part of this application no works are forward of the Mean High Watermark and therefore the development will not affect the waterway in any way.

 

26.  The PP has been placed on hold as the preparation of the Foreshore Access Policy is in its very preliminary stage of development and this led to uncertainty surrounding the final design of any public foreshore dedication and impacts on the determination of the PP. As a result the Applicant has lodged this DA for a development that has been designed to consider the Council’s current controls.

 

Figure 4: Section through the proposed building design as part of the Planning Proposal

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND LOCALITY

27.  The subject site comprises of three allotments with the following legal descriptions;

·    Lot A in DP420623 (468 Princes Highway)

·    Lot 1 in DP223068 (470 Princes Highway)

·    Lot 10 in DP633892 (472-474 Princes Highway)

 

28.  Numbers 472-474 Princes Highway comprises of a three storey rendered residential flat building including a large garage structure at the front of the building. A driveway providing access to the rear of the property is provided along the front of 472 Princes Highway and acts as a ‘right of carriageway’. This site is an irregular shaped allotment with a frontage to Princes Highway of some 53.215m, rear length to the foreshore of 49.82m and depths of 29.075m and 20.895m.

 

29.  Number 470 Princes Highway has a frontage of 16.815m to Princes Highway rear length to the foreshore of 19.385m and varying depths of 20.795m and 29.075m. Existing on site is a single storey dwelling house with a timber deck and grassed area at the rear.

 

30.  Number 468 Princes Highway has a frontage of 9.495m and a rear boundary length of 16.465m to the foreshore with varying depths of 20.795m and 26.17m. Existing on site is an above ground swimming pool which is utilised and forms part of the dwelling house on 470 Princes Highway although it sits on a separate allotment. Both these properties have lawn at the rear adjoining the foreshore and are heavily vegetated at the front.

 

31.  Unlike 468 and 472 Princes Highway, 474 Princes Highway comprises of hard paved and concreted areas with minimal vegetation.

 

32.  The proposed development relies on the amalgamation of the three sites and the combined area and dimensions of the subject site are as follows:

 

Total Site Area

2,301.9sqm

Frontage to Princes Highway

79.53m

Rear boundary (to the foreshore)

85.67m

Side  boundaries

South

North

 

20.895m

31.29m

 

33.  The subject site is located on the eastern side of Princes Highway between Townson Street to the north and Tom Ugly’s Bridge to the south. The Site has a substantial fall from the street frontage to the rear, of some 6.5m.

 

34.  Immediately to the north is a heavily vegetated reserve known as Tom Ugly’s Reserve (north) also known as Dover Park which includes public angled parking at the front with access off Princes Highway along a secondary roadway. This reserve is very difficult to access from street level. To the south is the continuation of the Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve (south). To the east is the foreshore (Kogarah Bay) and immediately to the west across the road is a small local parkland/reserve and to the south-west, the medium density residential flat building known as the “Seabreeze Apartments”.

 

35.  The site is within close proximity to the following amenities, Carss Park, Blakehurst High School and Southgate Shopping Centre at Sylvania. Across the road, to the north-west of the site are a series of small local shops which include Bayblu Seafood Restaurant and Smiths Seafood.

 

Photo 1: Front of part of the site being the residential flat building at

472 Princes Highway

Photo 2: Looking back at the site from Tom Ugly’s Reserve South

 

Photo 3: The rear of the house at 470 Princes Highway from the foreshore

 

Photo 4: The rear of No.472 Princes Highway along the foreshore and

the boundary to Tom Ugly’s Reserve South

Photo 5: Immediately adjoining development to the west (public reserve)

 

Photo 6: Seabreeze Apartments to the south-west of the site along Princes Highway

 

Photo 7: Existing driveway from Princes Highway providing access to the rear of the site

 

Photo 8: Rear of the site currently used for parking

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

36.  Compliance with the relevant state environmental planning policies is summarised in the table, and discussed in more detail below.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy

Complies

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

Yes

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

Yes

 

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment

37.  The main aims and objectives of this plan are (not limited to);

·      to maintain and improve the water quality and river flows of the Georges River and its tributaries and ensure that development is managed in a manner that is in keeping with the national, State, regional and local significance of the Catchment,

 

·      to protect and enhance the environmental quality of the Catchment for the benefit of all users through the management and use of the resources in the Catchment in an ecologically sustainable manner,

 

·      to ensure consistency with local environmental plans and also in the delivery of the principles of ecologically sustainable development in the assessment of development within the Catchment where there is potential to impact adversely on groundwater and on the water quality and river flows within the Georges River or its tributaries,

 

·      to establish a consistent and coordinated approach to environmental planning and assessment for land along the Georges River and its tributaries and to promote integrated catchment management policies and programs in the planning and management of the Catchment,

 

38.  The current properties drain to Kogarah Bay and the system and method of stormwater disposal proposed will be consistent with the existing situation. The application is accompanied by concept stormwater plans prepared by Australian Consulting Engineers. Stormwater is proposed to be drained by gravity to Kogarah Bay. A pump out system is acceptable for the basement which would also accommodate a silt arrestor pit and holding tank.

 

39.  This method of stormwater detention has been referred to Council’s Engineering Section. No objection has been raised in respect of the management and disposal of stormwater subject to the imposition of conditions if consent is granted. All stormwater from the proposed development can be treated in accordance with Council’s Water Management Policy and will satisfy the relevant provisions of the Deemed State Environmental Planning Policy – Georges River Catchment.

 

40.  The proposal is not considered to have an adverse impact on the waterway and the Georges River catchment. The proposal aims to protect the existing water quality and use and functionality of the catchment. The proposal is not affecting the quality of the waterway in any way. There is currently a small manmade boat ramp centrally located at the rear of the Site and it is proposed to remove this and extend the sandstone fencing which will improve the waterway by restricting direct access to it. In addition, the current development on site has removed any original vegetation along the embankment. Development adjoining the waterway has been largely concreted and at the rear of the RFB adjoining the waterway is utilised for car parking.

 

41.  The proposal is not considered to be inconsistent with the aims, objectives and purpose of the Regional Plan.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

42.  BASIX Certificate No.952773M_02 dated 7 September 2018 has been issued for the proposed development and the development meets the provisions and minimum requirements of BASIX in terms of water, thermal comfort and Energy efficiency.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

43.  SEPP 55 aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land in order to reduce the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment.

 

44.  Clause 7 requires contamination and remediation to be considered in determining a development application. The consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of development on land unless it has considered whether or not the land is contaminated. 

 

45.  A review of the site history indicates that the site has been used for residential purposes for extended periods of time, and such uses and/or development are not typically associated with activities that would result in the contamination of the site.  The Geotechnical Report that accompanies the application prepared by EI Australia does not identify any potential contaminants at the site. In this regard, no further assessment is warranted with regard to site contamination. A condition will be included to ensure that if during the demolition, excavation and construction process any expected finds are uncovered they are appropriately considered.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

46.  The aim of the Policy is to facilitate the effective delivery of infrastructure across the State.

 

47.  Subdivision 2 of the Infrastructure SEPP relates to Development that is in or adjacent to road corridors and road reservations. Princes Highway is a Classified Road and in accordance with Clause 101 (development with frontage to a Classified Road) concurrence from the Roads and Maritime Services Authority (RMS) is required. Initially RMS required further information in respect to swept paths to ensure cars exiting the site onto Princes Highway comply with the Australian Standards in respect to manoeuvring onto this roadway and associated sight distances were satisfactory. The Site has the benefit of obtaining some access off a small secondary roadway rather than direct access onto the Princes Highway. This further mitigates possible conflicts. Currently the RFB contains four garages which directly front Princes Highway and so the new development will improve accessibility to and from the Site.

 

48.  Varga Traffic Consultants provided additional information and swept path diagrams for a B99 vehicle leaving the Site which will satisfy the Australian Standards.  The swept turning path diagrams were prepared using the Autodesk Vehicle Tracking 2018 program in accordance with the requirements of AS2890.1 – 2004 and confirm that entry and exit movements can occur simultaneously and without any difficulty. Refer to Figure 5 below.

 

Figure 5: Proposed swept turning path (courtesy Varga Traffic Consultants)

 

49.  After receiving the additional details RMS were satisfied with the information and provided their concurrence subject to the imposition of conditions if consent is to be issued. RMS has imposed a standard condition to ensure that the development complies with sight distance requirements especially as the development accesses a busy classified road. Varga Traffic Consultants provided further information dated 11 December 2018 to confirm compliance can be achieved prior to issuing a determination. The traffic consultants stated that “the proposed site access driveway is to be located within a public car parking area which is located immediately to the north of the site, adjacent to the Princes Highway. The location of the driveway will enable exiting drivers to have a clear view along the full length of the public car parking area to observe any vehicles approaching in the public car park.

 

The location of the public car parking exit driveway on the Princes Highway provides exiting drivers with a clear view of traffic approaching in the Princes Highway for a distance of more than 150m to the north which is well in excess of the minimum gap sight distance of 97m required by Clause 3.4 Sight Distance at Property Entrances in the Austroads publication Guide to Road Design Part 4A Unsignalised and Signalised Intersections (2009).”

 

50.  Of importance when considering the proposal is that new development does not compromise the effective and ongoing operation and functionality of the Princes Highway (classified road) and to ensure the design of the development provides for safe access to and from the Site. The application was accompanied by a detailed traffic assessment prepared by Varga Traffic Consultants who considered the potential traffic generated by the development and its impact on Princes Highway. The development will generate some 21 vehicular trip movements per hour in the peak period which represents an increase of 14 movements per hour when compared to the traffic generation created by the current uses. In respect to traffic generation the traffic assessment concluded that the “projected increase in traffic activity as a consequence of the development proposal is minimal, representing just 1 vehicle trip every 2-3min during peak periods, less than other times and will clearly not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity”.

 

51.  The design of the development is considered to be acceptable and satisfies the provisions outlined in the Infrastructure SEPP.

 

Draft Remediation of Land SEPP

52.  The Department of Planning and Environment has announced a Draft Remediation of Land SEPP, which will repeal and replace the current State Environmental Planning Policy No 55—Remediation of Land.

 

53.  The main changes proposed include the expansion of categories of remediation work which requires development consent, a greater involvement of principal certifying authorities particularly in relation to remediation works that can be carried out without development consent, more comprehensive guidelines for Councils and certifiers and the clarification of the contamination information to be included on Section 149 Planning Certificates.

 

54.  Whilst the proposed SEPP will retain the key operational framework of SEPP 55, it will adopt a more modern approach to the management of contaminated land. The Draft SEPP will not alter or affect the findings in respect to contamination of the Site. Appropriate conditions are included in respect to any potential asbestos removal and an expected finds condition will ensure that if any traces of contamination is found appropriate measures in accordance with EPA requirements are implemented.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

55.  The Vegetation SEPP regulates clearing of native vegetation on urban land and land zoned for environmental conservation/management that does not require development consent.

 

56.  The Vegetation SEPP applies to clearing of:

 

(a) Native vegetation above the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS) threshold where a proponent will require an approval from the Native Vegetation Panel established under the Local Land Services Amendment Act 2016; and 

(b) Vegetation below the BOS threshold where a proponent will require a permit from Council if that vegetation is identified in the council’s development control plan (DCP). 

 

57.  The Vegetation SEPP repeals clause 5.9 and 5.9AA of the Standard Instrument - Principal Local Environmental Plan with regulation of the clearing of vegetation (including native vegetation) below the BOS threshold through any applicable DCP.

 

58.  The proposed development involves the removal of several trees at the front of the Site which affect the location of the building but mainly the driveway through to the basement. An Arboricultural report was lodged with the application (prepared by NewLeaf). The report assessed a total of twenty-one (21) trees within the property (refer to Figure 6). Most trees are rated of medium significance with one tree identified as Tree 10 which is rated of high significance. This tree is a Sydney Red Gum (Angophora Costata) and is located within the building footprint. The Applicant was requested to reconsider the siting of the building to retain this species however given the landform and configuration of the site the building and driveway the design cannot be adjusted to retain this tree. Council’s Landscape Officer has acknowledged the importance of the tree and a preference for its retention but has accepted that any redevelopment on the site will threaten its existence and has recommended a series of conditions including the provision of replacement planting to compensate for the loss.

 

59.  It should also be noted that although the tree is significant it is not a highly visible species and is located within part of the Site which is constrained and has not respected or valued its importance. The arboricultural report believes that to compensate for the loss of this species replacement planting should occur with some four (4) large (12m at maturity) trees and some twenty (20) medium to large trees (reaching 8-12m at maturity) as well as some additional landscaping. The development will be conditioned to reflect comments from Council’s Landscape Officer and also shall be implemented in accordance with the recommendations of the arboricultural report.

 

Figure 6: Location of trees to be removed on site (extract from the Arboricultural report)

 

Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016

60.  The Biodiversity Conservation Act, 2016 was formally implemented to conserve and protect biodiversity values and systems across the State. The legislation lists threatened species and ecological communities (EEC’s) and outlines processes and procedures in the assessment of these valuable and sensitive environmental species and communities.

 

61.  The Red Gum (Angophora Costata) is not listed as a Threatened Species within the Act but is included as part of a group of the species which form EEC’s being the Eastern Suburbs Coastal Banksia and also as part of the Southern Sydney sheltered forest. As such it is important to go through the process of understanding the significance of the species.

 

62.  First step of the process in accordance with the Act is to see whether the tree is threatened. It does not fall within the designated Threatened Species. The second stage is to see whether it forms part of an EEC or remnant vegetation of an EEC.

 

63.  Council’s mapping system identifies the site having vegetation that forms part of the Coastal Sandstone Foreshore Forest (refer to Figure 7 below). This is not identified as an EEC within the Act and Council’s mapping system which also shows where biodiversity and EEC’s exist does not highlight this site or any vegetation/area within the immediate surrounds of the Site. The Applicants arboricultural assessment acknowledged that the tree and some vegetation on site formed part of the Sandstone Foreshore Forest and stated “the vegetation on site appears to be identified as Coastal Sandstone Foreshore Forest according to Sutherland Shire Council vegetation mapping. Some species are consistent with this vegetation community. Landscape planting areas associated with the development should use plant species from this vegetation community where possible”.

 

64.  On 26 March 2019, the Applicant provided additional information from a Qualified Ecologist who conducted a detailed assessment and stated that “The property is mapped as supporting Sydney Coastal Dry Sclerophyll Forests consistent with Smooth barked Apple Coast Banksia/Cheese Tree open forest on sandstone slopes on the Foreshores of the drowned river valleys of Sydney. Neither the vegetation class nor the plant community are listed under The Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 or the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 of NSW. Review of the species identified in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment (New Leaf Arboriculture 2018) suggests that none of the species on site are listed as vulnerable, threatened or endangered under the EPBC Act 1999 or BC Act 2016. Based on published information available for the study area we confirm that the site does not support any Endangered Ecological Community, nor does the existing vegetation include species listed under the EPBC Act 1999 or the BC Act 2016.”

 

Figure 7: Council’s vegetation mapping showing the Site to have the presence of Coastal Sandstone Foreshore Forest (highlighted in pink)

 

65.  The removal of the trees on site will not alter or adversely affect the vegetation in or adjoining the Site. The proposed development will substantially improve the number of trees and vegetation and the compensatory planting and quality of landscaping proposed will be a big improvement and will be in the public interest. The aims and objectives and intentions of the SEPP have been considered.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Coastal Management) 2018

66.  SEPP (Coastal Management) 2018 updates and consolidates three previous SEPPs (SEPP 14 Coastal Wetlands, SEPP 26 Littoral Rainforests, SEPP 71 Coastal Protection) into one integrated Policy and is a matter for consideration for the current DA.

 

67.  Under SEPP (Coastal Management) 2018, the subject site is mapped as a Coastal Environment area and a Coastal Use area. These have the following management objectives under the SEPP:

 

(a) to protect and enhance the coastal environmental values and natural processes of coastal waters, estuaries, coastal lakes and coastal lagoons, and enhance natural character, scenic value, biological diversity and ecosystem integrity,

(b) to reduce threats to and improve the resilience of coastal waters, estuaries, coastal lakes and coastal lagoons, including in response to climate change,

(c)  to maintain and improve water quality and estuary health,

(d) to support the social and cultural values of coastal waters, estuaries, coastal lakes and coastal lagoons,

(e) to maintain the presence of beaches, dunes and the natural features of foreshores, taking into account the beach system operating at the relevant place,

(f)   to maintain and, where practicable, improve public access, amenity and use of beaches, foreshores, headlands and rock platforms.

 

68.  The following is an assessment of the matters for consideration listed under the SEPP as applicable to the Coastal Environment Area and Coastal Use Area.

 

SEPP Control

Proposal

Complies

13. Development on land within the coastal environment area

 

 

(1) Development consent must not be granted to development on land that is within the coastal environment area unless the consent authority has considered whether the proposed development is likely to cause an adverse impact on the following:

 

 

(a)  the integrity and resilience of the biophysical, hydrological (surface and groundwater) and ecological environment,

Surface water runoff is to be managed in accordance with the approved stormwater management plan and relevant conditions imposed. The proposal is generally satisfactory subject to conditions.

Yes

(b)  coastal environmental values and natural coastal processes,

 

The proposal is used for residential purposes and will not unreasonably impact the coastal environmental values and there is no direct impact on coastal processes.

Yes

(c)  the water quality of the marine estate (within the meaning of the Marine Estate Management Act 2014), in particular, the cumulative impacts of the proposed development on any of the sensitive coastal lakes identified in Schedule 1,

The water quality of the bay will not be affected by the proposal. The site is not located on any of the sensitive coastal lakes identified in Schedule 1.

Yes

(d)  marine vegetation, native vegetation and fauna and their habitats, undeveloped headlands and rock platforms,

 

There will be no unreasonable impact upon these features. The site will be landscaped in accordance with the submitted landscape plan to replace and embellish existing vegetation along the foreshore.

 

There are no works proposed that are likely to threaten fish or marine habitats. The application is accompanied by a Marine Ecology Assessment prepared by Ocean Environmental Consulting which conducted a field study of the marine environment and did not find that any endangered species, ecological communities or vulnerable species that were found within the vicinity of the site.

Yes

(e)  existing public open space and safe access to and along the foreshore, beach, headland or rock platform for members of the public, including persons with a disability,

The subject site is privately owned, however public access to the foreshore for the general public is proposed as part of this application and this is a significant public benefit as there is no public access currently.

 

In providing this access and improving the use and environmental quality of the rear of the development by softly landscaping spaces and also improving fencing above the sea wall these are considered to be benefits to the bay.

Yes

(f)   Aboriginal cultural heritage, practices and places,

 

The allotment is not known as a place of Aboriginal significance. There is no impact in terms of Aboriginal heritage.

Yes

(g)  the use of the surf zone.

 

The development is not located near the surf zone.

NA

(2) Development consent must not be granted to development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that:

 

 

(a) the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid an adverse impact referred to in subclause (1), or

The proposal is generally satisfactory in terms of impact as discussed throughout this report.

Yes

(b) if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided—the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact, or

The proposal is generally satisfactory and has been designed to reduce impacts. Conditions will be included to ensure that impacts on the waterway and its natural processes are mitigated i.e. especially through the construction process in that stockpiling of construction materials and waste materials are located towards the front of the site, not at the rear.

Yes

(c) if that impact cannot be minimised—the development will be managed to mitigate that impact

The proposal is generally satisfactory and has been designed to minimise impacts.

Yes

14 Development on land within the coastal use area

 

 

(1) Development consent must not be granted to development on land that is within the coastal use area unless the consent authority:

 

 

(a) has considered whether the proposed development is likely to cause an adverse impact on the following:

 

 

(i) existing, safe access to and along the foreshore, beach, headland or rock platform for members of the public, including persons with a disability,

The proposed accessway is intended to be a level form of access connecting the two adjoining areas of public open space. Due to the steep slope of the site providing access to people with a disability is difficult to access the foreshore but they will be able to obtain level access from the south (Tom Ugly’s Reserve).

 

This issue will be part of the Foreshore Access Policy currently being prepared by Council.

Yes

(ii) overshadowing, wind funnelling and the loss of views from public places to foreshores,

There are no adverse or unreasonable overshadowing impacts generated by the proposal to the public domain in respect to creating any wind tunnels or loss of views to the water.

Yes

(iii) the visual amenity and scenic qualities of the coast, including coastal headlands,

The building has been designed to improve the permeability of the Site and adjoining area and aims to improve the visual quality of the foreshore.

Yes

(iv) Aboriginal cultural heritage, practices and places,

The property is not a known site of Aboriginal heritage.

Yes

(v) cultural and built environment heritage, and

The site does not contain or adjoin any heritage items apart from Tom Ugly’s Bridge however this heritage item is not within the visual catchment of the site.

Yes

(b) is satisfied that:

 

 

(i) the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid an adverse impact referred to in paragraph (a), or

Proposal is generally satisfactory in terms of impact as discussed throughout this report.

Yes

(ii) if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided—the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact, or

The development does not result in any unreasonable visual impact.

Yes

(iii) if that impact cannot be minimised—the development will be managed to mitigate that impact, and

The development does not result in any unreasonable impacts.

Yes

(c) has taken into account the surrounding coastal and built environment, and the bulk, scale and size of the proposed development.

 

Development is generally satisfactory in terms of the built form controls in Kogarah LEP 2012 and DCP 2013.

 

The development form and scale is not inconsistent with the built form immediately adjoining development and is an anticipated urban design outcome for the site.

Yes

 

69.  Generally, the proposed development is consistent with the management objectives of the SEPP. In fact the provision of access to the foreshore will enhance the appreciation of this area and will provide linkages through to the adjoining areas of open space for the public who currently cannot access this part of the Bay. There will be no alteration to the visual quality and amenity of the foreshore as there are no works proposed that directly affect the waterway.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development

70.  State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings (SEPP 65) was gazetted on 26 July 2002 and applies to the assessment of DAs for residential flat developments of three or more storeys in height and containing at least four dwellings. Amendment 3 to SEPP 65 commenced on 17 July 2015 and implemented various changes including the introduction of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG) to replace the Residential Flat Design Code. Given the nature of the development proposed, SEPP 65 applies.

 

71.  Clause 28(2) of SEPP65 requires that the consent authority take into consideration the following as part of the determination of DAs to which SEPP 65 applies:

 

a)      the advice (if any) obtained from the design review panel, and

b) the design quality of the development when evaluated in accordance with the design quality principles, and

c)  the Apartment Design Guide.

  

72.  The Applicant lodged a Planning Proposal (PP) in August 2017 and the proposed design of the development was very similar to the built form proposed as part of this Development Application. The PP was referred to the Design Review Panel (DRP) on two occasions meetings held on 2 November 2017 and 1 February 2018 having regard to each of the nine (9) Design Quality Principles. The DRP was satisfied with the overall design “in principle” however raised a series of issues which are summarised and addressed in the Table 2 below.

 

73.  In addition to satisfying the nine (9) design principles, the proposal generally satisfies the Apartment Design Guidelines in respect to the design quality of the building and its apartments apart from a few areas of non-compliance which are detailed in this report. The Tables below provide a comprehensive assessment against the principles, objectives and controls of SEPP 65 and the ADG.

 

Application of SEPP 65

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

3 - Definitions

Complies with definition of “Residential Apartment Development” (RAD)

The proposal complies with the definition.

Yes

4 - Application of Policy

Development involves the erection of a new RFB, substantial redevelopment or refurbishment of a RFB or conversion of an existing building into a RFB. The definition of an RFB in the SEPP includes mixed use developments.

Erection of an RFB which satisfies the SEPP’s definition of this residential land use.

Yes

50 – Development Applications

Design verification statement provided by qualified designer

Registered Architect Name and Registration No.

Design Verification Statement provided by Registered Architect Mr Jim Apostolou  (Registration No.7490)

Yes

 

Part 2 Design Quality Principles under the SEPP

 SEPP 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings 

DRP Comment

Amended Design

Context and Neighbouring 

Character 

Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context is the key natural and built features of an area, their relationship and the character they create when combined. It also includes social, economic, health and environmental conditions. 

 

Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of an area’s existing or future character. Well designed buildings respond to and enhance the qualities and identity of the area including the adjacent sites, streetscape and neighbourhood. 

 

Consideration of local context is important for all sites, including sites in established areas, those undergoing change or identified for change. 

 

 

The site is located on the Georges River overlooking Kogarah Bay and comprises of two (2) properties (472 Princes Highway and 474 Princes Highway).

 

The site is adjacent to Tom Ugly’s Reserve which is a public park with car parking, significant trees, waterfront access, and public toilets. It has spectacular views to the east towards Captain Cook Bridge and is part of a wider network of public open space along the foreshore.

 

 

The site is generally landlocked by two areas of open space. It is a unique site that sits on its own without having the benefit of adjoining residential development.

 

Due to its unique location and awkward configuration the building as amended seeks to create an interesting and varied built form that addresses the street and has its prime orientation to the water. The consolidated nature of the development and massing seeks to break up the visual bulk and scale. The length and form is contemporary in nature and will be similar to the Seabreeze Apartments at 765 Princes Highway.

Built Form and Scale 

Good design achieves a scale, bulk and height appropriate to the existing or desired future character of the street and surrounding buildings.

 

Good design also achieves an appropriate built form for a site and the building’s purpose in terms of building alignments, proportions, building type, articulation and the manipulation of building elements.

 

Appropriate built form defines the public domain, contributes to the character of streetscapes and parks, including their views and vistas, and provides internal amenity and outlook. 

The proposed scheme presented is a development of the preferred Option 7 which proposes:

·    An FSR of 2.5:1

·    Two (2) buildings with a 6m gap located two thirds from the southern end

·    A 6m foreshore setback (including 3m private open space) and a 7 storey development presenting as 5 storeys to the Princes Highway

 

The proposed footprint of the building creates very narrow interface on the northern and southern boundaries.

 

 

 

 

Furthermore the proposed 6m space between the buildings is highly problematic with regard to use and public or private benefit. It is unclear whether it would visually read as two (2) separate buildings given the angle of the gap and the orientation of the Princes Highway. It is recommended that a revised footprint of a single consolidated building setback from the reserve to the south to accommodate access from Princes Highway to the foreshore park. The revised footprint at the north should accommodate access from the Princes Highway to the foreshore walk and a better transition between the development and the reserve to the north and effective connection from the proposed foreshore walkway to the reserve and to the car park.

 

 

The built form should address privacy issues between the foreshore walk (as proposed to be dedicated as public open space) through a change of level increasing the RL of the private open spaces by 400mm allowing a 1200mm fence which will allow views out to the water but will prevent views from the walkway to the private spaces.

 

The public benefit provided by the 3m foreshore walkway could be greatly enhanced by provision of boardwalks extending over the water to provide spaces of interest where people could congregate away from the through pedestrian traffic.

 

The addition of significant tree planting to the Princes Highway interface (within Council and RMS owned land) would also enhance the visual amenity of this section of the Princes Highway complementing natural vegetation on the opposite side of the highway. This is a key opportunity and would visually screen the proposed building height and therefore every effort should be made to achieve this.

 

The northern building setback is still very tight and will create visual privacy issues to bedrooms on lower levels. It is recommended that a tapered straight wall should replace the zigzagged building footprint; this should produce a minimum landscape setback of 5m on the eastern corner of the building. The public stair should be increased in width to minimum 2m (It is noted that changing the northern wall on lower and upper ground would also assist the 2 bed + study units on the north east corner, which currently have non-compliant internal habitable rooms without windows).

 

The proposed batten fencing should be removed and replaced with sandstone walls. The foreshore walk requires further landscape design development including new tree planting and furniture.

 

The Princes Highway frontage requires further review to provide an appropriate built form and landscape edge, including:

·    Increase native tree planting and include improvements to the street verge within the proposed VPA.

·    Replace all batten fencing with sandstone walls.

·    Relocate substation to a less prominent position, and ensure its visual impacts are minimised and expand and improve the new entry to the park on the south west corner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Substantially reduce the amount of glazing facing the Princes Highway.

 

The design has been amended to address the issues raised by the Panel.

 

The building has been integrated to form one building rather than be split up in two as per the Panels preferred design option and there is no gap between the buildings.

 

 

 

 

The provision of the staircase along the northern side of the building provides a better interface between the development and the public open space to the north.

 

The design and treatment of the boardwalk has been addressed via conditions to ensure compliance with Council’s provisions. The design of the walkway should be consistent with the concrete finish of the public accessway along Tom Ugly’s Reserve to the south. This is considered to be the most appropriate and sympathetic finish that will be level and align with the existing pathway.

 

This is also an easily maintained finish and the fencing along the waterway will have to be upgraded to include sandstone elements. There are sections of the fencing above the seawall which are mesh and this is an unattractive and inappropriate finish. The proposal will be conditioned appropriately to provide a consistent finish.

 

There will be a slight level change between the public walkway and the private rear courtyards to provide a distinction between the public and private domain. Fencing to the private courtyards will be transparent and conditioned accordingly.

 

 

 

 

 

Provided as part of the DA and considered to be a significant public benefit as legally this is not a requirement.

 

 

 

 

 

There will be significant additional planting along the rear of the site (foreshore) and at the front which is currently substantially hard paved area (area within the front setback of the RFB) The treatment of the development at the front will improve the visual appearance of the development when viewed from the streetscape.

 

 

 

The building has been modified and there will be no opportunity provided for any mutual overlooking.

 

The building has been setback between 7.2m – 12m providing for private courtyards with lengths of 10m. 3m of this area will comprise of deep soil areas which can accommodate large trees.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These details will be conditioned appropriately.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A condition has been included that will require the Applicant to upgrade and landscape the front public verge as part of the works so that the front of the site is well landscaped and this area is not neglected as it is an integrated component of the development even though it is public land.

 

A condition will require the substation to be relocated as its current location in the south west corner comprises of an area of deep soil and so the provision of 1-2 mature trees and associated landscaping is a more advantageous use of this space as it will provide additional screening to this side of the development and will create a better relationship to the reserve located to the south.

 

In accordance with the DRP advice and also in response to the acoustic assessment the windows along Princes Highway address secondary rooms and ancillary areas (study/bathrooms/hallway) which will not be able to be openable and as such these spaces will rely on mechanical ventilation and acoustic impacts from the busy roadway will be mitigated.

Density 

Good design achieves a high level of amenity for residents and each apartment, resulting in a density appropriate to the site and its context. 

Appropriate densities are consistent with the area’s existing or projected population. Appropriate densities can be sustained by existing or proposed infrastructure, public transport, access to jobs, community facilities and the environment.

Satisfactory

Acceptable and provides for a variety of differing unit sizes.

Sustainability 

Good design combines positive environmental, social and economic outcomes. 

 

Good sustainable design includes use of natural cross ventilation and sunlight for the amenity and liveability of residents and passive thermal design for ventilation, heating and cooling reducing reliance on technology and operation costs. Other elements include recycling and reuse of materials and waste, use of sustainable materials and deep soil zones for groundwater recharge and vegetation.

The south east orientation of the site towards the water precludes achievement of solar access of 2hrs to living areas and private open spaces of units at the winter solstice. The applicant will need to address this issue.

 

The Panel is mindful that the outlook to the east and south east is expansive and provides adequate daylight which would be compensating factor.

 

Also the applicant should address the difficulty the site orientation poses in compelling the development to have a high proportion of single aspect units which cannot be cross ventilated.

The proposal complies with the minimum requirements in accordance to the BASIX commitments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Achieving compliant cross ventilation and solar access to all apartments is difficult given the complexity of the site where some apartments will be below the Princes Highway ground floor level but their main living spaces will face east and obtain good general daylight. This issue is addressed in more detail further in the report.

Landscape 

Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, resulting in attractive developments with good amenity. A positive image and contextual fit of well designed developments is achieved by contributing to the landscape character of the streetscape and neighbourhood. 

 

Good landscape design enhances the development’s environmental performance by retaining positive natural features which contribute to the local context, co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy, habitat values and preserving green networks. 

 

Good landscape design optimises useability, privacy and opportunities for social interaction, equitable access, respect for neighbours’ amenity and provides for practical establishment and long term management. 

Refer comments above in ‘Built Form’.

 

The proposed landscape design provides for additional planting and landscaping which will substantially improve the visual appearance of the development when viewed from the Princes Highway.

 

This site is currently heavily concreted and there are limited areas of deep soil and soft landscaping.

 

The development will substantially improve the current situation at the rear and front of the site.

 

 

 

 

Amenity 

Good design positively influences internal and external amenity for residents and neighbours. Achieving good amenity contributes to positive living environments and resident well being. 

 

Good amenity combines appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, outlook, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts and service areas and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility. 

See comments about solar access and cross ventilation above.

 

All apartments are substantial in their size and as much as they comply they exceed the minimum internal floor area requirements in accordance with the ADG.

 

Most apartments have good amenity and have been designed to orientate towards the east and waterfront. The design of the building is such that all apartments will take advantage of water views and this superior outlook that the site affords.

Safety 

Good design optimises safety and security within the development and the public domain. It provides for quality public and private spaces that are clearly defined and fit for the intended purpose.

 

Opportunities to maximise passive surveillance of public and communal areas promote safety.

 

A positive relationship between public and private spaces is achieved through clearly defined secure access points and well lit and visible areas that are easily maintained and appropriate to the location and purpose.

More thought needs to be given to the interface of the private and public domains along the proposed foreshore walkway.

The development will naturally improve surveillance and safety as there will be increased opportunity to naturally observe and view the boundaries of the site. In its own right the development will improve safety in and around the site. It is requested by way of a condition that a lighting plan for the development will need to be created providing further increased levels of safety in and around the site.

Housing Diversity and Social Interaction 

Good design achieves a mix of apartment sizes, providing housing choice for different demographics, living needs and household budgets. 

 

Well designed apartment developments respond to social context by providing housing and facilities to suit the existing and future social mix. 

 

Good design involves practical and flexible features, including different types of communal spaces for a broad range of people and providing opportunities for social interaction among residents. 

Acceptable

Acceptable

 

The provision of public access at the rear of the site will significantly improve social interaction between residents and members of the community and locality.

Aesthetics 

Good design achieves a built form that has good proportions and a balanced composition of elements, reflecting the internal layout and structure. Good design uses a variety of materials, colours and textures. 

 

The visual appearance of a well designed apartment development responds to the existing or future local context, particularly desirable elements and repetitions of the streetscape. 

See note above regarding Princes Highway frontage. Provided the water facing façade incorporates genuine timber vertical battens (not aluminum RHS, for example) and that the lower sections of the building incorporate well-articulated sandstone walls (to match the sea walls) the building expression is supported.

The choice of materials and finishes has been carefully considered as the site is within a harsh foreshore environment and materials need to be high quality, marine grade that will allow for minimal maintenance in the long term to avoid rusting or degradation.

 

74.  The application was also referred to Council’s Urban Designer for comment. The comments provided are summarised below;

 

“Strategic Considerations

There is currently a Planning Proposal request (PP2017/0004) on the subject site which seeks to reduce the existing 12m foreshore building line (“FBL”), increase the floor space ratio permitted and include a café / restaurant land use on the site via Schedule 1. This Planning Proposal is currently on hold, pending the preparation of Council’s LEP and DCP Foreshore Review. The applicant was given the option of submitting a compliant DA scheme in the meantime.

 

The rear boundary is currently defined by an existing seawall. Whilst the proposed built form is compliant with the foreshore building line setback, no public foreshore access or improvements to the public amenity is offered by the proposed development.

 

The privatisation of the foreshore area through the proposed strata-titled, private courtyards denies any opportunity to provide continuous public access along the foreshore. Therefore the proposal does not comply with the above KLEP 2012 provision. This will be further addressed below in the ‘urban design consideration’ section.

 

The two levels of basement appear to encroach into the existing FBL by approx. 6m. There is concern regarding the structural integrity of the existing seawall in supporting the depth and placement of the proposed excavation. It is recommended that detailed structural design be submitted for this area and be referred to Council’s Assets Engineer for review.

 

Urban Design Considerations

In accordance with subclause 6.4(3)(e) of the KLEP 2012, the proposal should be revised to provide a 3m to 6m wide boardwalk along the waterfront for the purpose of enabling public access between Tom Uglys Reserve North and Tom Uglys Reserve South.

 

This will result in a reduction in the communal open space area at the lower ground floor. Accordingly, the private rooftop courtyards for units A4.02, A4.03, B4.02 and B4.03 should be converted to communal open space to supplement this loss.

 

An additional publicly accessible link between Princes Highway and the foreshore boardwalk is recommended along the northern side boundary of the site (adjacent to Tom Uglys Reserve North). This will significantly improve the pedestrian connectivity of the site by providing access to critical transport infrastructure (bus stops and public car park) on Princes Highway and to the foreshore area for amenity and recreation.

 

However, the proposal presents as a bulky, monolithic box when viewed from Kogarah Bay and fails to present an appropriate transition to the unfolding topography of the adjacent natural landscape.

 

A formal transition should be created between the building form and Tom Uglys Reserve South, which is a publicly accessible pocket park serviced by a public car park (total 30 spaces). The 8 storey proposal presents as a 24.5m tall façade to the reserve. The minimal side setback of less than 4m from the southern boundary further exacerbates the towering bulk and scale of the proposal.

 

The building envelope at the southern façade requires refinement to achieve a more appropriate transition to the landscape setting, especially with respect to the sense of human scale in the public domain. At the minimum, Unit A4.01 should be removed at both third and fourth floors. It is also strongly recommended that Units A2.01 and A3.01 be removed so that the development presents a 4 storey podium to Tom Uglys Reserve South.

 

The proposed built form features prominent articulation / indentations that break up both the streetscape and waterfront façades. This is encouraged and should be retained in future iterations.

 

It is recommended that the horizontal concrete element (on top of the 2nd storey) be further visually emphasised, possibly through a taller upstand at the 3rd storey which doubles as the balcony balustrade, to create a more distinctive separation between the existing podium and upper storeys.”

 

75.  These comments were presented to the Applicant and some adjustments to the design were made to address the issues raised. By removing the bedrooms, stairs and amenities to Unit 4.01 on the fifth level will reduce the scale and bulk of the building along the southern side at the prominent corner location to Princes Highway. This will address in part the Urban Designer’s concern regarding the height at this corner.

 

76.  Having regard to the above, it is considered the advice provided by the DRP has generally been adopted by the applicant in the amendments to the drawings. Most refinements have been made to the design as requested by the DRP.

 

77.  Clause 28 of SEPP65 requires the consent authority to take into consideration the provisions of the ADG. The Table below assesses the proposal against these provisions.

 

Part 3 and Part 4 – Consideration of Residential Flat Design Code Design Controls

Clause

Standard

Proposal

Complies

3D - Communal open space

 

 

1. Communal open space has a minimum area equal to 25% of the site.

-Where it cannot be provided on ground level it should be provided on a podium or roof

 

-Where developments are unable to achieve the design criteria, such as on small lots, sites within business zones, or in a dense urban area, they should:

• provide communal spaces elsewhere such as a landscaped roof top terrace or a common room

• provide larger balconies or increased private open space for apartments

• demonstrate good proximity to public open space and facilities and/or provide contributions to public open space

 

2. Developments achieve a minimum of 50% direct

sunlight to the principal usable part of the communal open space for a minimum of 2 hours between 9 am and 3 pm on 21 June (mid-winter)

The proposal provides for two distinct areas of communal open space.

 

On the ground floor at the rear an area of 200sqm is dedicated for open space.

 

On the roof top an area of 580sqm is dedicated.

 

A total area of 780sqm has been provided which amounts to 34% of the site and exceeds the minimum requirement of 575sqm.

 

The layout and configuration of the roof top area has been altered in response to Council’s concerns. Originally parts of the roof top were designed to include private courtyards and only some of the roof top was dedicated as “communal”. The Applicant altered the design to set the balustrade back further from the edge of the roof to reduce the visibility of this area and set the balustrade in by some 2m (including landscaping) and the whole area is now dedicated as communal.

It is requested by way of a condition that the area be embellished to include more landscaped areas and to include general amenities and a BBQ area to make this space more appealing and attractive. This will require an updated and detailed landscape plan and there is also a condition restricting the use of this space to ensure that the amenity of residents and the locality is not compromised.

Yes

 

3E – Deep Soil zones

 

 

1. Deep soil zones are to meet the following minimum

requirements:

 

Where the site is greater than1500sqm = 6m min dimension

 

Min deep soil area of 7% (161sqm)

 

The deep soil area is located at the rear adjoining the foreshore and has an area of 5m x 80m = 400sqm. The area of deep soil planting exceeds the 161sqm minimum however is short by 1m in terms of its minimum width. This 1m shortfall is not considered to significantly impact on the quality of the landscaped area at the rear and is dictated by the location of the basement car parking area. Currently there is no soft landscaped area at the rear of the RFB, and the dwelling house only includes a grassed area so there is no significant vegetation at the rear. The formalisation of the rear area of open space both for communal and private open space purposes and the integration of soft landscaping, planter boxes and large trees will substantially improve the current environmental and site conditions.

 

2m of this area at the rear is to be dedicated as a public accessway along the foreshore so it will not be utilised as a deep soil area but the public benefit of this dedication outweighs the cost of it being a landscaped area.

Yes

3F- 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:

 

Up to 12m (4 storeys)

Habitable - 6m

Non-habitable – 3m

 

 

 

Up to 25m (5-8 storeys)

Habitable – 9m

Non-habitable – 4.5m

The design and siting of balconies at upper levels are appropriately screened with privacy elements and blade walls etc. The balconies along the rear and side elevations are cleverly designed to limit any overlooking to adjoining apartments.

 

 

At the rear, the building is setback 7.2m – 12m from the foreshore which complies with the 6m minimum up to the fourth level

 

Levels 2, 3 and 4 should be setback 9m. At those levels the building is setback 7.63m – 12m with a greater setback along the south western corner of 10.2m. Although not fully compliant at the rear with the 9m side setback it is acceptable given the building faces the foreshore and will not overlook any immediately adjoining properties.

 

Along the south-western side the building is setback 2.3m increasing to 3.5m at the lower levels and 4.4m at the upper levels. This does not comply with the 6m and 9m minimum side setback requirement.

 

Along the north eastern side the building was initially built to the boundary at a nil setback at all levels. The design was modified to be setback 3.5m and allow for formal access (stairway) down to the foreshore for public access.

 

The building does not comply with the minimum separation distances along both sides of the Site but given that they adjoin two public reserves that are heavily vegetated there will be no adverse amenity impacts from the siting of the building.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No – refer to detailed discussion in issues below (Note 1).

 

3G – Pedestrian Access and entries

Building entries and pedestrian access connects to and

addresses the public domain

 

Multiple entries (including communal building entries

and individual ground floor entries) should be provided

to activate the street edge

The development caters for 2 main entries one to the building along the northern side and one along the southern side off the street frontage.

 

The lobbies have been amended to be larger so that they are more visible and create a more formal entry point.

Yes

3H-Vehicle Access

Vehicle access points are designed and located to achieve safety, minimise conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles and create high quality streetscapes

The development caters for a long driveway which is accessed off the side street not off Princes Highway. The driveway entry replaces the existing entry however accesses 2 basement levels and has a gradient of 1:4 and a width of 6.3m allowing for two way traffic. The transition in grades and design of the driveway is compliant with the Australian Standards.

 

The proposal was referred to RMS for comment as Princes Highway is a classified road. RMS raised no objections to the proposed arrangement subject to the imposition of conditions.

Yes

3J-Bicycle and car parking

For development in the following locations:

 

-     On sites that are within 800m of a railway station or light rail stop in the Sydney Metropolitan Area; or

 

-     On land zoned and sites within 400m of land zoned B3 Commercial Core, B4 Mixed Use or equivalent in a nominated regional centre

 

The minimum car parking requirement for residents and visitors is set out in the Guide to Traffic Generating

Developments, or the car parking requirement prescribed by the relevant Council, whichever is less

These provisions are not applicable as the proposal is not within 800m of a railway station or light rail stop.

 

There is a bus stop located within 400m of the site near Blake Avenue.

 

The provisions of the ADG (which rely on the RMS requirements for Traffic Generating Developments) are not relevant in this case and the development will need to satisfy the provisions of the KDCP.

Discussed in detail in the DCP table.

 

 

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 9am and 3pm at mid-winter in the Sydney Metropolitan Area

 

A maximum of 15% of apartments in a building receive no direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in midwinter

9 apartments (23%) receive 2hrs or more of solar access from 9am-3pm during midwinter. Some 21 apartments (52%) receive between 1hr to 1.5hrs of solar access.

 

 

6 apartments (15%) receive no solar access between 9am to 3pm in midwinter.

 

The siting and orientation of the site largely dictates this situation and it cannot be easily increased through the design. Despite less than 70% of apartments are receiving 2hrs of solar access most of these apartments face east and will not be overshadowed by any other buildings or structures, they face the water and will be largely overshadowed by themselves. The water outlook will provide daylight access to the apartments and sea breezes, the water reflecting on the balconies will improve the view and access to light. The design of the building is considered acceptable in this regard.

No but considered acceptable

(refer to Note 2 below)

4B- Natural Ventilation

At least 60% of apartments are naturally cross ventilated in the first nine storeys of the building.

 

Overall depth of a cross-over or cross-through apartment does not exceed 18m, measured glass  line to glass line

 

The building should include dual aspect apartments, cross through apartments and corner apartments and limit apartment depths

29 apartments (72%) are cross ventilated in accordance with the ADG provisions, achieving compliance.

 

 

Yes

 

4C-Ceiling Heights

Measured from finished floor level to finished ceiling level, minimum ceiling heights are:

 

Habitable rooms  = 2.7m

Non-habitable rooms = 2.4m

The minimum floor to ceiling height at all levels is 2.7m (3.060m from floor to floor including slabs is provided)

 

Floor to floor heights of 3.1m are usually required to achieve a floor to ceiling height, however 400mm will still allow for a slab of 360mm to be constructed which can be achieved. Council has approved developments with floor to floor heights of 3.05m.

Yes

 

4D- Apartment size and layout

Apartments are required to have the following

minimum internal areas:

 

1 bedroom = 50sqm

2 bedroom = 70sqm

3 bedroom = 90sqm

 

The minimum internal areas include only one bathroom. Additional bathrooms increase the minimum internal area by 5sqm each

 

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

Every apartment complies with the minimum internal area requirements.

 

The 1 bedroom apartment has a min internal area of 78sqm

 

2 bedroom apartments have minimum internal areas of 84sqm

 

3 bedroom apartments have minimum internal areas of 121sqm.

 

The apartments are much larger and spacious than the minimum ADG area requirements. The design seeks to cater for people in the area keen to downsize from their homes and buy in an exclusive waterfront location.

 

Most internal spaces and rooms have natural ventilation via windows. Some ensuites and WC’s will require mechanical ventilation.

Yes

 

4D-2 Apartment size and layout

Habitable room depths are limited to a maximum of 2.5 x the ceiling height

 

 

In open plan layouts (where the living, dining and kitchen are combined) the maximum habitable room depth is 8m from a window

Generally compliant and addressed as part of the design. Furniture layouts are provided.

 

There are some kitchens that are located further than 8m from a window this is considered acceptable in this case as the open plan arrangement allows for very large and spacious living and dining areas. Having larger living spaces is beneficial.

Yes

 

 

Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10sqm and other bedrooms 9sqm (excluding wardrobe space)

 

Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m

(excluding wardrobe space)

 

3. Living rooms or combined living/dining rooms have a minimum width of:

 

-3.6m for studio and 1 bedroom

- 4m for 2 and 3 bedroom apartments

 

The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments

are at least 4m internally to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts

Complies with minimum room sizes. Master bedrooms have a minimum area of 10sqm whilst all other rooms have areas of 9.6sqm.

 

Bedrooms have a minimum dimension of 3m - complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No cross-over or cross-through apartments are proposed.

Yes 

 

4E- Private Open space and balconies

All apartments are required to have primary balconies as follows:

 

 

-1 bedroom = 8sqm/2m depth

 

 

-2 bedroom = 10sqm/2m depth

 

 

-3+ bedroom = 12sqm/2.4m

 

The minimum balcony depth to be counted as contributing to the balcony area is 1m

 

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 15sqm and a minimum depth of 3m

All balcony areas comply with the minimum requirements of the ADG. Many exceed the minimum requirements.

 

1 bedroom apartments have balconies with a min of 16sqm. Depth – 2m

 

2 bedroom apartments have areas of between 10-15sqm Depth – 2m

 

3 bedroom apartments have balconies and spaces of 12-15sqm.

Depth – 2.4m

 

 

 

 

The ground floor areas of private open space at the rear of over 20sqm of courtyard area.

 

All balconies have a minimum depth of 2m with the balconies to 3 bedroom units having widths of 2.4m.

 

Yes

 

4F- Common circulation areas

The maximum number of apartments off a circulation

core on a single level is eight

Maximum 3 units accessing both lobbies however the lower ground floor plan has 6 apartments off the lobby which still maintains compliance with the maximum of 8 apartments accessing a single core.

Yes

4G- Storage

In addition to storage in kitchens, bathrooms and

bedrooms, the following storage is provided:

 

1 bedroom = 6m³

2 bedroom – 8m³

3 bedroom – 10m³

 

 

At least 50% of storage is to be located within the apartment.

All units have storage areas that comply with the requirements. Independent storage areas for each apartment are provided in the ground floor parking area and additional storage cupboards are provided within each apartment.

 

The apartments are generous in size and include internal laundry’s and linen cupboards as well as specific storage rooms in some units i.e. BLG.01, 02, 03 and 06. There is also ample space in the basement dedicated for storage purposes well above the minimum requirements.

Yes

 

4H- Acoustic Privacy

Adequate building separation is provided within the development and from neighbouring buildings/adjacent uses.

 

 

Window and door openings are generally orientated away from noise sources

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Noisy areas within buildings including building entries and corridors should be located next to or above each other and quieter areas next to or above quieter areas

 

Storage, circulation areas and non-habitable rooms should be located to buffer noise from external sources

There are no immediately adjoining residential developments therefore the proposal should not adversely impact on the general environment.

 

Most windows are sited away from Princes Highway with most amenities and a few bedrooms facing this elevation.

 

The two main entries are recessed and include attractive planter boxes which are located at the front and aim to screen the road activity and key noise source.

 

The design of the proposal has considered the recommendations of the Acoustic assessment which suggests double glazing and specific window treatment and construction methods which reduce and mitigate noise impacts internally and externally.

Yes

4J – Noise and Pollution

To minimise impacts the following design solutions may be used:

 

 • physical separation between buildings and the noise or pollution source

 

• residential uses are located perpendicular to the noise source and where possible buffered by other uses

 

• buildings should respond to both solar access and noise. Where solar access is away from the noise source, non-habitable rooms can provide a buffer

 

• landscape design reduces the perception of noise and acts as a filter for air pollution generated by traffic and industry

The building has been designed to orientate towards the water rather than the highway. Openings to the road (main noise source) have been minimised and limited with most openings along the north-western side being narrow and fixed windows addressing mainly utility areas and some secondary windows located along this elevation.

 

A condition will require these openings to be double glazed.

 

An Acoustic report was prepared by Acoustic Vibration and Noise Pty Ltd and accompanies the application. The report confirms that compliance with Clause 102 of the Infrastructure SEPP 2007 can be achieved. The report states that;

 

Under Clause 102, where the development is for residential use and is located in or adjacent to a relevant road corridor, a consent authority must not grant consent unless it is satisfied that appropriate measures will be taken to ensure that the following LAeq levels are not exceeded:

- in any bedroom in the building – 35dB(A) at any time between 10.00p.m. and 7.00a.m.

- anywhere else in the building (other than a garage, kitchen, bathroom or hallway) – 40dB(A) at any time.

 

Maximum design sound level is defined as the level of noise that has been found to be acceptable by most people for the environment in question and also to be not intrusive. In this assessment, satisfactory design sound levels were used where practically possible”.  

 

It is recommended that a series of materials and finishes be used to reduce noise transmission through to the habitable spaces. A condition will require these construction techniques and measures to be adopted.

Yes

4K – Apartment Mix

A range of apartment types and sizes is provided to cater for different household types now and into the future

 

The apartment mix is distributed to suitable locations within the building

The development comprises of a mix of apartments;

 

1 x 1 bed = 3%

28 x 2 bedroom = 70%

11 x 3 bedroom = 27%

 

There is an appropriate mix and diversity of accommodation. The layout and configuration of apartments is also varied with single level apartments and double loaded apartments.

Yes

4L – Ground Floor Apartments

Street frontage activity is maximised where ground floor apartments are located.

 

Design of ground floor apartments delivers amenity and safety for residents.

The ground floor apartments are located at the rear and have their areas of private open space abutting the 2m public walkway dedication.

 

The private courtyards are large and well landscaped which will also allow for casual surveillance and protect privacy of the residents.

Yes

4M - Facades

Facades should be well resolved with an appropriate scale and proportion to the streetscape and human scale.

The design of the façade is interesting, modern and well- articulated. The original design was amended to address issues raised by Council including the prominence of the building to the Princes Highway and minimal front setback along the south-western side and the length and bulk of the building when viewed from the waterway. Other issues such as having two entries to the building and lack of connectivity were issues raised.

 

The built form was amended by setting back the upper levels from the highway and Unit A4.01 reconfigured to be setback 4m from the front boundary at the fourth floor and integrate a planter box within the setback. This will break down the bulk and visual dominance of this corner and introduce some greenery to soften the façade. The deletion of the bedrooms, stair and amenities at the fifth level ensure the building is more compliant with the height limit apart from the lift overruns.

 

The main entries have been widened and become more legible. 

 

The building is of a high architectural and design quality and includes a number of visually attractive architectural elements and features that enhance the overall appearance including the use of a variety of materials, timber, rendered finishes, use of raw concrete and aluminium windows. Many finishes will have to be marine grade to be able to cope with the foreshore conditions.

 

The elevation to Princes Highway is modern but minimal as the acoustic report and recommendations from the DRP were to minimise openings along this front façade given the noise and conditions of this major arterial roadway. The design response is appropriate as it is simple and creates simple lines with small fixed openings which are abstract and asymmetrical to create visual interest and variety.

 

The south eastern elevation addressing the waterway (rear elevation) is represented by a long building however the built form is broken down by the curvilinear form which includes curved balconies and the inclusion of louvered privacy screens breaking up the form creating visual interest.

 

The provision of trees within the deep soil areas at the rear will include the planting of tall trees reaching a minimum height of 4m. This green screen will further break up the ground and first floor level and will enhance and reduce the scale of the building when viewed from the water.

Yes

4N – roof design

Roof treatments are integrated into the building design and positively respond to the street. Opportunities to use roof space for residential accommodation and open space are maximised. Incorporates sustainability features.

The original roof design included a communal area of open space but also provided for some exclusive private areas. Changes were requested to the design so that the balustrade to the roof terrace was recessed 2m from the edge of the roof to reduce its visibility. An internal planter box has been introduced around the periphery of the roof to soften the appearance of this space. The private courtyards were deleted and the whole space is now communal.

 

The communal roof terrace is a centralised private space that has been well designed. Conditions will require a more detailed landscape plan to cater for soft areas (grassed or comprised of artificial grass) planter boxes and also create a small covered space (pergola) attached to the lift overrun and also include a small BBQ and amenities area (WC) centralised and adjacent to the lifts. Conditions will also ensure the space is restricted in its use so that there are no adverse acoustic impacts to occupants within the building.

Yes

4O – Landscape Design

Landscape design is viable and sustainable, contributes to the streetscape and amenity

Landscape design is appropriate and provides suitable communal and private open space areas.

 

There is a lot more landscaped area proposed than currently is catered for as such the public domain will be improved. A condition will require an updated and more detailed landscape plan to be prepared which looks at providing a diverse range of landscaping elements on the roof.

Yes

4P- Planting on Structures

Planting on structures – appropriate soil profiles are provided, plant growth is optimised with appropriate selection and maintenance, contributes to the quality and amenity of communal and public open spaces

The design has catered for planter boxes around the perimeter of the roof terrace.

There are also planter boxes along the front of the site to delineate public and private spaces and to formalise the entry spaces.

Yes

4Q – Universal Design

Universal design – design of apartments allow for flexible housing, adaptable designs, accommodate a range of lifestyle needs

Design of apartments allows for use by different lifestyles. Internal layouts vary and provide flexible layouts.

Four (4) adaptable units are also catered for within the development which aim to comply with AS4299-1995 Adaptable Housing

Yes

4R – Adaptive reuse

Adaptive reuse as apartment of existing buildings- new additions are contemporary and complementary, provide residential amenity while not precluding future adaptive reuse.

N/A the existing buildings on site are outdated and not visually attractive, symbolic or important contributions to the fabric of the area. Their retention is not justified in this case.

Yes

4U – Energy Efficiency.

Development incorporates passive environmental design, passive solar design to optimise heat storage in winter and reduce heat transfer in summer, natural ventilation minimises need for mechanical ventilation

A compliant BASIX Certificate accompanies the application.

Yes

4V – Water management and conservation

Water management and conservation – potable water use is minimised, stormwater is treated on site before being discharged, flood management systems are integrated into the site design

The existing buildings drain to the rear (waterway). This arrangement will be incorporated into the new design and Council’s Engineers have considered the proposed stormwater design and considered it is acceptable subject to conditions being imposed if consent is to be granted.

Yes

4W – Waste Management

Waste management – storage facilities are appropriately designed, domestic waste is minimised by convenient source separation and recycling

Originally there was one large bin store located within the basement along the northern side. This waste room would have been difficult to access from the southern part of the building. The waste room design was amended to accommodate a second bin store along the southern side of the building. This now allows for two garbage areas which is a more efficient and functional arrangement.

 

The northern bin store room includes a bin lift. If this lift was to break the alternative is to take the bins to the street via the driveway.

Yes

4X – Building Maintenance

Building design provides protection form weathering

 

Enables ease of maintenance, material selection reduces ongoing maintenance cost

The design incorporates a mix of external finishes that aim to address the sensitive coastal location in which the site is located. Finishes intend to be marine grade so that they will not rust and reduce the weathering effects of this coastal environment. Colours selected are recessive and elements such as the timber privacy louvres have been integrated in accordance with the requirements of the DRP. These elements may weather a little more quickly but they are lighter and more natural features that will break up the bulk and scale of the building and create a more articulated and varied rear elevation.

Yes

 

(1) Separation Distances

78.  The building fails to comply with the minimum separation distances in accordance with the provisions of Part 3F of the Apartment Design Guide (ADG). Part 3F relates to “visual privacy” and establishes minimum or reasonable side setbacks for RFB’s which allow for adequate separation between buildings and therefore maintain privacy between properties.

 

79.  The objective of the control is to provide “Adequate building separation distances which are shared equitably between neighbouring sites, to achieve reasonable levels of external and internal visual privacy”. The subject site is unique in its location. It is bounded by open space on both the northern and southern sides (zoned as RE1) and known as Dover Park to the north-east and Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve to the south-west. There are no immediately adjoining residential properties. Currently the RFB on site has been built to the southern boundary at a nil setback so the proposed design improves this existing situation and creates a minimum side setback of 1.27m on the ground floor (south-western side) which increases to 2.52m and 4.4m at the fifth floor level.

 

80.  The actual side setback should be 6m up to the fourth storey (12m) and 9m up to 8 storeys (25m). The building does not achieve these setbacks but given the site’s location, topographic features and design the non-compliance in this case is satisfactory for the following reasons;

 

·    The building is narrow in width along the south western and north eastern elevation. The narrowness of the building (about 10m) and the fact it steps down the site will reduce its visual appearance when viewed from the public domain (along Princes Highway).

·    The south-western elevation will to a large degree be screened by the existing trees and vegetation located along Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve.

·    The south-western elevation has been designed to be articulated and its façade varied and stepped so that its visual bulk and scale is reduced.

·    The internal habitable spaces will not overlook any residential properties and will not adversely affect existing levels of privacy.

·    Compliance with the minimum separation distances will severely compromise the design potential for a building on this site.

·    The proposed setback along the south western side is greater than the existing side setback and will improve the current situation.

·    Along the north eastern side the building is setback 3.5m from the boundary. This side of the building comprises of stairs which will lead down to the rear of the property which will be able to be used by the public and some buffer planting.

·    There are some windows located along the north eastern side but these will not overlook any adjoining habitable spaces as Tom Ugly’s Reserve adjoins the site and the existing vegetation will screen some of the lower levels of the building.

·    The building along the north eastern side has been well designed and articulated to provide variety in the location and positioning of window openings which will also improve casual surveillance around the building.

·    The diversity in the use of materials and finishes enhances the visual appearance of the building and will reduce its visual bulk.

 

81.  The justification and design resolution of the building in respect to this provision is considered to be satisfactory.

 

(2) Solar Access

82.  Part 4A of the ADG refers to solar and daylight access and aims to “optimise the number of apartments receiving sunlight to habitable rooms, primary windows and private open space”. Although a guide it suggests that 70% of apartments receive a minimum of 2 hours of direct sunlight with a maximum of 15% receiving no sunlight.

 

83.  In this case the development achieves a total of 52% of apartments which receive between 1-1.5hours of sunlight which is just short of the 2hour minimum and 9 apartments that achieve full compliance (minimum of 2hours) with 15% receiving no solar access. The apartments receiving no solar access are within the criterion of the ADG.

 

84.  It is noted in this section of the ADG that “achieving the design criteria may not be possible on some sites. This includes….where greater residential amenity can be achieved along a busy road or rail line by orientating the living rooms away from the noise source.” This point is pertinent to this Site. Greater solar access to living spaces could be achieved if some living spaces could be orientated towards the west however given the site fronts a busy and noisy arterial roadway the apartments have been designed to be orientated away from this noise source and therefore the main orientation for most units will be to the east limiting the full potential to obtain maximum solar access.

 

85.  Given that most apartments are orientated towards the Bay the views and general outlook will compensate for the lack of solar access. The steep slope of the site naturally restricts the ability to optimise solar access to spaces at the rear as the lower ground floor apartments, ground floor and first floor apartments will receive less sunlight as these are sited substantially below the roadway level. However when visiting the site in the afternoon of 6 February 2019 the rear of the site was quite dark as it is at a much lower level. However what is evident is that the open space bordering the site and natural environment is in itself physically attractive and provides in itself a very high quality environment merely by its foreshore location.

 

86.  The ADG recognises that some sites cannot achieve full compliance with the solar access control and this Site falls within this category. The amenity of the apartments will not be adversely affected as they are spacious and non-compliance only affects some of the central and lower level apartments.

 

87.  Although the development fails to satisfy some of the provisions of the ADG the design has addressed the objectives of the controls and it is demonstrated through the design and siting of the building that the proposal is generally satisfactory and compliant in its form when considered against the relevant objectives, design criteria and design guidance for residential flat buildings.

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

The planning controls applying to the site were recently amended by the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (Amendment No 2), also known as the New City Plan which was gazetted on 26 May 2017.

 

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012

Zoning

88.  The subject site is zoned Zone R3 Medium Density Residential under the provisions of the Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP2012). Refer to zoning map below. The proposed development is defined as a Residential Flat Building which is a permissible use in the zone.

 

89.  The objectives of the zone are as follows:

·    To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment.

·    To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment.

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

 

90.  The proposal has been designed to satisfy the objectives of the zone.

 

91.  The extent to which the proposal complies with the relevant standards of Kogarah Local Environmental Plan 2012 (KLEP2012) is outlined in the table below.

 

 

Figure 7: Zoning map extract from the KLEP2012 (Map Extract 008)

 

KLEP2012 Compliance Table

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

2.2 Zone

R3 Medium Density Residential Zone

The proposal is defined as a Residential Flat Building (RFB) which is a permissible use within the zone.

Yes

 2.3

Objectives

Objectives of the Zone

Consistent with zone objectives

Yes – see comments above

4.1A Minimum lot sizes for Residential Flat Buildings

Clause 4.1A requires a minimum site area of 1,000sqm for the purpose of RFB’s in the R3 zone.

The total site area is 2,301.9sqm

Yes

4.3 – Height of Buildings

21m as identified on Height of Buildings Map

The building is generally within the height limit however the lift overrun and part of Unit 4.01 on the roof top exceed the height control by 3.145m (16% variation). At its maximum the structures on the roof reach a height of 24.415m.

 

To achieve a greater degree of compliance with the height it is requested that the habitable area located on the fifth level (bedrooms, stairs and amenities) will be removed.

No – see discussion below regarding Clause 4.6 Statement which has been submitted.

4.4 – Floor Space Ratio

2:1 as identified on Floor Space Ratio Map

Max GFA permissible 4,604sqm

The proposed FSR is 2:1

Total GFA = 4,599sqm

 

Note: The Applicant was requested to provide greater articulation and breaks in the front elevation due to the buildings length. The plans received on 11 December 2018 highlighted an area between the bathroom and bedroom in Units 1.03, 2.03, 3.03 and 4.03 along the front elevation which can be reduced and the main wall recessed further back to create a break in the façade. The most recent plans dated 19 January 2019 does not designate this space. This area is part of the main lobby/circulation space within the units and its removal would create a further break in the external form. The removal of this area at each level will reduce the overall floor space further and stagger the façade. It is a small change which is considered a beneficial improvement and is included as a condition. It will not affect the main internal areas within the units.

Yes

4.5 – Calculation of floor space ratio and site area

FSR and site area calculated in accordance with Cl.4.5

The GFA calculations provided by the Applicant have been verified and is considered satisfactory.

Yes

5.7 Development below mean high water mark

The objective of this clause is to ensure appropriate environmental assessment for development carried out on land covered by tidal waters.

The proposed development will not be located below the mean high water mark and will therefore satisfy the objectives of this control. There are also no works proposed beyond the rear boundary affecting the waterway.

 

The proposal is located over 1.5m above the MHWM and when considering sea level changes the proposed RL at the top of the sandstone sea wall is RL2.57 which is estimated to cater for potential sea level rises until 2100. The finished floor level of the lower ground floor apartments is RL1.955 which is almost 2m above the MHWM.

 

The public link will have an RL1.60 which is as existing which will allow for this pathway to connect through to the existing pathway along Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve at grade.

Yes

5.10 – Heritage Conservation

The objectives of

this clause are;

(i) to conserve the environmental heritage of Kogarah,

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

The site is not located within a Heritage Conservation Area. 

 

The closest Heritage Item is the Georges River (Tom Ugly’s) Bridge. This is an item of both State and Local significance noted as Item No.7 within the KLEP.

 

Tom Ugly’s Bridge is composed of two bridges completed in 1929 and 1987 that cross the Georges River. The main historic significance surrounds the 1929 Pratt Truss bridge which carries three lanes of north bound traffic. The 1929 bridge consists of nine steel truss spans forming a total length of 499m. The bridge was designed by Percy Allen and when opened the bridge was the longest in Australia.

 

The proposed development is setback some distance from the bridge and will not adversely affect the appearance or interface with the visual catchment of this item and its immediate surrounds.

Yes

6.1 Acid Sulphate Soils (ASS)

The objective of this clause is to ensure that development does not disturb, expose or drain acid sulfate soils and cause environmental damage

The site is not located within an area classified as having ASS.

 

As a precautionary measure, given the sensitivity of the site and its proximity to the Georges River which is classified as having Class 1 ASS, a Preliminary Acid Sulphate Soil Assessment was conducted by EI Australia.

 

Soil sampling occurred at three boreholes and visual indicators of actual acid sulphate soils were not observed but indicators of potential future ASS were detected however given the site and soil conditions the generation of ASS conditions were considered low and the preparation of an ASS management plan was considered unwarranted as there are no works proposed on the waterway.

 

The report recommended that during excavation that the disposal of soils should be classified in accordance with EPA Waste Classification Guidelines and disposed of appropriately and any proposed imported material for the purpose of backfilling etc will require validation testing to confirm its suitability. A condition will ensure compliance is achieved.

Yes

6.2 Earthworks

To ensure that earthworks do not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land

The proposed earthworks are considered acceptable having regard to the provisions of this clause as the works are not likely to have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring properties.

 

A condition will require that a detailed structural assessment be conducted on the sea wall to ensure that any construction works ensure its integrity.

Yes

6.4 Limited development on the foreshore area

The objective of this clause is to ensure that development in the foreshore area will not impact on natural foreshore processes or affect the significance and amenity of the area.

The subject site is located within a designated foreshore area and the siting of the building is dictated by the established Foreshore Building Line (FBL) of 12m.

 

The development has been designed to respect the character and nature of the foreshore and satisfy the FBL however the south eastern section of the building encroaches on the 12m FBL. This is considered acceptable given the siting of the existing buildings and structures on site and this issue is discussed in greater detail below.

 

The proposal will substantially improve the landscape and nature of the site as the concrete area that is designated for parking at the rear will be removed and replaced with a softer and more appropriate finish and provide for public accessibility along the coast. Most of the building will comply with the 12m FBL whilst the southern side is only setback between 7.2m-7.6m however this is in line with the existing building line.

 

The proposal will improve the character and nature of the development on the foreshore

Partial non-compliance but considered acceptable – see detailed discussion below.

 

A Clause 4.6 Statement has been submitted to address the non-compliance with part of the building encroaching on the FBL.

6.5 Airspace Operations

The consent authority must not grant development consent to development that is a controlled activity within the meaning of Division 4 of Part 12 of the Airports Act 1996 of the Commonwealth unless the applicant has obtained approval for the controlled activity under regulations made for the purposes of that Division.

The height of the proposed development is below the Obstacle Limitation Surface (OLS) which is established at RL51.00 and this triggers the concurrence from Sydney Airports.

Yes

 

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

Detailed assessment of variation to Clause 4.3 Height of Buildings

92.  The proposed development seeks a variation to the development standard relating to height (Clause 4.3). The LEP identifies a maximum height of 21m for the Site (refer to Figure 8 below) and the proposed development will exceed the height by 3.55m (southern side) to the extremity of the roof (parapet) and 3.415m along the northern side to the lift overrun. A variation to the height can only be considered under Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to Development Standards of the LEP.

 

93.  Clause 4.6(1) outlines the objectives of the standard which are to “provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development” and “to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances”.

 

 

Height map – site outlined in blue

 

94.  The original plans measured the building height against the “natural ground line” (NGL) which is not in accordance with the definition of height under the KLEP. The planning instrument defines Height as “the vertical distance from ground level (existing) to the highest point of the building, or in relation to the RL of a building – the vertical distance from the Australian Height Datum to the highest point of the building”. The plans were amended to show the relative heights of the building against the existing ground levels and an amended Clause 4.6 report was submitted.

 

95.  The non-compliance exceeds the control by some 17%. The non-compliance is considered to be acceptable in this case as the area where the variation is located will not cause any adverse amenity impacts to adjoining properties. The site is unique and quite constrained due to the topography of the land and as such compliance with the control is difficult to achieve. In addition to this, the existing ground floor line has been formed by cutting into the embankment at the rear which creates areas that are essentially sub-basement areas.

 

96.  Clause 4.6(3) states that:

 

“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:

 

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

 

that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard”

 

97.  To support the non-compliance, the applicant has provided a request for a variation to Clause 4.3 in accordance with Clause 4.6 of HLEP 2012 for the original variation and amended variation, of which points have been extracted justify the reasons in supporting the variation. This Clause 4.6 request for variation is assessed as follows:

 

Is the planning control in question a development standard?

98.  Height of Buildings limitation under Clause 4.3 of the KLEP 2012 is a development standard.

 

What are the underlying objectives of the development standard?

99.  The objectives of Height of Buildings standard under Clause 4.3 of HLEP 2012 are:

 

(a)  to establish the maximum height for buildings,

(b)  to minimise the impact of overshadowing, visual impact and loss of privacy on adjoining properties and open space areas,

(c)  to provide appropriate scale and intensity of development through height controls.

 

100.  The applicant has provided the following justification regarding the development’s consistency with the above objectives.

 

101.  Applicant’s Comments: In accordance with the proposed development achieves the objectives of the standard notwithstanding non-compliance with the height of buildings control in the following ways.

 

1(a)  To establish the maximum height for buildings.

102.  The subject site is located within a R3 Medium Density Residential zone, and residential flat buildings are permissible within the zone. The proposed lift does not alter the use of the zone and is therefore compliant with the character or nearby development. 'Building height' is measured from ground level (existing) to the highest point of the building according to the definition in the KLEP; however, it is extremely unlikely that when the KLEP controls were formulated regard was had to the extent of existing excavation on some older sites. This is demonstrated by the fact that the same building height control is applied uniformly on the waterfront sites irrespective of whether the ground level is natural or has been altered. As demonstrated in Figures 2 and 3, when building height is measured from natural ground level, the extent of any variation is confined to the lift overrun only with the actual 'building' sitting below the 21m height control.

 

103.  As detailed later in this variation request, and the SEE, the proposed height is compatible within its context, and will not result in any adverse impacts to surrounding properties. The breach of the standard does not affect consistency with this objective. In fact, the breach of the standard allows for a building that achieves an improved built form providing better and more equitable amenity to the future residents.

 

1(b) To minimise the impact of overshadowing, visual impact and loss of privacy on adjoining properties and open space areas.

104.  Architecture & Building Works have prepared detailed shadow diagrams for the proposal which are provided at Appendix 2 of the SEE. The shadow diagrams illustrate the additional overshadowing impact caused by the variation of the height standard. As the breach occurs at the northern lift overrun and some of the landscaped areas on the rooftop, the discernible shadows resulting from the height breach are cast wholly on the proposed development itself. Therefore, the breach in height will not result in any adverse overshadowing impacts on adjoining land. The variation of the height standard does not result in any additional overlooking of neighbouring properties, as the site is located between two (2) public reserves, Kogarah Bay and Princes Highway. As detailed in the SEE, the lift is of contemporary design that will be compatible with and improves the appearance of the area. Furthermore, the lift overrun, is only visible from certain parts of the road frontage and waterfront. The provision of both communal and private terraces and landscaped areas on the building's rooftop will enhance the amenity for future residents and integrate the proposed development into the existing setting with the provision of significant landscaping. The proposed lift is setback approximately 20m from Princes Highway in this location and will be screened by extensive new landscaping including the planting of mature large (i.e. 15m mature height) native trees, which will mitigate any impact of the variation on the streetscape. It is important to note that the properties to the north are separated from the site by a public reserve and car parking while Princes Highway provides separation to properties to the west. The site is bounded by Kogarah Bay to the east and another public reserve to the south, where a bridge connects Tom Uglys Point and Horse Rock Point on either side of Georges River. Therefore, there is no development to the east or south of the site affected be the height breach.

 

1(c)  To provide appropriate scale and intensity of development through height controls.

105.  The lift is not located on the street frontage and therefore has no impact on the intensity of development along Princes Highway. The site represents an isolated R3 zoned parcel of land bounded by RE1, SP2 and W2 zoned land/water. There will be no adverse amenity impacts to the properties located in the R3 zone in terms of overshadowing, over-looking, noise, or views as a result of the breach of the height standard, noting the nearest R3 zoned property is separated from the site by Princes Highway where it is a six-lane wide road. The scale and intensity of development is consistent with that intended by the planning controls when regard is had to the height above natural ground level. As discussed earlier, it is extremely unlikely that when the KLEP controls were formulated regard was had to the extent of existing excavation on some older sites. As demonstrated in Figures 2 and 3, when building height is measured from natural ground level, the extent of any variation is confined to the lift overrun only with the building mass sitting below the 21m height control.

 

106.  Officers Assessment: Council has been consistent in its application of Clause 4.6 in respect to the Height Standard. Allowance and flexibility is generally given to an exceedance in the height control for a centrally located lift overrun and other smaller structures which are not habitable and appear on the roof space to assist in providing a functional and attractive area of communal open space.

 

107.  This particular site is considered to be an isolated and unique one as the non-compliance partially relates to some habitable area along the south eastern side of the building. The area of non-compliance relates to the upper level of Apartment 4.01 comprising of two bedrooms, stairs and associated amenities. The area exceeding the control is shown in elevation below (Figure 9).

 

 

                        Figure 9: Southern elevation showing the area of non-compliance at the Fourth (4) level.

 

108.  The area of non-compliance is a light, glazed area of the apartment. The reason for the non-compliance is largely a result of the topography of the land and the fact the existing RFB on the site has substantially modified the natural ground level and cut into the site thus creating basement and sub-basement areas when viewed from Princes Highway. These lower levels are not visible from the street.

 

109.  Council has consistently applied the height control to all new developments in the area and it is important to retain the integrity of the control given that it is a new control. Council’s Urban Designer has raised concern about the visual dominance of the additional level along this southern side given it will become a prominent corner. It is considered for these reasons that the habitable areas on the fifth floor be deleted (bedroom, internal staircase and amenities) and Unit 4.01 be configured to become a studio apartment. This will respect the intention and purpose of the height control and ensure consistent application of this control. It will not reduce the overall density of the development and will still allow for only slight protrusions to the height control (being the lift overruns) but these structures are less visible as they are more centrally located. The architectural form and treatment of the building will remain intact and the scale and form of the building more reflective of the intent of the height control. It will also reduce the bulk of the building. This will be included as a condition.

 

 

Figure 10: Rear elevation of the proposed building and the upper level showing the section of the upper portion of Apartment 4.01 when viewed from the south east.

 

110.  In terms of satisfying the objectives of the height control the lift overrun located on the northern side of the building and the balustrade to the roof will not create any overshadowing to adjoining properties due to its orientation and will only overshadow the roof. The lift is centrally located and the front portion of this structure which faces Princes Highway complies with the height control as this is the higher side of the site. The shadowing from the non-compliance along the south eastern side of the building (the upper level to Unit 4.01) affects some of the reserve, water and Princes Highway at differing times of the day. There is no overshadowing caused to any adjoining residential properties. The amount and degree of overshadowing caused by the non-compliance is minimal and will not adversely affect the amenity of any adjoining habitable areas (see Figure 11 below for overshadowing). However the removal of the upper level of Unit 4.01 will still improve the impact of overshadowing and reduce the amount if even by a small degree.

 

 

 

Figure 11: Proposed overshadowing at 9am, 12noon and 3pm (June)

 

There are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the standard [cl. 4.6(3)(b)] for the following reasons;

111.  The Applicant has concluded that the variation is considered satisfactory in this case for the following reasons;

 

·    The variation will cause no additional overshadowing as discussed already;

·    The variation will cause no loss of privacy for neighbouring properties;

·    The visual impact of the variation on the Princes Highway will be negligible because of the setback from the road way and the proposed landscaping;

·    The variation of the standard allows for a development that is consistent with the existent and desired future character of the area;

·    The proposal complies with the maximum permissible floor space ratio for the site;

·    The variation is attributable to the particular physical characteristics of the site including its steeply sloping character' altered landform and relatively long and narrow geometry as well as the adherence to the 12m foreshore building line on Kogarah Bay.

·    The variation facilitates equitable access to the generous communal open space on the roof level of the proposed residential flat building; and

·    The variation facilitates the redevelopment of the site and the proposed dedication of public access along the foreshore and northern side of the site, which is presently not available.

·    The proposal would result in a better planning outcome than if compliance were to be achieved, as it provides a development that meets the objective of the standard.

 

112.  Clause 4.6(4) states that:

 

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

(a)  the consent authority is satisfied that:

 

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

 

113.  Officers Assessment: The written request adequately addresses the matters in subclause (3). Strict compliance with the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary because the development is consistent with the objectives of the R3 zone and height of building standard as documented in detail below and in parts some elements of the building are considered to be acceptable in terms of exceeding the control (i.e lift overruns and balustrade to the roof terrace) however it is unreasonable to accept the habitable spaces that exceed the control given that they will create additional undue bulk and scale to the building particularly along the southern side which will be a visible element when travelling both directions along the Princes Highway.

 

114.  It is considered that sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the standard (only for that part of the building that relates to the lift overruns and balustrade) given that the non-compliance provides for an improved amenity outcome while resulting in no adverse environmental impacts.

 

(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,

 

115.  Officers Assessment: The objectives of the R3 Medium Density zone pursuant to the LEP 2012 are;

·    To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment.

·    To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment.

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

 

116.  The proposed residential flat building comprises of 40 apartments of varying sizes and styles. The diversity in the proposed accommodation that is offered will cater to a variety of residents. The Blakehurst area is established and comprises of many larger detached homes and many residents in the area are downsizing and this development will cater to the needs of long established families or retirees that would like to maintain the waterfront lifestyle but have a lower maintenance lifestyle. The development has been designed to satisfy the objectives of the zone and will provide for a high quality and attractive development that will improve the appearance of the existing buildings on site and will provide a general public benefit by facilitating public access to the foreshore for the community.

 

117.  The objectives of the height control are;

·  to establish the maximum height for buildings,

·  to minimise the impact of overshadowing, visual impact and loss of privacy on adjoining properties and open space areas,

·  to provide appropriate scale and intensity of development through height controls.

 

118.  In respect to amenity impacts from the development discussion earlier has confirmed that the degree and amount of overshadowing created by the development is considered acceptable and generally compliant and the additional overshadowing from the small additional level is considered to be minimal however its removal will improve and lessen the shadowing impact. In respect to visual impact, this additional area on the upper level will be visible from the street and southern side. It will add habitable space to this upper level and its removal as requested by Council’s Urban Designer will reduce the visible bulk and scale of the building along this corner.  Although it is unlikely there will be any view loss for the Seabreeze Apartments as they generally have unobstructed eastern views of the water and the current buildings and vegetation at the site will obstruct some water views and the north-eastern orientation is not the predominant view for this property the removal of the habitable area on the fifth level may open up some views across to the east.

 

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

 

Comment: The concurrence of the Director-General is assumed and has been delegated to the determining authority which is the Georges River Local Planning Panel as the non-compliance exceeds 10%.

 

119.  In accordance with the recent Land and Environment Court decision (Initial Action v Woollahra Municipal Council the NSW Land and Environment Court has established a “five part test” for consent authorities to consider when assessing a clause 4.6 request for variation. These are set out below, together with commentary in respect of the proposed development.

 

1. the objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard;

 

Comment: This has been addressed in points 106 - 111 above.

 

The proposed distribution of built form and massing of the building across the site is the result of a considered analysis of the site, the site constraints and its surrounding context.

 

Strict compliance with the development standard would result in an inflexible application of the control that would not deliver an ability to develop this site with a reasonable yield. However on balance permission to allow for an accessible roof space is in the public interest and is encouraged so in this case the variation to the height control of the lift overrun and balustrade to the communal open space on the roof is acceptable however permitting the additional habitable area along the southern side would potentially undermine the integrity and purpose of the height control. As such this element is requested to be deleted.

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary;

 

Comment: Given the isolated nature of the site and its long length it is considered reasonable to apply flexibility to the height control contained in clause 4.3 given the constraints of the site but in this case only permitting ancillary structures to exceed the control. Council has applied the control to new developments in a very consistent way.

 

The proposal has been designed to satisfy the objectives of the zone and the control.

3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable;

 

Comment: By permitting the habitable area to exceed the height control it would go some way in altering the intent of the control and would undermine the integrity and application of the control which has been consistently and coherently applied.

4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the council’s own actions in granting

consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable;

 

Comment: The height controls under KLEP 2012 have been recently adopted via the “New City Plan” which took effect in May 2017; this DA is one of the first proposals in the Blakehurst area to be assessed under the new controls. Accordingly, there have been few if any developments proposed under the new controls.

 

The ancillary structures exceed this control and this is considered reasonable and a satisfactory planning outcome. The habitable area will establish a precedence which has not been endorsed by Council in its application of the height control. Secondly the area will be visually dominant and its removal will improve the overall scale of the building and reduce the visual bulk. In general the non-compliance is considered minor (if only applied to the ancillary structures) and it will not result in the abandonment of the controls, given the uniqueness of the site constraints and the fact that a small proportion of the building will exceed the control.

5. The compliance with development standard is unreasonable or inappropriate due to existing use of land and current environmental character of the particular parcel of land. That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the zone.

 

Comment: The height and zoning of the site is considered to be acceptable however in this case the variation to the height control is considered to be minimal and will not result in the generation of any adverse amenity impacts. The removal of the upper level to Unit 4.01 will reduce the visual scale and bulk of the building along this corner of the site and will be more in tune with the aims and objectives of the height control.

 

120.  The Clause 4.6 prepared by City Plan Services has demonstrated there are significant environmental planning benefits associated with the contravention of the standard.

 

Request for Variation under Clause 4.6 Kogarah LEP 2012 - Clause 6.4 Foreshore Development

121.  The proposed development seeks a variation to the development standard relating to Foreshore Development pursuant to Clause 6.4 of the KLEP. The LEP identifies a Foreshore Building Line (FBL) of 12m for the Site (refer to Figure 12 below). Parts of the proposed building encroach the 12m FBL. A variation to the FBL (Clause 6.4) can only be considered under Clause 4.6 – Exceptions to Development Standards of the LEP. The Applicant has submitted a Clause 4.6 Statement to support the non-compliance. An assessment of the statement and reasoning for the variation is discussed below.

 

Figure 12: Extract from the KLEP (Foreshore Building Line Map_008)

 

122.  Clause 4.6(1) outlines the objectives of the standard which are to “provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development” and “to achieve better outcomes for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances”.

 

123.  In a recent decision (Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Council [2018] NSWLEC 118), the NSW Land and Environment Court has established a “five part test” for consent authorities to consider when assessing a DA proposing a clause 4.6 request for variation. These are set out below, together with commentary in respect of the proposed development.

 

1. the objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard;

 

Comment: Subclause (1) of Kogarah LEP 2012 states that: The objective of this clause “is to ensure that development in the foreshore area will not impact on natural foreshore processes or affect the significance and amenity of the area.”

 

The applicant has provided the following response regarding the proposal’s compliance with the objectives of the development standard.

 

Applicants comment: Part of the site is located in the foreshore area. The subject site currently contains a dwelling house, above ground pool and a 3-storey residential flat building. It has been used for residential purposes in the past for an extended period. The proposed development does not represent a more sensitive use than existing, and instead retains its residential character. The subject development site has been found to be suitable for the proposal and does not pose any prohibitive natural or artificial constraints. The proposal will not impact on natural foreshore processes or affect the significance and amenity of the area. Arguably, it will improve the present relationship between the built form and the waterway including the creation of public access along the foreshore.

 

Officer comment: The proposal does not involve any works that would extend out beyond the boundary at the rear onto the waterway. The FBL is not a standard that is tied directly to Clause 6.4 of the KLEP however it forms part of the mapping within the KLEP and is therefore recognised as a development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6. The FBL for the subject site is 12m however the south-eastern portion of the building exceeds the control and is setback between 7.263m to 7.643m however this setback is consistent with the existing setback of the RFB situated at 472-474 Princes Highway which is in accordance with the provisions of Clause 6.4(2)(a).

 

The proposal will improve the visual appearance of the site when viewed from the waterway by creating an attractive, useable landscaped area adjacent to the foreshore and despite the larger scale; the building has been curved and articulated to break down the form and bulk.

 

Most of the new sections of the building will be setback 12m in accordance with the intended FBL. Achieving a consistent 12m FBL for any building on this site is extremely difficult given the steep topography and narrow width of the Site. The existing RFB is setback approximately 7.6m as this is the narrowest part of the Site and achieving a 12m setback along this side would compromise the design intent of the built form and create a tall, thin building along this side which will be out of proportion with the remainder of the building.

 

The encroachment into the FBL will be imperceptible when viewed from the water and in the context of wider development and neighbouring sites. The significance of the area will be undiminished as a result of the encroachment. Rather, a high quality contemporary building will replace a low quality building thereby enhancing the site’s significance. The minor encroachment beyond the FBL ensures that a coherent design is maintained.

 

The proposed siting of the building will not adversely affect the use and natural processes of the waterway and would maintain the intended objective of the Clause.

 

It should be noted that prior to the City plan and recent amendments to the Kogarah LEP which rezoned some parts of Blakehurst to allow for higher densities, the KLEP 1998 included Clause 18 (Foreshore Building Line). The objective of this clause is “to protect the vegetation and aesthetic appearance of foreshore areas”. Clause 18 (1) stated “a foreshore building line applies for the purposes of this plan and is located on land to which this plan applies at a distance of 7.6m from the MHWM of each bay or river or at any greater distance as shown by a broken black line marked “FBL” on the land use map”. Clause 18(2) states that “except as provided by subclauses (3) –(5) a building shall not be erected on any land to which this plan applies between the foreshore building line and MHWM of the nearest bay or river”. Consent may be granted to smaller scale ancillary structures such as boat shed, jetty’s, pontoons, fences etc.

 

Unfortunately this clause was not transferred across when the City Plan amendments were made and the KLEP 2012 gazetted. This now means that there is no clause that refers back to the foreshore building line mapping.

 

After discussions with Council’s Strategic Planning Division this has been confirmed and technically the FBL for this site was 7.6m in accordance with the Clause 18 of the KLEP 1998 and unfortunately this Clause did not get transferred across. Given this omission we need to assess the application with what is in front of us it would seem that the 12m FBL is applicable and the most relevant Clause is 6.4.

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary;

 

Comment: When considering the objective of Clause 6.4, subclauses Clause 6.4(2) and 6.3(3) need to be taken into account as they have been constructed to assist in the interpretation of the Clause and aim to provide an indication of development that is considered to be acceptable along the foreshore. Clause 4.6(2) states that development consent must not be granted to development on land in the foreshore area except for the following purposes;

 

(a)    the extension, alteration or rebuilding of an existing building wholly or partly in the foreshore area,

(b)    the erection of a building in the foreshore area, if the levels, depth or other exceptional features of the site make it appropriate to do so,

(c)    boat sheds, sea retaining walls, wharves, slipways, jetties, works to enable pedestrian access to the waterway, swimming pools, fences, cycleways or walking trails.

 

In terms of compliance with Clause 6.4(2) the proposal complies as the proposal fits within the category of Clause 6.4(2)(a) as it is development that it involves “the erection of a building in the foreshore area, if the levels, depth or other exceptional features of the Site make it appropriate to do so”.

 

Clause 6.4(3) requires a detailed assessment of the proposal against a series of provisions to ensure there are no detrimental impacts on the foreshore in terms of environmental, cultural, social and visual impacts.

 

Applicants comment: In assessing the proposals compliance with Clause 6.4(3) the Applicant addressed each criteria in the following manner;

(a)    the development will contribute to achieving the objectives for the zone in which the land is located, and

 

The Site is located in the R3 zone and Clause 4.6 requires the assessment to consider whether the development is in the public interest and responds accordingly to the zone objectives. The objectives of the R3 zone are;

 

·       To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment.

·       To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment.

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

 

In response the Applicant states that “The proposed development is for a part-six and part seven storey residential flat building on the site containing a total of forty (40) units. The variation of the development standard does not result in an inconsistency with this objective. The proposal would increase the diversity of housing available in the region, achieve compatibility with the built form character anticipated by the planning controls, and improve the current built form and its relationship to the natural settings of Kogarah Bay and adjacent public reserves as well as the Princes Highway.

 

The proposed development comprises a residential flat building within land zoned R3, which will provide a mix of 1, 2- and 3-bedroom apartments. Units also vary in configuration and size to cater to different household types, requirements and levels of affordability.

 

The variation of the standard does not result in an inconsistency with this objective as it does not preclude development in surrounding areas. The proposed development has been designed to minimise and manage any potential adverse impacts that may occur to neighbouring properties and the environment.

 

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

 

Applicants comment: The site adjoins substantial public open spaces on either side boundary. The proposal has been carefully designed to complement the waterfront location and immediate context. Additionally, the proposal includes the provision of communal open space at the lower ground level and on the roof.

 

(c)    the development will not cause environmental harm such as: (i) pollution or siltation of the waterway, or (ii) an adverse effect on surrounding uses, marine habitat, wetland areas, fauna and flora habitats, or (iii) an adverse effect on drainage patterns, and

 

The specialist reports accompanying the DA, such as the Marine Ecology Report, Preliminary Acid Sulfate Soil Assessment and Stormwater Concept Plan (and subject to the preparation of an appropriate Construction Management Plan) the proposal will not cause environmental harm. The proposal, in conjunction with any mitigation measures as referenced in this SEE, does not result in any unreasonable environmental impacts. In some cases, the impacts are positive.

 

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

 

The proposal will create public access along the foreshore which does not presently exist.

 

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

 

The proposal includes the dedication of public access along the foreshore and northern boundary of the site.

 

(f)     any historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic significance of the land on which the development is to be carried The land has previously been developed and substantially altered and there are no known historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic features of the land.

 

The land has previously been developed and substantially altered and there are no known historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic features of the land.

 

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

 

The proposal will have a beneficial impact on the amenity and aesthetic appearance of the foreshore which is currently dominated by a concrete hardstand. This hardstand is to be removed and replaced with appropriate landscaping.

 

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

 

The finished floor level of the ground floor has been determined to accommodate projected sea level rise.

 

Officer Comment: A Marine Ecology Assessment was conducted in 2015 by Ocean Environmental Consulting which concluded that considering no dredging or excavation of marine sediments was proposed no adverse environmental impact on the Marine Habitat is envisaged and the sea grasses should not be affected.

 

The proposal is not considered to pose an adverse visual, aesthetic or environmental impact on the foreshore or immediately adjoining area. The proposed provision of a dedicated public boardwalk with access to the Foreshore will be a substantial and significant public benefit for the community.

The proposal is located over 1m above the mean high water mark (MHWM) and this is considered to be an acceptable floor level that takes into consideration any proposed tidal flooding in the future and caters for sea level rises.     

 

The proposed development will be well screened by the existing vegetation and planting located on the adjoining reserves. Further, the building will be reasonably set well back from the waterway and so it will have minimal impact on natural foreshore processes. The development generally satisfies the objectives of the foreshore building line control and is therefore satisfactory despite the numerical non-compliance.

3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable;

 

Comment: The provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 require a degree of flexibility to be applied in assessment of development proposals. Whilst the building being fully compliant with the foreshore building line would not defeat or thwart the underlying objective/purpose of the control, it is considered that the objectives of the control can still be met by the proposal which involves a minor non-compliance with the control.

 

The breach of the foreshore building line only occurs as a result of minor portions of the building but is consistent with the existing established building line. The existing building is in a poor state and the rear of the site is poorly utilised as it is currently comprises of a hard paved car parking area. The proposed development will substantially improve the visual amenity and functionality of this space at the rear and create an active area that will be able to be enjoyed by the residents as well as the community creating a through site link to the south and north and will promote the enjoyment of the foreshore by all members of the public.

 

The objective and purpose of Clause 4.6 is not defeated or thwarted by the non-compliance. The fact the FBL forms part of the mapping of the KLEP it is not directly tied to a development standard or Clause within the KLEP so the Clause that has the most applicability is Clause 6.4. The intention of a FBL is to restrict development on the foreshore and provide a suitable setback to reduce visual bulk and scale impacts when viewing the development from the waterway and foreshore and to maintain the natural landscape that abuts the waterway. The varied FBL of the proposed building from 7.2m to 12m will maintain the intention of the control.

 

It is also questionable that the FBL in this location (eastern side of Kogarah Bay) has and should actually be 7.6m and the previous Clause 18 (Foreshore Building Line) in the KLEP has not been transferred across from the previous version of the KLEP 1998.

4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable;

 

Comment:  In general, Council strictly enforces compliance with the foreshore building line, and so it cannot be said that this control has been abandoned or destroyed. However in keeping with the intent of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, variation to the foreshore building line is generally only supported to a minor extent in development proposals, where it can be demonstrated that there will be no adverse impact. This is considered to be the case in this instance, where a small variation is warranted and the new building replaces an existing building and is located in a similar position to the existing RFB.

 

5. The compliance with development standard is unreasonable or inappropriate due to existing use of land and current environmental character of the particular parcel of land. That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the zone.

Comment: The site is zoned for medium density residential purposes in a waterfront location. There are no immediately adjoining residential properties which will be adversely affected by the development.

Partial non-compliance with the standard will not affect the intention and objectives of the zone and the purpose of the standard.

 

Conclusion – Assessment of Clause 4.6 Request for Variation

124.  Despite the non-compliance in terms of the FBL, the proposal is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons:

 

125.  The encroachment into the FBL occurs only at one point of the building being the southern part; however this is consistent with the FBL of the existing RFB on the site. The encroachment will create a variation and articulation of the built form and break up the mass. This is beneficial from the design and planning perspective.

 

126.  The encroachment into the FBL does not give rise to any significant issues regarding impacts on neighbouring properties, such as visual bulk or view loss. The proposal is considered to be acceptable response for the site, it satisfies the objectives of the zone and control, as such the development is considered to be in the public interest and will establish a positive precedent in the area, replace a dilapidated and outdated building and improve the visual quality of the development when viewed from the street and foreshore. 

 

Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

The proposal is not inconsistent with the Draft Environmental SEPP which aims to protect and manage the natural environment. The SEPP consolidates a series of policies.

 

Development Control Plans

KOGARAH DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO 2013 (KDCP)

Compliance Table

Part B General Controls

Control

Standard

Proposed

Complies

B1 Heritage Items and Heritage Conservation Areas

Ensure development protects and enhances the environmental and cultural heritage of Kogarah;

 

Ensure proposed development is sympathetic to heritage items and Heritage Conservation Areas;

 

Provide guidance on appropriate design, siting, bulk, materials, landscaping and streetscape character

The subject site is not recognised as a Heritage Item or located within a Heritage Conservation Area.

 

Schedule 5 of the Kogarah LEP 2012 identifies heritage items in the City of Kogarah or is a site adjacent to a heritage item. Aboriginal Heritage The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Database indicates that there is evidence of Aboriginal archaeological sites (Middens) located in this Locality. These are situated in Dover Park and are not located within the site boundaries.

N/A to the site however a condition will be included to state that if any archaeological relics or remains are found during excavation then works shall stop and Council and the National Trust be notified and appropriate action be taken.

B2 – Tree Preservation and Greenweb

Development approval is required to ringbark, remove, cut down or destroy any tree that has a height greater than 3.5m or branch spread exceeding 3m in diameter.

 

Must not be within a Green Web habitat.

 

 

The proposal involves the removal of a number of trees the most prominent tree is T10 which is a Red Gum and is located at the front of the Site. This tree is mature and significant and in a good condition however is located within the building footprint. A detailed discussion in relation to the removal of this tree and associated trees has been provided above and there is enough evidence to suggest that its removal is satisfactory in this case.

Yes

 

B3 – Developments near busy roads and rail corridors

 

Acoustic assessments for noise sensitive developments as defined in clauses 87 and 102 of the Infrastructure SEPP may be required if located in the vicinity of a rail corridor or busy roads.

As previously mentioned an Acoustic Assessment was prepared and accompanies the application. It considers the design and siting of the development against the provisions in Clauses 87 and 102 of the Infrastructure SEPP.

The acoustic report suggests a series of measures that will improve noise attenuation within the apartments and includes double glazing, better insulation and other construction methods that will buffer the development from the surrounds. A condition will ensure compliance with these recommendations

Yes

B4 – Parking and Traffic

1 bedroom unit = 1 space/unit

2 bedroom unit = 1.5 spaces/unit

3 bedroom unit = 2 spaces/unit

1 visitor space/5 units or part thereof, and

1 designated car wash bay which may also be a visitor space.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A minimum of 1% of the total number of car parking spaces within the development are to be designated “accessible” spaces for people with mobility impairments.

 

For developments with less than 100 car spaces, a minimum of one accessible space must be provided designated accessible car spaces may be treated as resident car spaces in the calculation of parking requirements.

 

Bicycle parking 1 space per 3 dwellings plus 1 space per 10 for visitors so

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Internal car park layouts, space dimensions, ramp grades, access driveways, internal circulation aisles and service vehicle areas shall be designed in accordance with the requirements set out in AS 2890.1 (2004) and AS 2890.2 (2002) for off street parking and commercial vehicles.

 

No minimum requirements for loading/unloading for residential developments

Required

1 x 1 bedroom units  = 1 space

 

30 x 2 bedroom units = 45 spaces

 

9 x 3 bedroom units = 18 spaces

 

40/5 visitor spaces = 8 spaces

 

1 x car wash = 1 separate car wash bay provided

 

Accessible spaces required = 1space

 

Five (5) accessible spaces are provided as four (4) apartments are adaptable.

 

Total required 72 spaces

 

72 spaces provided which complies

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

40/3 bicycle spaces = 13 spaces

1 motorcycle space is required.

 

17 bicycle spaces are provided and 1 motorbike space is also allocated in the lower basement.

 

The parking layout and arrangement satisfies Council’s requirements and Australian Standards. The application was also referred to RMS and they are satisfied with the traffic generated by the development and access into and out of the site subject to the imposition of conditions.

Yes

 

The parking layout and arrangement satisfies Council’s requirements and Australian Standards. The application was also referred to RMS and they are satisfied with the traffic generated by the development subject to the imposition of conditions.

B5 – Waste Management

Submit a Waste Management Plan (WMP).

The application was accompanied by a WMP which was assessed by Council’s Coordinator of Environmental Sustainability.

 

No objection was raised in respect to the design of the garbage and waste disposal area and arrangement subject to conditions.

 Yes

B6 – Water Management

Detention storage is to be provided that is equal to or greater than the specified Site Storage Requirements (SSR).

Rainwater tank installed to meet BASIX water conservation requirements will be given credit for SSR purpose.

 

Drainage easements servicing stormwater pipes and/or overland runoff from catchments upstream of the development site are to be managed according with Council’s guidelines.

 

Discharge of stormwater runoff from a development site is to be undertaken in accordance with the design practice note, Site Drainage and Flood Management regarding direct discharge to kerb, discharge to a Council owned stormwater conduit, discharge to natural areas, discharge through private property and discharge within the development site.

The subject site is not located within flood prone land.

 

The application was referred to Council’s Engineers who assessed the proposed stormwater and drainage arrangement and are satisfied with the design and layout as the development intends on draining to the rear of the site and to Kogarah Bay which is consistent with the current drainage from the sites.

 

 

Yes

B7 – Environmental Management

Orient the building, as far as possible, so that the longest side is on the east-west axis.

 

The main facades of a building should be orientated towards the north, preferably within a range of 30 degrees east and 20 degrees west of true north.

 

 

 

Maximise the number of windows on the northern face of the building.

 

 

 

 

 

The use of dark coloured roofing is discouraged unless solar cells are integrated into the roof.

 

Minimise glazing on the southern and western sides of the building.

The application is accompanied by a BASIX certificate which confirms compliance with the minimum requirements of the SEPP (thermal comfort and water usage).

 

The western elevation faces Princes Highway has reduced window sizes to address the acoustic impacts.

 

The northern elevation of the development is a narrow width area, the majority of the openings face Kogarah bay which is the eastern side of the development.

 

The roofing is light in colour.

 

 

 

Glazing has been minimized on both these elevations.

Yes

Part C2 – Medium Density Housing

Site Isolation and amalgamation

 

A number of sites have been highlighted in the KDCP that will require amalgamation to avoid site isolation.

 

 

The subject site is not subject to the amalgamation plan.

 

The proposal involves the consolidation of 3 sites which is a desirable long term future outcome for this waterfront area.

Yes

 

 

Precinct Controls

 

A number of sites have been highlighted as “precincts” within subsection 2 of the DCP.

The site is not located within any of the precincts highlighted in Subsection 2.

N/A

Minimum site and density requirements

 

Stipulates a minimum frontage width of 20m and a minimum of 2.1sqm per sqm of per dwelling for RFB’s in designated precincts.

 

The minimum site area requirements for multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings are contained in Clause 4.1A of Kogarah LEP 2012.

The site is not in a designated precinct. FSR control is stipulated in the KLEP.

 

 

Complies with KLEP provisions which override KDCP.

Yes

Height and building envelope

Building envelopes have been established for development in the R3 zone. In respect to RFB’s the DCP stipulates an overall height of 14m (to the ridgeline) for 4 storeys and a maximum wall height of 12m.

 

Min floor to ceiling height of 2.7m

 

 

Rooftop terraces are prohibited unless they are directly linked to penthouse units.

The building exceeds the 14m overall height. This control is outdated as the DCP has not been amended to reflect the changes in the KLEP.

 

 

 

 

Complies all levels have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.7m

 

Rooftop terraces are permitted and encouraged by SEPP 65 especially if it provides for communal open space. The space is centralised and communal in nature and will not adversely affect adjoining properties.

No however the KLEP controls override the KDCP controls

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

No - however ADG provisions encourage communal areas of open space on the roof top.

Building setbacks

Front setback - 75% of the width of the building must be setback a min 5m with the remaining 25% setback 7m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Side and rear setbacks – 3m plus one-quarter the amount that the wall exceeds 3m.

 

 

Nil, 3m, 5.6m and 5.3m proposed to the various elements of the building.

The front setback variation to the control is considered acceptable given the narrow depth of the site and its steep and constrained nature and its isolated location between 2 reserves. The building is located on the lower side of Princes Highway and as the perspective shows only levels 4 - 6 will be visible and this section of the building is well within the 21m height limit permitted by the KLEP.

 

The side setbacks do not comply with the KDCP however the ADG provisions override these and although not fully compliant, the proposed separation distances are considered to be acceptable, see detailed discussion in the SEPP 65 assessment.

No but considered acceptable given the site constraints as discussed in the SEPP 65 assessment.

See Note 3 below

 

Site Coverage

 

RFB’s max 45% site coverage which amounts to 1,035sqm

43% site coverage building footprint and driveway access amounts to 1,000sqm

Yes

 

Open Space

 

Ground floor courtyards min 35sqm in area per dwelling with min dimension 3m

 

has a minimum width of 4m

 

has a maximum gradient of 1 in 10

 

is suitably landscaped and directly accessible from the dwelling at ground level; and

 

Balconies with min area 12sqm and min dimension of 3m

 

 

 

 

 

 

Common open space – 30sqm per dwelling which requires a total area of 1,200sqm of common open space

Rear private courtyards have areas of approx. 60sqm or greater.

 

6-6.5m

 

Complies – level access

 

 

Deep soil and paved courtyards

 

 

Balcony sizes vary from 8sqm and 10sqm depending on the size of the apartment. This is in accordance with the SEPP 65 provisions which override the DCP criterion.

 

The development includes two areas of open space with the lower ground floor catering for 153sqm and the roof terrace providing 733sqm of communal area. This creates a total area of 886sqm. This area exceeds the minimum required by the ADG.

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No but considered to be acceptable and in compliance with the ADG.

 

 

 

No - but considered to be acceptable and in compliance with the ADG.

Car Parking

Numerical compliance in accordance with B4 of the DCP

 

Minimise driveways off main roads

 

Parking spaces to have min dimensions 2.6m by 5.5m

 

 

Provision of a car wash bay

 

 

 

 

One point of access from Princes Highway.

 

Car parking spaces and general arrangement and layout is compliant.

 

One separate designated car wash bay is provided

Yes

 

 

Solar Access

 

Where the neighbouring properties are affected by overshadowing, at least 50% of the neighbouring existing primary private open space or windows to main living areas must receive a minimum of 3 hours sunlight between 9am–3pm on the winter solstice (21 June).

Proposal complies with the minimum requirements as all immediately neighbouring properties receive a minimum of 3 hours of solar access throughout the day in midwinter.

Refer to shadow diagrams in Figure 11 above.

 

 

Views and view sharing

 

Development shall provide for the reasonable sharing of views.

The proposal will not adversely affect or impact on any existing views or outlook from adjoining properties.

Yes

Adaptable and Accessible Housing

 

The minimum number of adaptable units designed in accordance with AS4299 - 1995 Adaptable Housing must be incorporated into the above developments: (i) 3-10 units – 1 adaptable unit (ii) 11-20 units – 2 adaptable units (iii) 21-30 units – 3 adaptable units (iv) 31-40 units – 4 adaptable units (v) 41-50 units – 5 adaptable units (vi) 51+ units - 6 adaptable units + 10% of additional dwellings beyond 60 (rounded up to the nearest whole number).

 

Notwithstanding the above requirements, where multi dwelling housing is proposed in accordance with Clause 18, Schedule 1 of KLEP 2012, all dwellings must be designed in accordance with AS4299-1995.

A minimum of 4 adaptable units are required to be provided. The proposal caters for the provision of four adaptable apartments

Yes

C3 - Foreshore & Waterfront Controls

 

Clause 6.4 of KLEP 2012 specifies provisions to ensure that development in the foreshore area will not impact on natural foreshore processes or affect the significance and amenity of the area.

No works are proposed along the water interface, the boat ramp that exists is proposed to be removed which will reduce the potential for waterway use and activity by boats.

Yes

6.1 Foreshore & Waterfront Development

Council will not grant consent for residential waterfront structures to land which does not have frontage to the waterway. This includes allotments which only have a right of way to the waterway.

 

Where an existing allotment has a water frontage of less than 9m, Council will not permit waterfront structures unless they are shared.

The subject site has a frontage much greater than 9m and is a large integrated development.

 

The proposal intends on sharing the benefits of the waterfront with the local community by providing public access at the rear of the site and a staircase from the street to the water along the northern side of the development.

Yes

6.2 Jetty, ramp and pontoon structures

A fixed jetty is not to exceed a length of 9m from MHWM including any existing reclamations. The jetty may have a maximum width of 1500mm and a maximum height of 750mm above MHWM (1.29 AHD) (Figure 1).

(2) A ramp and pontoon extension to a jetty may be permitted provided that the total length of the ramp and jetty does not exceed 15m from MHWM (Figure 1).

(3) Pontoons are to be a maximum of 3.6m x 2.4m, constructed to the appropriate Australian Standard and only used as a facility to provide access to the water (Figure 1).

N/A – no jetty, pontoon or associated structures are proposed as part of this application.

 

Note: The Planning Proposal did include a new jetty structure along the southern side of the site adjoining Tom Ugly’s Reserve. This structure was referred to the Department of Fisheries for their concurrence, no objection was raised regarding the structure.

N/A

6.3 Stabilisation Piles

Council will generally only permit a maximum of two freestanding end piles to stabilise a jetty or a pontoon in areas subject to moderate to heavy wave exposure.

 

The Foreshore Locality Controls specify the circumstances when stabilisation piles are permitted.

Not proposed as part of this application.

N/A

6.4 Sliprails

Sliprails are to be in the form of two parallel rails located as close as practical to the seabed and must be recessed into any seawall or reclamation to minimise the height of the sliprails.

Not proposed as part of this application.

N/A

6.5 Boatsheds

Boatsheds are to be single storey and will generally only be permitted at or above MHWM.

Not proposed as part of this application.

N/A

6.6 Swimming Pools/Spa Pools

Any swimming pool or spa pool is to be sited as close to natural or existing ground level as possible. In this regard, the coping level of swimming pools and spa pools is not to be elevated more than 500mm above natural or existing ground

The proposal proposed a swimming pool as part of the landscape plan however this part of the proposal has been deleted by way of a condition.

N/A

6.7 Seawalls

The construction of seawalls is not generally favoured as these detract from the natural appearance of the foreshore and will only be considered where justified on the basis of avoiding flooding or for necessary retention works.

There is currently a small illegal boat ramp located along the centre of the site which provides direct access to the water for smaller boats such as dingys.

 

The sea wall seems to have been removed to cater for this opening. It is proposed by way of a condition to replace the seawall and fencing and to remove this structure. The wall is a sandstone structure and can be readily replaced.

Yes

6.8 Reclamation

Council will only consider reclamations where there are exceptional circumstances.

No reclamation of any land is proposed.

Yes

6.9 Inclinators and Stairs

Inclinators and stairs to enable pedestrian access to the waterfront are permitted between the FBL and MHWM.

The proposed public link and access stairs satisfy the control.

Yes

6.10 Landscaping

Natural features along the foreshore are to be retained and the removal of natural rock, trees and vegetation to enable the construction of landscaping will not be supported.

 

Natural ground levels are to be retained with minimal use of retaining walls. Where retaining walls are constructed, materials and colours that blend into the character and landscape of the area shall be used.

 

Endemic native species should be used in areas where native vegetation is present or has the potential to be regenerated.

 

Exotic species that have the potential to spread into surrounding bushland should be avoided.

 

Existing mature trees should be retained where possible and incorporated into the design of new developments.

 

Vegetation along ridgelines and on hillsides should be retained and supplemented with additional planting to provide a backdrop to the waterway.

 

 A landscape plan is to be submitted for any development between FBL and MHWM. The level of detail required will depend on the level of works being undertaken. Where a landscape plan is submitted it should indicate the existing and proposed changes in contours, existing trees/vegetation to be retained and removed, measures to protect vegetation during construction and proposed planting including species and common names.

The existing development on site has altered the natural topography of the land and has been cleared.

 

Maybe we need to also provide a comment on the Red Gum here.

Yes

6.11 Dredging

Council will generally not support dredging in the W2 Recreational Waterways zone unless a Public Authority is undertaking the work or there is a general public benefit to be gained by the work.

Not proposed as part of this development.

N/A

C4 Foreshore Locality Controls – Carss Park

4.8 Water Based Development

Protect the estuarine flora and fauna habitat and minimise disturbance of ecological communities.

(b) Retain and encourage tidal public foreshore access.

(c) Ensure that watercraft facilities do not encroach on navigation channels or adversely affect the use of the waterway by adjoining landowners.

(d) Minimise the individual and cumulative visual impact of watercraft facilities and ensure that they do not detract from the visual quality of the waterway.

More related to ancillary developments i.e. jetty’s boat sheds etc. which are not proposed as part of this application.

N/A

4.9 Land Based Development

Buildings should be sited on the block to retain existing ridgeline vegetation, where possible. Siting buildings on existing building footprints or reducing building footprints to retain vegetation and the natural landform is highly recommended. In this regard, Council may consider variations to setback and height requirements to retain existing ridgeline vegetation, particularly where it provides a backdrop to the waterway, but only where it can be demonstrated that the variations:

(i)    do not increase the visual impact of the dwelling when viewed from the water;

(j)    still achieve a built form that is in scale and proportion with the site and adjoining development; and

(k)   the overall development complies with the floor space requirements as contained in Part C1 Section 1.2.1.

 

On sites where the slope exceeds 1:8 (12.5%), dwellings should not have the appearance from any elevation of being more than three levels from the water.

Such developments should be stepped, with the bulk of the development setback as far from the water as possible

The maximum number of storeys at any point is two (2).

 

However, in certain circumstances, Council may permit a variation to this requirement where the design of the dwelling results in a reduced building footprint and site coverage and results in the following:

(h)  Preservation of topographic features of the site, including rock shelves and cliff faces;

(i)   Retention of significant trees and vegetation, particularly in areas where the loss of this vegetation would result in the visual scarring of the landscape, when viewed from the water; and

(j)    Minimised site disturbance through cutting and/or filling of the site (Refer to Figure 12-14).

 

Facades and rooflines of dwellings facing the water are to be broken up into smaller elements with a balance of solid walls to glazed areas. Rectangular or boxy shaped dwellings with large expanses of glazing and reflective materials are not acceptable. In this regard, the maximum amount of glazed area to solid area for façades facing the foreshore is to be 50%-50%.

 

Colours that harmonise with and recede into the background landscape are to be used. In this regard, dark and earthy tones are recommended and white and light coloured roofs and walls are not permitted. To ensure that colours are appropriate, a schedule of proposed colours is to be submitted with the Development Application and will be enforced as a condition of consent.

 

Swimming pools and surrounds should be sited in an area that minimises the removal of trees and limits impact on the natural landform features (rock shelves and platforms).

 

On steeper slopes, preference is given to the use of stable rock ledges and escarpments, as opposed to retaining walls. In circumstances where it is appropriate, a landscape batter is preferable to retaining walls.

 

Adequate landscaping shall be provided to screen undercroft areas and reduce their impact when viewed from the water.

 

Where there is a strong design character in existing buildings, new dwellings must, when viewed from the waterway, incorporate design elements (such as roof forms, textures, materials, the arrangement of windows, modulation, spatial separation, landscaping etc) that are compatible with that character.

 

Blank walls facing the waterfront shall not be permitted. In this regard, walls are to be articulated and should incorporate design features, such as:

(i)         awnings or other features over windows;

(ii)        recessing or projecting architectural elements; or

(iii)       open, deep verandas.

The existing site/s have been severely altered from their natural state and the existing RFB at No.472 Princes Highway has been constructed and eliminated the embankment and altered the topography of the land.

 

The new development will not alter the natural environment any further other than removing some vegetation and consolidating two existing, developed sites and creating a larger, integrated building.

 

Some of these controls relate to dwelling houses on the foreshore.

 

The scale and form of the development will be in keeping with the character of the area and is in line with the desired future character for new development. The removal of the upper level habitable area to Unit 4.01 will improve the visual bulk and scale of the

building when viewed from the street.

 

This control relates to dwelling houses so not applicable in this case.

 

 

The control is also outdated and is not in line with the updated amendment to the LEP which increases the height and FSR in this foreshore location. The proposal aims to comply with the height and FSR.

 

Again this control relates specifically to dwelling houses and provides some flexibility to the application of the height/number of storey’s control. It is irrelevant in this case.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The proposed colours, materials and finishes are contemporary in nature and aim to be sympathetic with the coastal characteristics present. The proposed colours and materials are considered to be consistent with and respect the character of the area and locality.

 

 

 

 

 

The proposed swimming pool in the communal area on the ground floor at the rear is recommended to be deleted as the plans don’t include the pool just the landscape plan and details of the pool have not been included.

 

The proposal does not require extensive retaining walls only some treatments along the southern and northern boundaries but as the site/s have already been redeveloped existing structures may be sufficient to be retained.

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The façade to the waterfront is angled and well-articulated. There are many interesting architectural elements that are integrated into the design including awnings, recessed balconies of varying sizes and shapes.

Yes

 

Figure 13: Extract from the KLEP showing Locality 4 (Carss Park to Shipwrights Bay)

 

(3) Front Setback

127.  The DCP control seeks to create a staggered front building alignment and provide diversity and variety in the built form. A standard 5m setback is required for 75% of the width of the site and the further 25% of the building requires a 7m setback.

 

128.  The proposed building is setback between 2m to 7.25m which does not comply with this provision. Currently the RFB at 472 Princes Highway is a three storey building with one storey visible from the roadway. The building is setback between 4m-5m however there are some visually dominating and unattractive features located forward of the building line including four (4) garage structures and the obtrusive solid, brick front fence. The front of the RFB is concreted catering for hardstand parking.

 

129.  The proposal although non-compliant with the KDCP has been designed to improve the general interface between the new built form and the roadway. The building along the southern side is setback 3m to the face of the façade and 2m to the fire stair. This front setback is intended to include large, deep planter boxes which can accommodate some smaller lower shrubs and some larger mature trees. The substation has been designated to be located along the south western corner of the site within the front boundary. The substation location is in the only part of the site at the front which is deep soil area and this comprises of some 10sqm. A condition will require the relocation of the substation and the planting of one large mature tree species on this corner.

 

130.  The main entry to the units is located on the southern side and is setback 4m with the main entry doors recessed further within the building. The building is setback over 6m from the front boundary in the centre of the site where the driveway crosses over is located.  There is a large Council verge at the front of the driveway that is not part of the site but provides additional separation from the roadway. At present this area is lightly vegetated but a condition will require this area to include some additional planting to green this space. The northern section of the building is setback 5.6m from the front which is considered an acceptable setback, although the goods hoist is located within the front setback area this feature is small and is a functional addition which will assist with the movement of garbage bins from the basement to the roadway. A platform lift is also proposed to provide equitable access to the site to avoid the large expanse of ramped access ways.

 

131.  The interface of the driveway access and the RMS roadway ha largely dictated the development along the interface of Princes Highway, as a result the development form has been appropriately located to ensure there is a positive visual transition from the roadway to the development site.

 

132.  The building is varied and is the staggered front setback including planter boxes and additional vegetation will provide a more harmonious development that respects the nature of the roadway it faces and the public domain.

 

(4) Foreshore Access Improvement Policy

133.  Council is currently in the process of preparing a Foreshore Access Improvement Policy. The purpose of the Policy is to create an integrated policy informing developments along the waterfront. The policy is in its infancy and the scope of the brief is to examine public land only. The Consultant preparing the plan has stated that any recommended actions will not be included for private land.

 

134.  On that basis, the Council is focusing on improving access along the foreshore for public land. In this case the provision of the 2m wide public access link is a substantial public benefit especially as it is on private land and there is no legislative requirement that seeks this arrangement. This accessway will substantially improve the access from Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve through to Dover Park North. Currently Dover Park North is hard to access and the provision of the stairs and accessways at the rear of the site is a benefit for the local community and improve connectivity along this part of the Bay. Tom Ugly’s Point Reserve is a popular area and well utilised by fishermen and members of the public, this extended link will improve accessibility, functionality and the useability of the waterfront for the public.

 

135.  Council has considered how to treat the walkway and stair access with respect to ownership. A condition will be required that the stairs and path be an easement on title for the benefit of Council and this will require formal registration prior to the issuing of the occupation certificate.

 

Section 7.12 Contributions

136.  The proposed development would require payment of developer contributions under Section 7.12 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. An appropriate condition is included in the recommended conditions.

 

IMPACTS

Natural and Built Environment, Social and Economic Impacts

137.  The proposed development is replacing some existing, outdated and unattractive buildings and structures on site with a larger scale modern contemporary residential flat building. Given the location of the site on the waterway and its frontage to a busy, noisy arterial road the building has been designed to respect the environmental conditions and site constraints (steep nature and topography) to create an articulated and interesting built form that aims to improve the visual quality of the streetscape.

 

138.  The development should provide short term economic benefits through the construction process and should provide significant environmental and social benefits by the provision of a public accessway along the waterway to connect to the adjoining areas of open space.

 

139.  The proposal is unlikely to adversely affect the amenity of adjoining developments and aims to have a positive impact on the streetscape and the waterway. The design of the building has been amended to address concerns raised by Council, it is now considered that the planning and design outcome is an appropriate response for the site.

 

Suitability of the site

140.  The site is zoned R3 – Medium Density Residential. The proposal is a permissible form of development in this zone. The proposal will not have an unreasonable impact on the adjoining properties and there will be no loss of views from the waterway. It is considered that the proposed development is of a scale and design that is suitable for the site having regard to its size and shape, its topography, vegetation and relationship to adjoining developments.

 

SUBMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST

141.  The DA was neighbour notified in accordance with Kogarah DCP 2013 for a period of 14 days from 3 October 2018 until 19 October 2018. One (1) submission was received. The submitter raised one issue of concern in relation to this development as the submission also raised concern about another application on Princes Highway. The main issue of concern is:

 

·   The development is non-compliant with the 12m height limit increasing to 18m on the waterfront

 

142.  The standard height control for this part of Kogarah was modified as part of the Kogarah LEP 2012 (Amendment 2) from a 12m height limit to a 21m height limit.

 

143.  Although the development exceeds the 21m height limit in parts the exceedance is not visible at the front of the building as the front façade to the Princes Highway is 5 storeys along the northern side and 6 storeys along the southern side. Based on a 21m height limit this allows for approximately 7 storeys (excluding the lift overrun as these elements often exceed the height as they access a rooftop communal area of open space. So the development as viewed from the front complies with the height limit.

 

144.  The parts of the building that exceed the height are both lift overruns and a section of apartment 4.01. The result of the variation is due to the existing ground floor line being located below the natural ground line and the steep nature of the site creating the non-compliance as the rear parts of the building would technically be considered to be “below ground”. It is requested by way of a condition that the upper level of Unit 4.01 be deleted which will reduce the visual bulk of the building when viewed from the street and southern side and will improve the scale of the building. This will ensure that general compliance with the height is achieved other than a slight encroachment by the ancillary structures.

 

REFERRALS

Council Referrals

Health and Building

145.  The application was referred to Council’s Building Section for comment. The proposal was considered against the provisions of Clause 98 of the EP&A Act Regulation and with the Building Code of Australia. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory subject to the implementation of conditions if approval is to be granted.

 

 Development Engineer

146.  The application was referred to Council’s Engineers for comments. No objection was raised in respect to the design of the proposed stormwater/drainage subject to the imposition of conditions.

 

Traffic Engineer

147.  The application was referred to Council’s Traffic Engineer for comment. No objection was raised in respect to the proposal, subject to the RMS being satisfied with the proposal. The Traffic Engineer commented on the proposed traffic and trip movements created by the development being approximately “an increase of some 13 additional vehicular movements per hour in the peak”. Considering there is no intersection within the immediate vicinity of the site there should not be any major impacts of these additional movements.

 

Environmental Health Officer

148.  Council’s Environmental Health Officer has raised no objection subject to conditions of consent being attached to any consent granted.

 

149.  The comments made by EHO states “The application proposes to demolish the existing residential developments on site (a single dwelling & and a 3 storey residential flat building) and construct a part 6 & part 8 storey residential flat building comprising 2 levels of basement car parking & 40 residential units.

 

The Environmental Health Section has assessed the proposed development in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.  The assessment also includes the review of the floor plans submitted and the:

·    Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by City Plan Services dated September 2018.

·    Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) prepared by EI Australia dated 14 September 2018.

·    Acoustic Report – Traffic & Environmental Noise prepared by Acoustic, Vibration & Noise Pty Ltd dated 16 August 2018.

 

The PSI states that EI considers there is a low potential for contamination to be present on-site and that the site can be made suitable for the proposed developments subject to recommendations. These recommendations will be included in the suggested conditions below.

 

As the proposed development is located on a busy road, the acoustic report includes recommendations to achieve the appropriate level of noise mitigation inside the residences. The recommendations will be included in the suggested conditions.”

 

Consultant Arborist

150.  The application was accompanied by an Arboricultural Assessment prepared by Newleaf which considered the importance and significance of each tree species.

 

151.  The proposal requests the removal of a number of trees but the most significant tree is a Red Gum. This tree is located within the building footprint and the Applicant considered its retention but this tree cannot be physically retained as the site is heavily constrained by its steep nature. A detailed assessment of the significance of the tree has been addressed earlier in this report. An Arborist and Ecologist have both justified that the removal of the tree is satisfactory in this case subject to the provision of compensatory planting.

 

152.  The proposal will provide for a substantial amount of compensatory planting which will substantially improve the visual character and appearance when viewed from the street and immediate surrounds. Larger trees will be planted at the rear of the site which will improve the relationship to the foreshore.

 

153.  Council’s Landscape Officer considered the proposal and removal/retention of trees as acceptable subject to the imposition of standard conditions.

 

External Referrals

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS)

154.  The application was referred to RMS in accordance with Clause 104 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 and Section 138 of the Roads Act, 1993 as the Princes Highway is a classified State Road.

 

155.  RMS reviewed the proposal and provided formal concurrence and an “in principle” approval subject to the imposition of a series of conditions if consent is to be granted.

 

Department of Primary Industries – Water

156.  The development is located within 40m of a waterway and is within “waterfront” land therefore the provisions of the Water Management Act 2000 need to be considered. The proposal is not considered to be a controlled activity as no works are occurring on the water, and no licence is required however the proposal is also not “exempt” development in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 4 of the Water Management (General) Regulation 2018 as such concurrence of the Department of Primary Industries – Water is required.

 

157.  The application was referred to DPI and no formal comment has been received to date. The Departments concurrence can be assumed if no response is provided after 21days (insert date of referral and date of preparation of this report).

 

CONCLUSION

158.  The proposal has been assessed using the matters for consideration listed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory and recommended for approval subject to conditions, as discussed throughout this report.

 

159.  The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the KLEP 2012 and KDCP 2013 and the proposal is generally compliant with the main statutory controls apart from the building partially exceeding the height limit. A Clause 4.6 Statement has been submitted with the application justifying the variation in this case. A detailed assessment of the Clause 4.6 Statement in respect to height has been conducted and given the unique nature of the site, its topographical constraints the fact the exceedance maintains compliance with the objectives of both the height control and the zone objectives, the proposed variation is acceptable in this case and the Clause 4.6 Statement should be supported subject to the deletion of the upper level of Unit 4.01. This is achieved through a condition if consent is to be granted.

 

160.  The applicant has also lodged a Clause 4.6 Statement in respect to the non-compliance with the Foreshore Building Line (FBL) whereby part of the building encroaches on the 12m FBL. The statement justifies that the encroachment is considered to be satisfactory as that part of the building encroaching on the FBL is in line with the rear alignment and setback of the existing RFB on site. The proposed design is in accordance with the objectives of the zone and the development standard (Clause 6.4 of the KLEP). In this case the Clause 4.6 statement should be supported.

 

DETERMINATION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS

Statement of Reasons

161.  The reasons for this recommendation are:

·    The proposed development complies with the requirements and objectives of the relevant environmental planning instruments and development control plan except in respect to the height of the development which is considered acceptable having regard to the justification provided in the report above.

·    The applicant has amended the proposal from that originally submitted to address issues raised by the Design Review Panel and Council officers to provide a better design outcome when viewed from Princes Highway and the waterway and to improve the internal functionality of the building.

·    The proposed development is considered to be an appropriate scale and form for the site and the character of the locality. Subject to the implementation of the recommended conditions and the deletion of the upper level of Unit 4.01 the development will have no unacceptable adverse impacts upon the natural or built environment.

·    The provision of public access as part of this proposal is a significant public benefit for the local community and will provide connectivity to the immediately adjoining areas of open space.

·    The proposal aims to create a positive contribution to the streetscape through its design, use of materials and finishes and siting of the building.

·    In consideration of the aforementioned reasons, the proposed development is a suitable and planned use of the site and its approval is in the public interest.

 

Determination

A.        THAT Georges River Council supports the request for variation under Clause 4.6 of Kogarah LEP 2012, in relation to the Foreshore Building Line control.

 

B.        THAT Georges River Council supports the request for variation under Clause 4.6 of the Kogarah LEP 2012, in relation to the building height control.

 

C.        THAT pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) the Council grant development consent to Development Application DA2018/0393  for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a part six (6) storey, part eight (8) storey residential flat building comprising of forty (40) residential apartments, two levels of basement car parking containing seventy two (72) car spaces, roof top communal open space and associated landscaping residential, at Lot A in DP420623, Lot 1 in DP223068 and Lot 10 in DP633892 and known as 468-472 Princes Highway, Kogarah, in accordance with the following conditions.

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

1.      Approved Plans - The development must be implemented in accordance with the approved plans and supporting documentation listed below which have been endorsed by Council’s approved stamp, except where marked up on the plans and/or amended by conditions of this consent:

 

Description

Reference No.

Date

Revision

Plans prepared by Architecture and Building Works

Streetscape Analysis

A-1600

4/9/18

A

Lower Basement

A-1000

18/1/19

D

Basement Plan

A-1010

18/1/19

D

Upper Ground Plan

A-1030

18/1/19

D

Ground Floor Plan

A-1040

18/1/19

D

First Floor Plan

A-1050

18/1/19

D

Second Floor Plan

A-1060

18/1/19

D

Third Floor Plan

A-1070

18/1/19

D

Fourth Floor Plan

A-1080

18/1/19

D

Fifth Floor Plan

A-1090

18/1/19

D

Roof Plan

A1100

18/1/19

D

Elevations

A-1200

18/1/19

D

Elevations

A-1201

18/1/19

D

Section

A-1300

18/1/19

D

Section 2

A-1301

18/1/19

D

GFA Calculations

A-1400

18/1/19

D

Communal Open Space GFA

A-1401

18/1/19

D

Site Plan

A-0100

18/1/19

D

Material Sample

A-0003

Aug 2018

-

Landscape Plans prepared by Scott Carver

LD-DA100, LD-DA101, LD-DA110, LD-DA200, LD-DA201

Ref 20170059

1

Survey Plans prepared by Geometra

Sheets 1, 2, 3 and 4

26/6/17

A1

Stormwater Concept Plans

Plans 000, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107

21/6/18

-

 

Separate Approvals Required Under Other Legislation

 

2.      Section 138 Roads Act 1993 and Section 68 Local Government Act 1993 - Unless otherwise specified by a condition of this consent, this Development Consent does not give any approval to undertake works on public infrastructure.

 

Separate approval is required under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and/or Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for any of the following activities carried out in, on or over a public road (including the footpath) listed below.  An application is required to be lodged and approved prior to the commencement of any of the following works or activities:

Placing or storing materials or equipment;

a)      Placing or storing waste containers or skip bins;

b)      Erecting a structure or carrying out work;

c)      Swinging or hoisting goods over any part of a public road by means of a lift, crane or the like;

d)      Pumping concrete from a public road;

e)      Pumping water from the site into the public road;

f)       Constructing a vehicular crossing or footpath;

g)      Establishing a “works zone”;

h)      Digging up or disturbing the surface of a public road (eg Opening the road for the purpose of connections to utility providers);

i)       Stormwater and ancillary works in the road reserve;

j)        Stormwater and ancillary to public infrastructure on private land.

 

If any excavation is to be supported by the use of below ground (cable) anchors that are constructed under Council’s roadways/footways.

 

These separate activity approvals must be obtained and evidence of the approval provided to the Certifier prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

The relevant Application Forms for these activities can be downloaded from Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au. For further information, please contact Council’s Customer Service Centre on (02) 9330 6400.

 

3.      Below ground anchors - Information to be submitted with S68 Application under LGA 1993 and S138 Application under Roads Act 1993 - In the event that the excavation associated with the basement carpark is to be supported by the use of below ground (cable) anchors that are constructed under Council’s roadways/footways, an application must be lodged with Council under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Roads Act 1993 for approval, prior to commencement of those works.

 

The following details must be submitted:

 

k)      That cable anchors will be stressed released when the building extends above ground level to the satisfaction of Council;

 

l)       The applicant has indemnified Council from all public liability claims arising from the proposed works, and provide adequate insurance cover to the satisfaction of Council.

 

m)     Documentary evidence of such insurance cover to the value of $20 million;

 

n)      The applicant must register a non-terminating bank guarantee in favour of Council. An amount will be determined when the application is lodged;

 

o)      The guarantee will be released when the cables are stress released. In this regard it will be necessary for a certificate to be submitted to Council from a structural engineer at that time verifying that the cables have been stress released.

 

p)      In the event of any works taking place on Council’s roadways/footways adjoining the property while the anchors are still stressed, all costs associated with overcoming the difficulties caused by the presence of the ‘live’ anchors will be borne by the applicant.

 

4.      Road Opening Permit - A Road Opening Permit must be obtained from Council for every opening of a public road reserve to access services including sewer, stormwater drains, water mains, gas mains, and telecommunications before the commencement of work in the road.

 

Requirements of Other Government Authorities

 

5.      Sydney Water – Tap in TM - The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Tap inTM to determine whether the development application will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met.  The approved plans will be appropriately endorsed.  For details please refer to ‘Plumbing, building and developing’ section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then see ‘Building’, or telephone 13000 TAP IN (1300 082 746).  The Certifying Authority must ensure that a Tap inTM agent has appropriately stamped the plans prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

6.      Notice of Requirements for a Section 73 Certificate - A Notice of Requirements of what will eventually be required when issuing a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained from Sydney Water Corporation.  Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator.  Please refer to the ‘Plumbing, building and developing’ section of the web site www.sydneywater.com.au then refer to ‘Providers’ under ‘Developing’ or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

Following application, a ‘Notice of Requirements’ will advise of water and sewer infrastructure to be built and charges to be paid.  Please make early contact with the Co-ordinator, as it can take some time to build water/sewer pipes and this may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

 

The Notice of requirements must be submitted prior to the commencement of work. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate will be required at the completion of development in accordance with further conditions.

 

7.      Section 73 Compliance Certificate - A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

8.      Electricity Supply - An application is required to be made to Ausgrid for a network connection. This may require the network to be extended or its capacity augmented. Evidence of this application being lodged with Ausgrid is required to be provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. For further details, you are advised to contact Ausgrid on 13 13 65 or www.ausgrid.com.au (Business and Commercial Services).

 

9.      Roads and Maritime - The following RMS requirements are to be met;

 

I.    The subject property is affected by a road proposal as shown by the grey colour on the attached Aerial – ‘X’.

 

Roads and Maritime has no other approved proposal that requires any part of the subject property for road purposes. As such, all buildings and structures, together with any improvements integral to the future use of the site are wholly within the freehold property (unlimited in height or depth), along the Princes Highway boundary.

 

II.   The redundant driveways on the Princes Highway shall be removed and replaced with kerb and gutter to match existing. The design and construction of the kerb and gutter on Princes Highway shall be in accordance with Roads and Maritime requirements. Details of these requirements should be obtained by email to DeveloperWorks.Sydney@rms.nsw.gov.au.

 

Detailed design plans of the proposed kerb and gutter are to be submitted to Roads and Maritime for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate and commencement of any road works.

 

III.  Detailed design plans and hydraulic calculations of any changes to the stormwater drainage system are to be submitted to Roads and Maritime for approval, prior to the commencement of any works.

A plan checking fee will be payable and a performance bond may be required before Roads and Maritime approval is issued.

 

IV. All vehicles shall enter and exit in a forward direction.

 

V.  The proposed development should be designed such that road traffic noise from Princes highway is mitigated by durable materials in order to satisfy the requirements for habitable rooms under Clause 102 (3) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.

 

VI. Roads and Maritime is currently undertaking a program to implement “Clearways” on State roads within Sydney. If not already in place, “Clearway” restrictions will be implemented along the full Princes Highway frontage of the development site.

 

VII.       All demolition and construction vehicles are to be contained wholly within the site and vehicles must enter the site before stopping. A construction zone will not be permitted on Princes Highway.

 

VIII.      The layout of the proposed car parking areas associated with the subject development (including, driveways, grades, turn paths, sight distance requirements in relation to landscaping and/or fencing, aisle widths, aisle lengths, and parking bay dimensions) shall comply with the provisions of  AS 2890.1- 2004, AS2890.6-2009 and AS 2890.2 – 2002 for heavy vehicle usage.

 

IX. A Construction Pedestrian Traffic Management Plan (CPTMP) detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control should be submitted to Council for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

X.  Construction works zone will not be permitted on Princes Highway.

 

XI. A Road Occupancy Licence should be obtained from Transport Management Centre for any works that may impact on traffic flows on Princes Highway during construction activities.

 

PRIOR TO ISSUING THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

10.    Design – The following design changes are to be incorporated into the plans prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate;

 

(a) The upper level of Unit 4.01 (at the fifth floor level) comprising of bedrooms, stairs and amenities shall be removed and be replaced by communal open space that will be a continuation of the communal open space on the roof. This part of the roof shall include a balustrade and planting that will be recessed from the edge and be consistent with the design of the remainder of the roof space.

 

(b) The lower level of the apartment (Unit 4.01) on Level 4 shall be redesigned to become a studio apartment.

 

(c)  The electrical substation along the south-western side of the Site shall be relocated and this section of the site shall be softly landscaped (as per requirements in Condition 3)

 

(d) The design shall be amended to reduce the floor space of the building and create an additional break/step in the built form at the front be by removing some floor space between the bedroom and bathroom in Units A103, A2.03, AA3.03, A4.03 (noted as “potential break point to the building” on the floor plans. The construction certificate plans shall show this change. This will break up the bulk of the building when viewed from the street frontage.

 

(e) The 12 bicycle parking spaces that are centrally located on the basement plan shall be relocated to adjoin the penthouse storage area so that there is clear unencumbered area to be able to transport bins to the northern side of the site where the bin hoist is located.

 

Details of compliance with these conditions shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Manager of Building and Development prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.

 

11.    Landscaping - The Landscape Plan prepared by Scott Carver shall be updated and shall include the following features and details to the Satisfaction of the Manager of Development and Building;

 

(i)   The proposed swimming pool at the rear shall be deleted from the original landscape plans and replaced with a variety of landscape features and treatments including seating, planter boxes, a sand pit or the like and shall include larger trees and plants.

 

(ii)  A minimum of two (2) large, mature trees that will achieve a minimum height of 12m shall be located within each private courtyard at the rear and three (3) trees in the communal area of open space at ground level. The Landscape plan shall include the following features;

·    Trees shall be planted in the designated deep soil areas.

·    Trees shall have a minimum 100L pot size.

·    The proposed species shall be included and shall be endemic to the area.

·    One (1) mature Sydney Red Gum tree (Angophora costata) (minimum 100L pot size) shall be planted in lieu of the electrical substation along the south western corner of the site at the front.

·    Additional lower level soft landscape planting shall be included where the original substation was proposed (along the south-western side of the site at the front).As this area comprises of deep soil it is encouraged that larger, mature trees and shrubs be planted here to soften the form and visual appearance of the development.

·    Planting above the vehicular driveway along the eastern side of the driveway shall including creepers that will cascade down the driveway wall. Details of the type of species and an elevational plan of the driveway shall be submitted.

·    Types of plants and vegetation to be included within the planter boxes at the front of the site shall be included.

·    The treatment of the private courtyards and communal open space shall be shown on the plan and include seating and planter boxes. Where possible larger trees and plants shall be provided to soften these spaces when viewed from the foreshore.

·    Type and nature of planting along the northern side of the building adjoining the staircase leading down to the rear, foreshore.

 

(iii) Details in relation to the proposed landscaping/planter box proposed along the western side of Unit A4.01 shall be provided. This area shall include plants and vegetation that will enhance the building and create more greenery and soften the upper level of the building when viewed from the street and southern side.

 

(iv) The following details need to be provided and the Landscape Plan updated in relation to the rooftop communal area of open space;

·    The roof top area is to be totally dedicated as a communal area.

·    A 1m wide by 1m high planter boxes shall be installed around the perimeter of the site and shall be setback 2m from the edge of the roof parapet and outside of the glass balustrade.

·    Landscaping on the rooftop shall include a variety of plants and comprise of deep and wide planter boxes that allow and encourage the planting of larger trees and shrubs.

·    The roof top shall include a variety of finishes such as timber decking, real or artificial grass to create different spaces and areas. Planter boxes can be used to delineate spaces and shall include seating.

·    The roof shall include a WC located next to the lift located along the northern side (max area of 1.2m by 2m).

 

The Landscape Plan shall be prepared by a Qualified Landscape Architect and should include species that are native and endemic to the area.

 

The Landscape Plan shall be to the satisfaction of the Manager of Building and Development prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.

 

12.    Public Domain Plan - A public domain plan is to be submitted to Council and prepared by a Qualified Landscape Architect on behalf of Council.

The plan is to address the design criteria, including but not limited to:

·      Street trees to be retained and new trees,

·      Reconfiguration of the street verges and how these are to be treated and designed in terms of existing and new landscaping to be included,

·      Expanded soil volumes in verges for maximum root space,

·      Planting of additional street trees, the proposed species and location (new trees shall be established and have a minimum pot size of 100L).

·      The extinguishing and removal of all existing driveway crossings.

·      Public Footpath and access to and around the site.

·      The improvement in the appearance of the front public verges.

The cost of the works will be borne by the Applicant and will need to be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager of Building and Development prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.

 

13.    Fencing - Details of the fencing shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate and the following details shall be included;

·    There shall be no front fence to the property and the planter boxes at the front shall delineate private and public spaces.

·    The proposed planter boxes at the site shall have a maximum height of 1m and shall be constructed of a sandstone finish.

·    The rear fencing to the private courtyards and communal area of open space shall be designed to be an open style dark palisade fence so that it will offer security whilst also be transparent for safety. The height of the fence shall not exceed 1.5m

·    The existing boat ramp at the rear shall be removed and the sandstone fencing above the sea wall constructed to be consistent with the height of the existing rear fence.

·    The rear sandstone fence adjoining the waterway shall be retained and upgraded where it is unsafe or in need of repair. The rear sandstone wall above the seawall shall be upgraded and materials shall match as closely as possible the existing sandstone finish.

 

14.    Public Link - The Construction Certificate plans shall be updated to refer to the ‘public link’ at the rear of the site. A detailed plan shall also be submitted which shows the following features;

 

a)  Details of the design, materials and finishes of the proposed public pathway and associated stairs shall be provided.

b)  The plan shall show the details of the finished RL’s and the finishes shall be provided. The finish of the pathway shall be consistent with that of the public footpath along Tom Ugly’s Reserve to the south so that there is a consistency in the proposed finishes and visual appearance and to create an integrated public accessway.

 

Details shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development and Building.

 

15.    Seawall – A detailed structural report shall be prepared that assesses the structural adequacy and integrity of the sea wall in consideration of the proposed construction works and measures outlined which will assist in protecting, strengthening the retaining this wall for the future. The report shall include the construction method to be adopted to improve the integrity of the sea wall and the most appropriate method to be adopted when upgrading and reinstating parts of the sandstone wall above the sea wall.

 

A Qualified Structural Engineer will be engaged to prepare this report and findings shall be included as part of the Construction Certificate.

 

Any works that occur to the sea wall will need to be formally certified by a Structural Engineer prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued.

 

16.    Use of Rooftop open space - A Plan of Management (POM) for use of rooftop open space must be submitted for approval of Council. The POM must outline the:

 

q)   hours of use of the rooftop deck which shall be restricted from 8am until 10pm;

 

r)    maximum number of users at any one time shall be specified (for this development a maximum of 20 is recommended);

 

s)   Outline provisions to maximise the safety (fire safety and general safety) for users of this area.

 

t)    provisions for no amplified music to be played;

 

u)  identify other measures to ensure that the amenity and safety of persons within the development and in nearby existing and future development is maintained.

 

v)   Location and type of signage to be installed in the building to notify residents and visitors in respect to the use of this space.

 

w)  The approved POM shall be incorporated into the Owners Corporation by-laws in any future Strata subdivision and a sign in the front entry of the building shall be included to ensure the use of this space is monitored and understood by all occupants.

 

The POM shall be prepared and shall be to the satisfaction of Council’s Manager of Building and Development.

 

17.    Materials and finishes - The proposed materials and finishes selected shall be non-reflective and shall be of the highest quality and take into consideration the provision of marine grade quality materials to avoid rusting and the harsh coastal conditions.

 

18.    Demolition - Prior to the demolition of the structures on site and prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate the recommendations of the Preliminary Site Investigation prepared by EI Australia and dated 14 September 2018 shall be adopted as part of the design and included in the construction management plan for the site.

 

19.    Demolition/excavation - Should the site soils require excavation and disposal from the site then these soils should be classified in accordance with the EPA (2014) Waste Classification Guidelines and disposed to an approved landfill facility. Any soils to be imported onto the site for the purpose of back-filling excavated areas will also require validation testing to confirm their suitability for the proposed residential land use.

 

20.    Construction Management Plan - A Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority and shall include details about stockpiling of materials and how waste and excavated materials shall be disposed of. Stockpiling of Waste and building materials shall be setback from the rear and shall not affect the waterway. A hoarding shall be provided along the rear boundary protecting the waterway from disposal of any waste products or rubbish.

 

21.    Road Noise attenuation - The site is affected by noise from the Princes Highway.  The construction certificate plans shall show that the development has been designed in accordance with the measures of acoustic attenuation to meet the internal noise levels specified in Clause 102 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007, as recommended in the Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Vibration and Noise P/L, dated 16 August 2018.

 

The findings and recommendations of the Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Vibration and Noise and dated 16 August 2018 shall be implemented in the Construction Certificate plans.

 

22.    Geotechnical works - Prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate the recommendations in the Geotechnical Report prepared by EI Australia and dated 23 August 2018 shall be implemented.

 

23.    Disabled access The development must be designed and constructed to comply with: AS 1428.1 – 1993 Design for Access and Mobility Part 1 and AS 1428 – 1993 Design for Access and Mobility Part 2 Enhanced and Additional Requirements – Buildings and Facilities.

 

24.    Traffic/parking – Any recommendations included within the Transport Assessment Report prepared by Varga Traffic Planning and dated 6 September 2018 shall be included as part of the Construction Certificate Plans.

 

25.    Fire Safety Measures - Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a list of the essential fire safety measures that are to be provided in relation to the land and any building on the land as a consequence of the building work must accompany an application for a construction certificate, which is required to be submitted to either Council or a PCA. Such list must also specify the minimum standard of performance for each essential fire safety measure included in the list. The Council or PCA will then issue a Fire Safety Schedule for the building.

 

26.    Building - Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the applicant may be required, under Clause 144 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation, 2000 to seek written comment from FR NSW about the location of water storage tanks, construction of hydrant/booster pump and valve rooms, and any Fire Engineered Solution developed to meet the performance requirements under the Category 2 Fire Safety Provisions.

 

The applicant is also advised to seek written advice from FR NSW on the location and construction of the proposed Fire Control Centre Facility and location and installation of the sites Fire Indicator / mimic Panels.

 

27.    Street Tree Removal / Replacement by Council - Five (5) mature street trees of species to be determined and pot sizes minimum 75 litre, must be provided in the road reserve fronting the site. Details of the plant species and location of the plants shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Manager of Assessments prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.

 

(a) Council shall be appointed to remove and plant all tree/s on public land. All costs associated with the removal of the tree/s and the planting of replacement trees and tree protection shall be met by the applicant.

(b) The fees must be paid in accordance with the conditions of this consent.

(c)  The fee imposed is to ensure that the development makes adequate provision for the demand it generates for public amenities and public services within the area. The fees payable will be adjusted at the time of payment to reflect changes in the cost of delivering public amenities and public services, in accordance with the indices provided by the relevant conditions set out in this consent.

 

A copy of the Hurstville City Council’s Tree Removal and Pruning Guidelines and Kogarah City Council, Street Tree Management Strategy and Masterplan, can be downloaded from Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au.

 

28.    Provision of a Car Wash Bay – The designated car wash bay must:

 

(i)      have clearly visible signs which indicate that no degreasing or mechanical work is to be undertaken in the bay;

(ii)     have a fixed basket trap for floor waste; and

(iii)    includes a 1000 litre general purpose pit.

 

Details of the disposal of trade waste water are to be indicated on the Construction Certificate drawings.  Three options exist for the disposal of trade wastewater from residential car wash bays.  They are:

 

(i)      removal off-site by an authorised liquid waste disposal contractor;

 

(ii)     reuse of treated wastewater for car washing or irrigation on landscaped areas.  An appropriate method should be used to treat grease, oil and silt before reuse or irrigation; or

 

(iii)    discharge to the sewer via appropriate pre-treatment.  If the car wash bay discharges into the sewer, a Permission to Discharge Trade Wastewater issued by Sydney Water must be obtained prior to approval of the development.

 

(iv)    If the carwash bay is not discharged into the sewer, applicants must provide Council with details and evidence of how wastewater will be removed (eg removal by an authorised liquid waste disposal contractor).

 

(v)     Plans and specifications of the car washing system which has been approved by Sydney Water must be submitted with the application for the Construction Certificate. 

 

(vi)    All car washing bays shall be contained within a roofed and bunded car wash bay with pre-treatment approved by Sydney Water.  The water from the car wash bay must be graded to a drainage point and connected to sewer. 

 

(vii)   If alternative water management and disposal options are proposed (i.e. where water is recycled, minimised or reused on the site), detailed plans and specifications of the water recycling system must be submitted with the application for the Construction Certificate for approval.

 

29.    Required design changes - Referring to Stormwater Concept Plans dated 29 August 2018 and prepared by Australian Consulting Engineers design changes are required and shown on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

The site drainage out let pipe cross sectional details shall be shown on the Stormwater Plans including pipe invert level, ground level, Kogarah Bay bed level and astronomical highest spring tide levels. This is to ensure the site drainage is not affected by the sea water intrusions from Kogarah Bay.

 

30.    Fees to be paid - The fees listed in the table below must be paid in accordance with the conditions of this consent and Council’s adopted Fees and Charges applicable at the time of payment (available at www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au).

 

Payments must be made prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate or prior to the commencement of work (if there is no associated Construction Certificate).

 

Please contact Council prior to the payment of Section 7.11 Contributions to determine whether the amounts have been indexed from that indicated below in this consent and the form of payment that will be accepted by Council.

 

Council will only accept Bank Cheque or Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) for transaction values of $500,000 or over. Council must be contacted prior to payment to determine correct total amount to be paid and bank account details (if applicable).

 

A summary of the fees to be paid are listed below:

 

Fee Type

Fee

GENERAL FEES

Long Service Levy (to Long Service Corporation) Or, provide evidence of Payment direct to the Long Service Corporation.  See https://portal.longservice.nsw.gov.au/bci/levy/

Builders Damage Deposit

$4,500.00

Inspection Fee for refund of Damage Deposit

$371.00

Builders Damage Deposit (footpaths and roadworks)

$2,250.00

Builders Damage Deposit (security against access damage to Council’s parks or reserves)

$2,250.00

Inspection Fee for Refund of Damage Deposit

$371.00

DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTIONS

Kogarah Section 94 Development Contributions Plan No.1 - Roads and Traffic Management - Residential

$4068.57

Kogarah Section 94 Development Contributions Plan No.5 - Open Space 2007

$217,248.86

Kogarah Section 94 Development Contributions Plan No.9 - Kogarah Libraries - Buildings

$4,709.98

Kogarah Section 94 Development Contributions Plan No.9 - Kogarah Libraries - Books

$3114.60

 

General Fees

 

The fees and charges above are subject to change and are as set out in the version of Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges or as required by other Government Authorities, applicable at the time of payment.

 

Development Contributions

 

The Section 7.11 contribution is imposed to ensure that the development makes adequate provision for the demand it generates for public amenities and public services within the area.

 

A Section 7.12 contribution has been levied on the subject development pursuant to the Georges River Council Section 94A Contributions Plan.

 

Indexation

The above contributions will be adjusted at the time of payment to reflect changes in the cost of delivering public amenities and public services, in accordance with the indices provided by the relevant Section 94 Development Contributions Plan.

 

Timing of Payment

The contribution must be paid and receipted by Council prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.

 

Further Information

A copy of the all current Development Contributions Plans may be inspected or a copy purchased at Council’s offices (Georges River Civic Centre, MacMahon Street, Hurstville and Kogarah Library and Service Centre, Kogarah Town Square, Belgrave Street, Kogarah) or viewed on Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au.

 

31.    Vehicular Crossing - Major Development - The following vehicular crossing and road frontage works will be required to facilitate access to and from the proposed development site:

 

(a) Construct a footpath for the full length of the frontage(s) of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(b) All associated road pavement restorations.

(c) Installation of turf as required across all street frontages. 

(d)The thickness and design of the driveway will be in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(e) Construct a new 150mm high concrete kerb with 450mm wide gutter for the full frontage(s) of the site in in accordance with Council’s Specifications for kerb and guttering, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

(f) Any existing vehicular crossing and/or laybacks which are redundant will be removed.

 

The kerb and gutter, any other footpath and turf areas will be restored at the expense of the applicant. The work will be carried out in accordance with Council’s specification, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

 

Constructing a vehicular crossing and/or footpath requires separate approval under the Roads Act 1993, prior to the commencement of those works. 

 

32.    Damage Deposit - Major Works - In order to insure against damage to Council property the following is required:

i.       Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a damage deposit for the cost of making good any damage caused to any Council property as a result of the development: $4,500.00.

 

ii.      Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a non-refundable inspection fee (for two inspections) to enable assessment of any damage and repairs where required: $371.00.

 

33.    Tree Retention - The following trees shall be retained and protected:

 

Tree Species

Location of Tree / Tree No.

Tree Protection Zone (metres)

Fencing distance from trunk

T1 – Allocasuarina littoralis

Councils street tree

2.4 metres

T2 – Allocasuarina littoralis

Councils street tree

3.6 metres

T3 – Livistonia australis

Councils street tree

2.5 metres

Eucalypt spp x 2

Within reserve to the south of site, Bridge reserve

4.0 metres radially

 

Details of the trees to be retained must be included on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

-     The client shall engage a qualified Arborist who holds an AQF Level 5 or above in Arboriculture and who is a current financial member of Arboriculture  Australia – AA and or Institute of Australian Consulting Arboriculturists – IACA to oversee and validate all works.

 

-     A certificate of compliance for tree protection measures shall be completed and forwarded to the Certifying Authority, before works, during works and once all building works have been completed, that tree protection measures have been installed and maintained during the building process.

 

-     Details of the trees to be retained must be included on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

34.    General Tree Protection Measures - All trees to be retained shall be protected before and maintained during demolition, excavation and construction of the site. 

 

(a)  The tree protection measures must be in undertaken in accordance AS4970 -2009 Protection of trees on development sites. 

(b)  Details of the tree protection measures to be implemented must be provided with the application for a Construction Certificate by a suitably qualified Arborist who holds an AQF Level 5 or above in Arboriculture and who is a current financial member of Arboriculture  Australia – AA and or Institute of Australian Consulting Arboriculturists – IACA.

(c)  The Project Arborist must be present on-site during the stages of excavation, demolition and construction when works are being undertaken that could impact on the tree canopy or root zone within the tree protection zone of each tree.

(d)  Unless otherwise specified in AS 4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites, a protective fence consisting of 2.4 x 1.8 metres high, fully supported chainmesh fence shall be used. The distance of the fence from the base of each tree is to be in accordance with the TPZ listed in the table above. A layer of organic mulch 100 millimetres thick shall be placed over the protected area and no soil or fill should be placed within the protection area.

(e)  The Tree Protection Zone of each tree, to be protected, shall be watered thoroughly and regularly to minimise the effects of construction works.

(f)  No building products/ materials or services shall be installed within the TPZ of the tree/s unless approved by Council. This fence shall be kept in place during demolition, construction and also have a sign displaying ‘Tree Protection Zone – DO NOT ENTER’ attached to the fence and must also include the name and contact details of the Project Arborist.

 

35.    Excavation – Excavation and earthworks near trees to be retained shall comply with the following measures;

 

(a)     Excavations around the trees to be retained on site or the adjoining properties shall be supervised by the Project Arborist to ensure that the root system will not adversely be affected.

 

(b)     Where the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of trees on site or adjoining sites become compromised by any excavation works, the Project arborist shall be consulted to establish the position of any major roots and determine the necessary measures to protect these roots. The recommendations of the Arborist shall be submitted to Council prior to any further demolition or construction works taking place.

 

(c)     Tree Protection Zone around the trees to be retained are not to have soil level changes, building product / materials stored or services installed in this area. Any structures proposed to be built in this area of the trees are to utilise pier and beam or cantilevered slab construction.

 

(d)     Details satisfying this condition shall be shown on the Construction Certificate plans.

 

Removal or pruning of any other tree (that would require consent of Council) on the site is not approved. All pruning must be undertaken by a qualified Arborist in accordance with AS4373 -2007 Pruning of Amenity Trees and Amenity Tree Industry, Code of Practice (SafeWork NSW August 1998).

 

36.    Tree Removal & Replacement  - Permission is granted for the removal of the following trees:

 

Tree Species                               

Number of trees

Location

T4 – Jacaranda mimosifolia

X1

Top of existing driveway

T5 – Callistemon viminalis

X1

Top of existing driveway

T6 – Pittosporum undulatum

X1

Between front boundary and driveway ramp

T7 – Eucalyptus robusta

X1

Lower side of driveway ramp

T8 – Jacaranda mimosifolia

X1

Between front boundary and driveway ramp

T9 – Celtis spp

X1

Between front boundary and driveway ramp

T10 – Angophora costata

X1

Between front boundary and driveway ramp

T11, 12, 12A  – Archontophoenix cunninghamiana

X3

Around base of driveway ramp

T13 – Plumeria acutifolia

X1

Close to bottom of ramp

T14 – Ficus spp

X1

Growing upon base of driveway ramp

T15 – Cupaniopsis anacardioides

X1

Middle of site, closer to waterfront edge

T16 – Plumeria acutifolia

X1

Middle of site, closer to waterfront edge

T17/ 18 – Metrosideros excelsa

X2

Middle of site, closer to waterfront edge

T19 – Leptospermum petersonii

X1

Middle of site, closer to waterfront edge

T19A – Eucalyptus Spp

X1

Far north, close to waterfront

 

37.    General Tree Removal Requirements

 

(a) All tree removal shall be carried out by a minimum certificate Level 3, Licenced and insured Tree Surgeon/Arborist to ensure that removal is undertaken in a safe manner and complies with the AS 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees and Tree Works Industry Code of Practice (Work Cover NSW 1.8.98).

 

(b) No trees are to be removed on the site or neighbouring properties without the prior written approval of Council.

 

38.    Compliance with submitted Arborist Report - The recommendations outlined in the Arborist’s Report titled Arboricultural Impact Assessment, prepared by New Leaf Arboriculture, dated 28 August 2018 must be implemented throughout the relevant stages of construction.  Details of tree protection measures to be implemented must be detailed and lodged with the Construction Certificate application for approval and shall be in accordance with Section 4 - Australian Standard AS 4970-2009: Protection of trees on development sites.

 

39.    Traffic, Parking and Driveways - All shared zone area marked for disabled parking need to have the bollards installed as per the AS2890.6

 

The proposed car wash bay shall be appropriately signposted.

 

A minimum of 25 bicycle parking spaces shall be designated in the basement.

 

PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORK (INCLUDING DEMOLITION AND EXCAVATION)

 

40.    Development Engineering - Driveway Construction Plan Details - Engineer's details shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application regarding the proposed construction of the driveway.

 

These details shall show longitudinal and cross sections, gradients, swept paths, type of construction materials and shall be designed in accordance with AS/NZS2890.1-2004.

The driveway shall be designed with a surface that shall be non-slip.

 

41.    Dial before your dig - The applicant will contact “Dial Before You Dig on 1100” to obtain a Service Diagram prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.  The sequence number obtained from “Dial Before You Dig” will be forwarded to Council’s Engineers for their records.

 

42.    Building - Structural Engineers Details - Supporting excavations and adjoining land - Prior to the commencement of work in connection with the excavation of the site associated with the basement car park, structural engineer’s details relating to the method of supporting the excavation must be submitted.

 

43.    Building – Hoarding Application - Prior to demolition of the buildings on the site or the commencement of work above ground level a separate application for the erection of an A class (fence type) or a B class hoarding or C type scaffold, in accordance with the requirements of Work Cover Authority of NSW, must be erected along that portion of the footway/road reserve, where the building is within 3.0 metres of the street boundary. An application for this work under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Roads Act 1993 must be submitted for approval to Council.

 

The following information is to be submitted with a Hoarding Application under s68 of the Local Government Act and s138 of the Roads Act 1993:

 

(a) A site and location plan of the hoarding with detailed elevation, dimensions, setbacks, heights, entry and exit points to/from the site, vehicle access points, location of public utilities, electrical overhead wire protection, site management plan and builders sheds location; and

(b) Hoarding plan and details that are certified by an appropriately qualified engineer; and

(c)  The payment to Council of a footpath occupancy fee based on the area of footpath to be occupied and Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges (available on our website) before the commencement of work; and

(d) A Public Risk Insurance Policy with a minimum cover of $10 million in relation to the occupation of and works within Council's road reserve, for the full duration of the proposed works, must be obtained a copy provided to Council. The Policy is to note Council as an interested party; and

(e) The application must be endorsement by the Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) as the hoarding is located within 100m of an intersection with traffic lights. For assistance you should contact the DA unit at RMS and speak to Hans on 88492076. Or email hans.pilly.mootanah@rms.nsw.gov.au to obtain concurrence for the hoarding structure.

 

44.    Registered Surveyor's Report - During Development Work - A report will be submitted to the Certifier at each of the following applicable stages of construction:

 

(a) Set out before commencing excavation.

(b) Floor slabs or foundation wall, before formwork or commencing brickwork.

(c) Completion of Foundation Walls - Before any construction of flooring, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.

(d) Completion of Floor Slab Formwork - Before pouring of concrete/walls construction, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  In multi-storey buildings a further survey will be provided at each subsequent storey.

(e) Completion of any Roof Framing - Before roof covered detailing eaves/gutter setback from boundaries.

(f) Completion of all Work - Detailing the location of the structure (including eaves/gutters) relative to adjacent boundaries and its height relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  A final Check Survey will indicate the reduced level of the main ridge.

 

Work will not proceed beyond each stage until the Principal Certifier is satisfied that the height and location of the building is proceeding in accordance with the approved plans.

 

45.    Dilapidation Report on Public Land - Prior to the commencement of works (including demolition and excavation), a dilapidation report must be prepared for the Council infrastructure adjoining the development site.  The report must include the following:

 

(i)      Photographs showing the existing condition of the road pavement fronting the site

(ii)     Photographs showing the existing condition of the kerb and gutter fronting the site

(iii)    Photographs showing the existing condition of the footpath pavement fronting the site

(iv)    Photographs showing the existing condition of any retaining walls within the footway or road,

(v)     Closed circuit television/video inspection (in DVD format) of public stormwater drainage systems fronting, adjoining or within the site, and

(vi)    The full name and signature of the structural engineer.

 

The Dilapidation Report must be prepared by a qualified structural engineer.  The report must be provided to the Certifier and a copy provided to the Council.

 

The report is to be supplied in electronic format in Word or PDF.  Photographs are to be in colour, digital and date stamped.

 

Note: Council will use this report to determine whether to refund the damage deposit after the completion of works.

 

46.    Pre-Construction Dilapidation Report – Private Land - A professional engineer specialising in structural or geotechnical engineering shall prepare a Pre-Construction Dilapidation Report detailing the current structural condition of adjoining the adjoining public land to ensure it remains stable and there is no damage to the embankment and established trees and landscaping..

 

47.    Demolition and Asbestos - The demolition work shall comply with the provisions of Australian Standard AS2601:2001 - Demolition of Structures, NSW Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and the NSW Work Health & Safety Regulation 2011.  The work plans required by AS2601:2001 shall be accompanied by a written statement by a suitably qualified person that the proposals contained in the work plan comply with the safety requirements of the Standard.  The work plans and the safety statement shall be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the commencement of works.

 

For demolition work which involves the removal of asbestos, the asbestos removal work must be carried out by a licensed asbestos removalist who is licensed to carry out the work in accordance with the NSW Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and the NSW Work Health & Safety Regulation 2011 unless specified in the Act and/or Regulation that a license is not required.

 

All demolition work including the removal of asbestos, shall be undertaken in accordance with the Demolition Code of Practice (NSW Work Cover July 2015).

 

Note: Copies of the Act, Regulation and Code of Practice can be downloaded free of charge from the SafeWork NSW website: www.SafeWork.nsw.gov.au.

 

48.    Demolition Notification Requirements - The developer /builder must notify adjoining residents five (5) working days prior to demolition.  Such notification is to be a clearly written note giving the date demolition will commence, contact details of the developer/builder, licensed asbestos demolisher and the appropriate regulatory authority. Notification is to be placed in the letterbox of every premises (including every residential flat or unit, if any) either side and immediately at the rear of the demolition site.

 

Five (5) working days prior to demolition, the developer/builder is to provide written notification to Council advising of the demolition date, details of the SafeWork licensed asbestos demolisher and the list of residents advised of the demolition.

 

On demolition sites where buildings to be demolished contain asbestos, a standard commercially manufactured sign containing the words “DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” measuring not less than 400mm x 300mm is to be erected in a prominent visible position (from street frontage) on the site. The sign is to be erected prior to demolition work commencing and is to remain in place until such time as all asbestos material has been removed from the site to an approved waste facility.

 

49.    Demolition work involving asbestos removal - Work involving bonded asbestos removal work (of an area of more than 10 square metres) or friable asbestos removal work must be undertaken by a person who carries on a business of such removal work in accordance with a licence under clause 458 of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011.

 

50.    Utility Arrangements - Arrangements are to be made with utility authorities in respect to the services supplied by those authorities to the development. The cost associated with the provision or adjustment of services within the road and footway areas is to be at the applicant’s expense.

 

51.    Erosion and Sedimentation Control - Erosion and sediment controls must be provided to in accordance with the approved Site Management Plan.

 

Removal or disturbance of vegetation and top soil is confined to within 3 m of the approved building area (no trees to be removed without approval).  All disturbed areas are rendered erosion-resistant by turfing, mulching, paving or similar.

 

All clean water run-off is diverted around cleared or exposed areas.

 

 Silt fences, stabilised entry/exit points or other devices are installed to prevent sediment from entering drainage systems or waterways.

 

Controls are put into place to prevent tracking of sediment by vehicles onto adjoining roadway. Compliance with Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction (Blue Book) produced by Landcom 2004 is to be met.

 

These measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of work (including demolition and excavation) and must remain until works are completed and all exposed surfaces are landscaped/sealed.

 

52.    Site sign – Soil and Erosion Control Measures - Prior to the commencement of works (including demolition and excavation), a durable site sign, issued by Council in conjunction with this consent, must be erected in a prominent location on site.  The site sign warns of the penalties which apply to pollution, storing materials on road or footpath and breaches of the conditions relating to erosion and sediment controls.  The sign must remain in a prominent location on site up until the completion of all site and building works.

 

53.    Site Management Plan -  Major Development - A Site Management Plan must be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate, and include the following:

 

(a) location of protective site fencing;

(b) location of site storage areas/sheds/equipment;

(c) location of building materials for construction, e.g. stockpiles

(d) provisions for public safety;

(e) dust control measures;

(f) method used to provide site access location and materials used;

(g) details of methods of disposal of demolition materials;

(h) method used to provide protective measures for tree preservation;

(i) provisions for temporary sanitary facilities;

(j) location and size of waste containers/skip bins;

(k) details of proposed sediment and erosion control measures;

(l) method used to provide construction noise and vibration management;

(m) construction and demolition traffic management details.

         

The site management measures are to be implemented prior to the commencement of any works including demolition and excavation. The site management measures are to be maintained throughout the works, to maintain reasonable levels of public health, safety and amenity. A copy of the Site Management Plan must be kept on site and is to be made available upon request.

 

54.    Vehicular Crossing – Major Development - The following vehicular crossing and road frontage works will be required to facilitate access to and from the proposed development site:

 

(i)      Construct a 1.5 metre wide footpath for the full length of the frontage of the site in Princes Highway in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought;

 

(ii)     The thickness and design of the driveway shall be in accordance with Council’s Specifications applying at the time construction approval is sought.

 

(iii)    Any existing vehicular crossing and/or laybacks which are redundant must be removed.  The kerb and gutter, any other footpath and turf areas shall be restored at the expense of the applicant.  The work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s specification, applying at the time construction approval is sought.

 

Constructing a vehicular crossing and/or footpath requires separate approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993, prior to the commencement of those works.

 

55.    Driveway Construction Plan Details - Detailed engineering plans for the driveway shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application that shows:

 

Longitudinal and cross sections, gradients, access onto the proposed lots, type of construction materials designed in accordance with Council's Subdivision standards and AS/NZS2890.1-2004;

 

Suitable underground provision for the supply of all relevant services to the proposed lots (proposed position of pipes and conduits); and

 

The full length of the driveway designed with a minimum 150mm thick reinforced concrete and minimum of 2.7m wide pavement/kerb face to kerb face width, and a non-slip surface.

 

56.    Removal – Bins are to be taken to the kerbside for collection and garbage bins are to be collected twice a week and recycling bins are to be collected weekly. They are to be collected from the kerbside and removed from the kerbside as soon as possible after collection.

 

57.    Stormwater System - The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. Final detailed plans of the drainage system, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate.

 

All stormwater shall drain by gravity to Council's kerb and gutter in the street as indicated on the approved drainage plan in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3500.3: 2015 (as amended).

 

Prior to the commencement of works, the PCA/builder shall ensure that the stormwater discharge pipe across the footpath shall be RHS at an angle and is laid with minimum disturbance at a minimum 1% grade to the kerb and gutter in the street and is made in good working condition.

 

There shall be no damage to the adjoining driveway crossing. All damages are to be rectified to its original condition at the cost of the applicant.

 

The stormwater drainage plans including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, dimensions and types of drainage pits prepared by a professional engineer who specialises in Hydraulic Engineering in accordance with the Australian Institute of Engineers Australian Rainfall and Runoff (1987) and Council's Stormwater Drainage Guidelines, shall accompany the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

58.    Stormwater Systems with Basement    - The underground basement car park must pump to and all other stormwater must drain by gravity to the drainage system within the site via a silt trap pit.

 

The design of the proposed drainage system must be prepared by a professional engineer who specialises in hydraulic engineering and be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate application.

 

59.    Protection of basement from inundation of stormwater waters - The protection of the underground basement shall be protected from possible inundation by surface waters from the street.

 

Evidence from a professional engineer who specialises in hydraulic engineering that this design requirement has been adhered to shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

 

60.    On Site Detention - An on-site detention (OSD) facility designed by a professional engineer who specialises in Hydraulic Engineering must be designed, approved and installed.  The design must include the computations of the inlet and outlet hydrographs and stage/storage relationships of the proposed OSD using the following design parameters:

 

·    peak flow rates from the site are to be restricted to a permissible site discharge (PSD) equivalent to the discharge when assuming the site contained a single dwelling, garage, lawn and garden;

·    at Annual Recurrence Intervals of 2 years and 100 years;

·    discharge by gravity to the street stormwater system; and

·    ensure the provision of an overland flow bypassing the orifice plate to the street.

·    The design and structural adequacy of the OSD tank system shall be certified by a practicing drainage engineer to the satisfaction of the certifier.

 

61.    Pump-Out System Design for Stormwater Disposal - The design of the pump-out system for storm water disposal will be permitted for drainage of basement areas only, and must be designed in accordance with the following criteria:

 

(a)        The pump system shall consist of two pumps, connected in parallel, with each pump being capable of emptying the holding tank at the rate equal to the rate of inflow for the one-hour duration storm. The holding tank shall be capable of holding one hour’s runoff from a one-hour duration storm of the 1 in 20 year storm. Minimum storage volume shall be 3m3;

(b)        The pump system shall be regularly maintained and serviced, every six (6) months; and

(c)        The drainage disposal shall be discharged to a silt arrestor pit.

Details and certification of compliance from a professional engineer specialising in civil engineering shall be provided for approval with the Construction Certificate application.

 

62.    Driveway Construction Plan Details  - Detailed engineering plans for the driveway shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application for approval that show:

 

a)      Longitudinal and cross sections, gradients, access onto the proposed lots, type of construction materials designed in accordance with Council's Subdivision standards and AS/NZS2890.1-2004.

 

b)      Suitable underground provision for the supply of all relevant services to the proposed lots (proposed position of pipes and conduits).

 

c)      A longitudinal driveway sections are to be prepared by a qualified civil/traffic engineer and be submitted for to and approved by the Certifying Authority. These profiles are to be at 1:100 scale along both edges of the proposed driveway, starting from the centreline of the frontage street carriageway to the proposed basement floor level.

 

d)      The civil/traffic engineer shall provide specific written certification on the plans that:

 

(i)      Vehicular access can be obtained using grades of 25% (1 in 4) maximum; and

 

(ii)     All changes in grade (transitions) comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 (2004) – “Off-street car parking” to prevent the scraping of the underside of the vehicles.

 

63.    Council Property Shoring - Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, plans and specifications prepared by a professional engineer specialising in practising structural engineering must detail how Council’s property shall be supported at all times.

 

Where any shoring is to be supporting, or located on Council’s property, certified structural engineering drawings detailing; the extent of the encroachment, the type of shoring and the method of removal, shall be included on the plans.  Where the shoring cannot be removed, the plans must detail that the shoring will be cut to 150mm below footpath level and the gap between the shoring and any building shall be filled with a 5MPa lean concrete mix.

 

64.    Geotechnical requirements prior to construction - The recommendations of the Geotechnical Report prepared by EI Australia and dated 23 August 2018 shall be implemented and satisfied construction, including:

 

i.    to ensure that buildings or other developments on adjacent properties are not damaged when excavating rock, limiting vibration to 10mm/sec, with vibration monitoring; or using the excavation methods shown in Table 5.1 on page 5;

 

ii.   adopting the other recommendations in each paragraph on pages 5, 6 and 7 in Section 5.2;

 

iii.  adopting recommendations for foundation design in Section 5.3.

 

Construction methods must ensure that nuisance from vibration does not occur, which as noted in page 5 of the Geotechnical Report may occur at levels below the threshold for building damage.  Vibration monitoring in this regard may be required and on-site guidance by a vibration specialist during the early part of excavation.

 

As the submitted Geotechnical Report is based on the findings of three boreholes only (due to limited site access) and data has been extrapolated across the site, should actual site conditions differ from those inferred, an updated Geotechnical Report, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in geotechnical engineering who holds the relevant Certificate of accreditation as required under the Building Professionals Act 2005 in relation to dilapidation reports, all site works and construction is to be submitted before the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

65.    Traffic Management - Compliance with AS2890 - All driveways, access ramps, vehicular crossings and car parking spaces shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the current version of Australian Standards, AS 2890.1 (for car parking facilities) and AS 2890.2 (for commercial vehicle facilities).

 

66.    Construction Traffic Management Plan - A Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted detailing the following:

 

(i)      construction vehicle routes;

(ii)     anticipated number of trucks per day;

(iii)    hours of construction;

(iv)    access arrangements

(v)     proposed traffic measures to minimise impacts of construction vehicles must be submitted for the approval of Council’s Engineers.

(vi)    Compliance with AS2890

(vii)   Council’s Engineers must specify in writing that they are satisfied with the Traffic Management Plan prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

67.    Allocation of street addresses - In order to comply with AS/NZS 4819:2011 Rural and Urban Addressing, the NSW Addressing User Manual (Geographical Names Board of NSW) and Georges River Council’s requirements, the street address for the subject development is allocated as follows:

 

Primary Street Address

468 Princes Highway BLAKEHURST  NSW  2221

 

Alternative Street Address

470 Princes Highway BLAKEHURST  NSW  2221

 

Unit Addresses

Refer to the attached list of unit addresses for the subject development

 

Details indicating compliance with this condition must be shown on the plans lodged with any Construction Certificate for approval.

 

68.    Access for Persons with a Disability and Adaptable Housing - Access for persons with disabilities and adaptable housing must be provided to the premises/building in accordance with the requirements of AS4299-1995, the Building Code of Australia, and AS 1428.1 where relevant.  The requirements and amendments indicated in Access Report prepared by Vista Access Architects Revision B are to be complied with and are to be shown on the construction certificate drawings.

 

69.    SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement - A design verification statement, prepared by the qualified designer, shall be submitted to the Certifier verifying that the plans and specifications achieve or improve the design quality of the development for which development consent was granted, having regard to the design quality principles set out under Schedule 1 of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 -Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

 

70.    BASIX Commitments - All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the BASIX Certificate No.952773M_02 dated 7 September 2018 must be implemented on the plans lodged with the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

71.    Design Quality Excellence - In order to ensure the design quality excellence of the development is retained:

 

(a)     The design architect is to have direct involvement in the design documentation, contract documentation and construct stages of the project.

 

(b)     The design architect is to have full access to the site and is to be authorised by the applicant to respond directly to the consent authority where information or clarification is required in the resolution of the design issues throughout the life of the project.

 

(c)     Evidence of the design architect’s commission is to be provided to the Council prior to release of the Construction Certificate.

 

(d)     The design architect of the project is not to be changed without prior notice and approval of the Council.

 

72.    Waste Storage - The number of bins required for this property is 11 X 240L garbage bins and 12 X 240L recycling bins.  Bins will be collected once a week and need to be taken to the Princes Hwy for collection.

 

The waste room will contain the following to minimise odours, deter vermin, protect surrounding areas, and make it a user-friendly and safe area:

 

i)       floor to be sealed;

ii)      walls and floor surface is flat and even;

iii)     all walls painted with light colour and washable paint;

iv)     equipment electric outlets to be installed 1700mm above floor levels;

v)      is mechanically exhausted as required by AS 1668.2;

vi)     must be well lit (sensor lighting recommended); a light switch is installed at height of 1.6m;

vii)    an optional automatic odour and pest control system may be installed to eliminate all pest types and assist with odour reduction;

viii)   all personnel doors are hinged and self-closing; and

ix)     conform to the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standards and local laws; and childproofing and public/operator safety shall be assessed and ensure that the bin movements should be with ease of access.

x)      Occupational Health and Safety issues such as slippery floors in waste rooms and the weight of the waste and recycling receptacles will need to be monitored.

xi)     Cleaners will monitor the bin storage area and all spills will be attended to immediately by cleaners.

 

73.    Structural details - Engineer's details prepared by a practising Structural Engineer being used to construct all reinforced concrete work, structural beams, columns and other structural members.  The details are to be submitted to the Certifier for approval prior to construction of the specified works.  A copy shall be forwarded to Council where Council is not the Certifier.

 

74.    Site Stormwater  Discharge  Pipe across the Footpath - The site stormwater discharge pipe shall be RHS type connected to the existing kerb and gutter in the street through an outlet from a boundary pit within the subject site.  The Principal Certifying Authority shall engage a registered surveyor to ensure that the proposed stormwater connection into Council’s stormwater system in the street is satisfactory in location and grade to drain the site by gravity and to the satisfaction of Council’s Asset engineer prior to the commencement of works:   

 

·    Prior to the commencement of works, the registered surveyor shall ensure to the PCA  that the stormwater discharge pipe across the footpath shall be RHS at an angle and is laid with minimum disturbance at a minimum 1% grade to the kerb and gutter in the street and is made in good working condition. Stormwater discharge pipe across the footpath shall not connect against the flow in the street.

·    A longitudinal section of the site stormwater discharge pipe across the footpath reserve shall be prepared showing the public utility services particularly those may encroach the above proposed stormwater pipe.

·    The RHS galvanised pipe must have a minimum of 50mm of cover along its length through the road reserve.  A detailed section of the connection through the road reserve is to be prepared and shown on the drainage plan prior to the commencement of works.

·    There shall be no damage to the adjoining driveway crossings. All damages within the footpath road reserve are to be rectified to its original condition at the cost of the applicant.

 

During Construction

 

75.    Physical connection of stormwater to site - No work is permitted to proceed above the ground floor slab level of the building until there is physical connection of the approved stormwater drainage system from the land the subject of this consent to Princes Highway.

 

76.    Hazardous or Intractable Waste – Removal and Disposal  - Hazardous or intractable waste arising from the demolition or construction process shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of SafeWork NSW and the NSW Environment Protection Authority and with the provision of:

 

·          Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) (as amended);

·          Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (as amended);

·          Protection Of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (NSW) (as amended); and

·          Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2014 (as amended)

 

77.    Cost of work to be borne by the applicant - The applicant shall bear the cost of all works associated with the construction of the development that occurs on Council property.  Care must be taken to protect Council's roads, including the made footway, kerbs, etc., and, where plant and vehicles enter the site, the footway shall be protected against damage by deep-sectioned timber members laid crosswise, held together by hoop iron straps and chamfered at their ends.  This construction shall be maintained in a state of good repair and condition throughout the course of construction.

 

78.    No Obstruction of Road or Footpath - The use of the road or footpath for the storage of any building materials, waste materials, temporary toilets, waste or skip bins, or any other matter is not permitted unless separately approved by Council under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and/or under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.  Penalty infringement Notices may be issued for any offences and severe penalties apply.

 

79.    Hours of construction for demolition and building work - Any work activity or activity associated with the development consent that requires the use of any tools (including hand tools) or any power operated plant and machinery that creates noise on or adjacent to the site shall not be performed, or permitted to be performed, except between the hours of 7.00 am to 5.00 pm, Monday to Saturday inclusive.  No work or ancillary activity is permitted on Sundays, or Public Holidays.

 

Note: A penalty infringement notice may be issued for any offence.

 

80.    Waste Management Facility - All materials removed from the site as a result of demolition, site clearing, site preparation and, or excavation shall be disposed of at a suitable Waste Management Facility.  No vegetation, article, building material, waste or the like shall be ignited or burnt.  Copies of all receipts for the disposal, or processing of all such materials shall be submitted to the Principal Certifier, and Council, where Council is not the Principal Certifier.

 

81.    Site contamination – Additional information - Any new information that comes to light during demolition or construction which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination and remediation must be notified to Council and the accredited certifier immediately.

 

82.    Ground levels and retaining walls - The ground levels of the site shall not be excavated, raised or filled, or retaining walls constructed on the allotment boundary, except where indicated on approved plans or approved by Council.

 

83.    Registered Surveyors Report - During Development Work - A report must be submitted to the Principal Certifier at each of the following applicable stages of construction:

 

(i)      Set out before commencing excavation;

 

(ii)     Floor slabs or foundation wall, before formwork or commencing brickwork;

 

(iii)    Completion of Foundation Walls - Before any construction of flooring, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans;

(iv)    Completion of Floor Slab Formwork - Before pouring of concrete/walls construction, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  In multi-storey buildings a further survey must be provided at each subsequent storey;

 

(v)     Completion of any Roof Framing - Before roof covered detailing eaves/gutter setback from boundaries;

 

(vi)    Completion of all Work - Detailing the location of the structure (including eaves/gutters) relative to adjacent boundaries and its height relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  A final Check Survey must indicate the reduced level of the main ridge.

 

Work must not proceed beyond each stage until the Principal Certifier is satisfied that the height and location of the building is proceeding in accordance with the approved plans.

 

Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

 

84.    Easement for public access – Prior to the issue of any occupation certificate in relation to the development, the Applicant must at its expense, obtain registration on the title of the land an easement upon the terms acceptable to Georges River Council in favour of the public in perpetuity which permits the public to a right of footway (including the use of bicycles) over that part of the land identified in the approved plans as “Public Link” (including over the access stairs) to access the foreshore of Kogarah Bay which Easement may only be released or varied with written consent of Georges River Council.

 

85.    Acoustic Certification - Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, a report prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant must be submitted to the PCA certifying that the construction has incorporated the recommendations in the Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Vibration and Noise Pty Ltd and dated 16 August 2018

 

86.    Acoustic Compliance – General Operation of Premises - The proposed use of the premises and the operation of all plant and equipment shall not give rise to an ‘offensive noise’ as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (as amended) and Regulations.

 

A suitably qualified person shall certify that the operation of the plant equipment shall not give rise to sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the background LA90, 15 min noise level, measured in the absence of the noise sources under consideration by more than 5dB.  The source noise level shall be assessed as an LAeq, 15 min in accordance with the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s “NSW industrial Noise Policy.

 

Certification must be submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

87.    Completion of Landscape Works - All landscape works must be completed before the issue of the Final Occupation Certificate in accordance with the updated Landscape Plans and in accordance with conditions in this consent which require the landscape plans to be modified.

 

88.    Post Construction Dilapidation report – Private Land - At the completion of the construction works, a suitably qualified person is to be engaged to prepare a post-construction dilapidation report.  This report is to ascertain whether the construction works associated with the subject development created any structural damage to the five adjoining premises.

 

The report is to be prepared at the expense of the applicant and submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.  In ascertaining whether adverse structural damaged has occurred to the adjoining premises, the Principal Certifier, must compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report required by conditions in this consent.

 

Evidence confirming that a copy of the post-construction dilapidation report was delivered to the adjoining properties subject of the dilapidation report must be provided to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

89.    Traffic Control Devices - The internal road network, pedestrian facilities and parking facilities (including visitor parking and employee parking) shall be designated and line marked in accordance with Australian Standard - AS1742, Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

 

If an exit from car park utilises a pedestrian footpath, then a warning system such as flashing light and/or ‘alarm sound’ must be installed on the subject property to alert pedestrians of vehicles exiting the car park.  The Alarm System must be designed and installed in accordance with AS2890.1 -2004.

                                                

90.    SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement - The Principal Certifier must not issue an Occupation Certificate to authorise a person to commence occupation of the residential flat development unless design verification from a qualified designer, being a statement in which the qualified designer verifies that the residential flat development achieves the design quality of the development as shown in the plans and specifications in respect of which the construction certificate was issued, having regard to the design quality principles set out in Part 2 (Schedule 1) of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65 Design Quality of Residential Apartment Development.

 

91.    Major Development car parking areas - Internal driveways and parking spaces are to be adequately paved with concrete or bitumen, or interlocking pavers to provide a dust-free surface.  All car parking spaces are to be line marked in accordance with AS1742, ‘Australian Standard Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices’ and the relevant guidelines published by the RMS.

 

92.    Consolidation of Site - The site shall be consolidated into one allotment and by a Plan of Consolidation being prepared by a Registered Surveyor.  This Plan shall be registered at the NSW Land and Property Information prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

 

93.    Restriction to User and Positive Covenant for On-Site Detention Facility - A Restriction on Use of the Land and Positive Covenant shall be created and registered on the title of the property, which places the responsibility for the maintenance of the on-site stormwater management system on the owners of the land.  The terms of the instrument are to be in accordance with Council’s standard terms and restrictions which are as follows:

 

Restrictions on Use of Land

The registered proprietor shall not make or permit or suffer the making of any alterations to any on-site stormwater management system which is, or shall be, constructed on the lot(s) burdened without the prior consent in writing of Georges River Council. The expression “on-site stormwater management system” shall include all ancillary gutters, pipes, drains, walls, kerbs, pits, grates, tanks, chambers, basins and surfaces designed to manage stormwater quantity or quality including the temporary detention or permanent retention of stormwater storages. Any on-site stormwater management system constructed on the lot(s) burdened is hereafter referred to as “the system.

 

Name of Authority having the power to release, vary or modify the Restriction referred to is Georges River Council.

 

Positive Covenants

The registered proprietor of the lot(s) hereby burdened will in respect of the system:

i)          keep the system clean and free from silt, rubbish and debris

ii)         maintain and repair at the sole expense of the registered proprietors the whole of the system so that if functions in a safe and efficient manner

iii)        permit the Council or its authorised agents from time to time and upon giving reasonable notice (but at any time and without notice in the case of an emergency) to enter and inspect the land for the compliance with the requirements of this covenant

iv)        comply with the terms of any written notice issued by the Council in respect of the requirements of this covenant within the time stated in the notice.

 

Pursuant to Section 88F(3) of the Conveyancing Act 1919 the Council shall have the following additional powers:

 

In the event that the registered proprietor fails to comply with the terms of any written notice issued by the Council as set out above the Council or its authorised agents may enter the land with all necessary materials and equipment and carry out any work which the Council in its discretion considers reasonable to comply with the said notice referred to in part b) (iii) above.

 

The Council may recover from the registered proprietor in a Court of competent jurisdiction:

i)          any expense reasonably incurred by it in exercising its powers under subparagraph (c) hereof. Such expense shall include reasonable wages for the Council’s employees engaged in effecting the work referred to in (c) above, supervising and administering the said work together with costs, reasonably estimated by the Council, for the use of materials, machinery, tools and equipment in conjunction with the said work.

 

ii)         Legal costs on an indemnity basis for issue of the said notices and recovery of the said costs and expenses together with the costs and expenses of registration of a covenant charge pursuant to section 88F of the Act or providing any certificate required pursuant to section 88G of the Act or obtaining any injunction pursuant to section 88H of the Act.

 

Name of Authority having the power to release vary or modify the Positive Covenant referred to is Georges River Council.

 

94.    Maintenance Schedule for On-site Stormwater Management - A Maintenance Schedule for the proposed on-site stormwater management measures is to be prepared and submitted to Council. The Maintenance Schedule shall outline the required maintenance works, how and when these will be done and who will be carrying out these maintenance works.

 

95.    Works as Executed and certification of stormwater works - Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifier must ensure that the stormwater drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the approved design and relevant Australian Standards.  A works-as-executed drainage plan and certification must be forwarded to the Principal Certifier and Council, from a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering.

 

This Plan and Certification shall confirm that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system satisfies the conditions of development consent and the Construction Certificate stormwater design details approved by the Principal Certifier.

 

The works-as-executed drainage plan must be prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering in conjunction with a Registered Surveyor and must include the following details (as applicable):

 

(i)      The location of any detention basin/s with finished surface levels;

(ii)     Finished site contours at 0.2 metre intervals (if applicable);

(iii)    Volume of storage available in any detention areas;

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

(v)     The orifice size/s (if applicable);

(vi)    Details of any infiltration/absorption systems; and (if applicable);

(v)     Details of any pumping systems installed (including wet well volumes) (if applicable).

 

96.    Requirements prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate - The following shall be completed and or submitted to the Principal Certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate:

 

a)      All the stormwater/drainage works shall be completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate plans prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

b)      Work as Executed Plans prepared by a Chartered Professional Engineer or a Registered Surveyor when all the site engineering works are complete shall be submitted to the Principal certifier prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

97.    Vehicular crossing & Frontage work – Major development - The following road frontage works shall be constructed in accordance with Council's Specification for Vehicular Crossings and Associated Works together with the Vehicular Crossing Approval issued by Council’s Engineering Services Division. Also, the works are carried out in accordance with NSW Roads and Maritime Services:

 

(a) Construct footpath for the full length of the frontage of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications for footpaths.

(b) Construct the vehicular crossing in accordance with Council’s Specifications for vehicular crossings.

(c)  Construct a new 150mm high concrete kerb with 450mm wide gutter for the full frontage(s) of the site in accordance with Council’s Specifications for kerb and guttering.

(d) Any existing vehicular crossing and/or laybacks which are redundant must be removed. The kerb and gutter, any other footpath and turf areas shall be restored at the expense of the applicant and in accordance with Council’s Specification for Vehicular Crossings and Associated Works. 

 

The above works shall be carried out at the expense of the applicant and in accordance with Council’s Specification for Vehicular Crossings and Associated Works.

 

The driveway and road frontage works are to be completed before the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

98.    Completion of major road related works - Prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate, the following works must be completed at the applicant’s expense to the satisfaction of Council’s Engineering Services section:

 

(a) Driveways and vehicular crossings within the road related area;

(b) Removal of redundant driveways and vehicular crossings;

(c)  New footpaths within the road related area;

(d) Relocation of any  existing  above ground utility services

(e) Relocation/provision of street signs

(f)  New or replacement street trees;

(g) New footway verges, where a grass verge exists, the balance of the area between the footpath and the kerb or site boundary over the full frontage of the proposed development must be turfed.  The grass verge must be constructed to contain a uniform minimum 75mm of friable growing medium and have a total cover of turf predominant within the street.

(h) New or reinstated kerb and guttering within the road related area; and

(i)   New or reinstated road surface pavement within the road.

 

Council’s Engineering Services Section must advise in writing that the works have been completed to their satisfaction prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. Note: The damage deposit paid to Council will not be released until the works have been completed to Council’s satisfaction.

 

99.    Dilapidation Report on Public Land - Upon completion of works, a follow up dilapidation report must be prepared or the items of Council infrastructure adjoining the development site.  The dilapidation report must be prepared by a professional engineer specialising in structural engineering, and include:

 

(i)      Photographs showing the condition of the road pavement fronting the site;

(ii)     Photographs showing the condition of the kerb and gutter fronting the site;

(iii)    Photographs showing the condition of the footway including footpath pavement fronting the site;

(iv)    Photographs showing the condition of retaining walls within the         footway or road;

(v)     Closed circuit television/video inspection (in DVD format) of public stormwater drainage systems fronting, adjoining or within the site, and

(vi)    The full name and signature of the professional engineer.

 

The report must be provided to the Principal Certifier and a copy provided to the Council.  The reports are to be supplied in electronic format in Word or PDF. Photographs are to be in colour, digital and date stamped.

 

Note: Council will use this report to determine whether or not to refund the damage deposit.

 

100.  Stormwater drainage works – Works As Executed - Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, storm water drainage works are to be certified by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, with Works-As-Executed drawings supplied to Council detailing:

 

a)      Compliance with conditions of development consent relating to stormwater;

b)      The structural adequacy of the On-Site Detention system (OSD);

c)      That the works have been constructed in accordance with the approved design and will provide the detention storage volume and attenuation in accordance with the submitted calculations;

d)      Pipe invert levels and surface levels to Australian Height Datum;

e)      Contours indicating the direction in which water will flow over land should the capacity of the pit be exceeded in a storm event exceeding design limits.

 

Council’s Engineering Services section must advise in writing that they are satisfied with the Works-As-Executed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

101.  Fire Safety Certificate before Occupation or Use - In accordance with Clause 153 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, on completion of building works and prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the owner must cause the issue of a Final Fire Safety Certificate in accordance with Clause 170 of the aforesaid Regulation.  The Fire Safety Certificate must be in the form or to the effect of Clause 174 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000. In addition, in relation to each essential fire or other safety measure implemented in the building or on the land on which the building is situated, such a Certificate is to state that:

 

(i)      the measure has been assessed by a person (chosen by the owner of the building) who is properly qualified to do so; abd

 

(ii)     as at the date of the assessment the measure was found to be capable of functioning at a standard not less than that required by the Schedule.

 

A copy of the certificate is to be given by the applicant to the Commissioner of Fire & Rescue NSW and a further copy is to be displayed in a frame and fixed to a wall inside the building's main entrance.

 

102.  Allocation of car parking spaces - Car parking associated with the development is to be allocated as follows and shall be reflected on the strata plan:

 

a)       64 Resident car parking spaces

b)     8 residential visitor spaces

c)     5 accessible spaces.

d)     1 car wash bay

e)     Motorbike parking catering for a minimum of 2 motorbikes

 

103.  Structural Certificate During Construction - The proposed building must be constructed in accordance with details designed and certified by the practising qualified structural engineer. All structural works associated with the foundations, piers, footings and slabs for the proposed building must be inspected and structurally certified for compliance by an independent practising geotechnical and structural engineer.  In addition a Compliance or Structural Certificate, to the effect that the building works have been carried in accordance with the structural design, must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority at each stage of Construction or prior issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

104.  Structural Certificates - The proposed structure must be constructed in accordance with details designed and certified by the practising qualified structural engineer. In addition, Compliance or Structural Certificates, to the effect that the building works have been carried in accordance with the structural design, must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

105.  BASIX Certificate - All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the approved BASIX Certificate No.952773M_02, dated 7 September 2018 in the plans approved with the Development Consent, must be implemented before issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

106.  Maintenance Schedule – On-site Stormwater Management. A Maintenance Schedule for the proposed on-site stormwater management measures is to be prepared and submitted to Council. The Maintenance Schedule will outline the required maintenance works, how and when these will be done and who will be carrying out these maintenance works.

 

107.  Stormwater - Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the PCA must ensure that the stormwater drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the approved design and relevant Australian Standards. A works-as-executed drainage plan and certification must be forwarded to the PCA and Council, from a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering.

 

This Plan and Certification shall confirm that the design and construction of the stormwater drainage system satisfies the conditions of development consent and the Construction Certificate stormwater design details approved by the PCA.

 

The works-as-executed drainage plan must be prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering in conjunction with a Registered Surveyor and must include the following details:

 

(a)   The location of any detention basin/s with finished surface levels;

(b)   Volume of storage available in any detention areas;

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

(d)   The orifice size/s.

 

108.  Acoustic Certification - Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate, a suitably qualified acoustic consultant will certify that the operation of the premises and plant equipment will not give rise to a sound pressure level at any affected premises that exceeds the relevant acoustic criteria. The development will at all times comply with these noise levels post occupation.

 

109.  Waste room - The waste room will contain the following to minimise odours, deter vermin, protects surrounding areas, and make it a user-friendly and safe area:

·  waste room floor to be sealed;

·  waste room walls and floor surface is flat and even;

·  all walls painted with light colour and washable paint;

·  equipment electric outlets to be installed 1700mm above floor levels;

·  The bin storage rooms will be mechanically exhausted as required by AS 1668.2;

·  light switch installed at height of 1.6m;

·  waste rooms must be well lit (sensor lighting recommended);

·  optional automatic odour and pest control system installed to eliminate all pest

·  types and assist with odour reduction - this process generally takes place at

·  building handover - building management make the decision to install;

·  all personnel doors are hinged and self-closing;

·  waste collection area must hold all bins - bin movements should be with ease of access;

·  conform to the Building Code of Australia, Australian Standards and local laws; and childproofing and public/operator safety shall be assessed and ensured.

·  Occupational Health and Safety issues such as slippery floors in waste rooms and the weight of the waste and recycling receptacles will need to be monitored.

·  Cleaners will monitor the bin storage area and all spills will be attended to immediately by cleaners:

 

110.  Certification - Air handling systems (including water-cooling system, hot-water systems and warm-water systems) - Certification by a suitably qualified person engineer ‘2012 must be submitted to the PCA prior to the issue of any occupation certificate  verifying that the air handling system has been installed in accordance with:

(a) Public Health Act 2010 (as amended)

(b) Public Health Regulation 2012 (as amended)

(c) AS/NZS 3666.1:2011 Air-handling and water systems of buildings -Microbial control -Design, installation and commissioning

 

Operational Conditions (Ongoing)

 

111.  Noise Control - The use of the premises must not give rise to the transmission of offensive noise to any place of different occupancy. Offensive noise is defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (as amended).  This includes the use of the rooftop open space.

 

112.  Roof top terrace – The A Plan of Management for the use of this space shall be adhered to for the perpetuity of the development. The Strata Manager shall ensure that the plan is provided to all residents and occupants of the development and a sign shall be installed next to the lifts on Level 10 to highlight the hours of use of the area (7am until 10pm daily) and any other operational restrictions i.e keeping the space clean, rules around using the bbq’s.

 

113.  Final Acoustic Report – Verification of Noise report - Within three months from the issue of an Occupation Certificate, an acoustic assessment is to be carried out by an appropriately qualified acoustic consultant, in accordance with the EPA's Industrial Noise Policy and submitted to Council for consideration.  This report should include but not be limited to, details verifying that the noise control measures as recommended in the acoustic report.

 

114.  Compliance with POM for use of rooftop open space - The approved POM for use of the rooftop open space shall be enforced by the Owners Corporation.

 

115.  Outdoor Lighting - To avoid annoyance to the occupants of adjoining premises or glare to motorist on nearby roads, outdoor lighting must comply with AS 4282-1997: Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

 

116.  Entering & Exiting of vehicles - All vehicles shall enter and exit the premises in a forward direction.

 

117.  Annual Fire Safety Statement - The owner of the building premises must ensure the Council is given an annual fire safety statement in relation to each essential fire safety measure implemented in the building.  The annual fire safety statement must be given:

 

a)      Within 12 months after the date on which the fire safety certificate was received.

 

b)      Subsequent annual fire safety statements are to be given within 12 months after the last such statement was given.

 

c)      An annual fire safety statement is to be given in or to the effect of Clause 181 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

d)      A copy of the statement is to be given to the Commissioner of Fire & Rescue NSW, and a further copy is to be prominently displayed in the building.

 

118.  Responsibility of Owners Corporation - The Owners Corporation shall be responsible for presenting all approved waste and recycling receptacles for collection, and returning all receptacles to the Main Waste Collection Room, as soon as practicable after they have been serviced.

         

The Owners Corporation shall also be responsible for maintaining all equipment, systems, facilities and storage areas used in conjunction with the provision of waste management services in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, relevant health and environmental standards, and to the satisfaction of Council.

 

119.  Maintenance of Landscaping - All trees and plants forming part of the approved landscaping in must be maintained in perpetuity.  Maintenance includes watering, weeding, removal of rubbish from tree bases, fertilizing, pest and disease control, replacement of dead or dying plants and any other operations required to maintain healthy trees, plants and turfed areas.

 

120.  Amenity of the neighbourhood - The implementation of this development shall not adversely affect the amenity of the neighbourhood or interfere unreasonably with the comfort or repose of a person who is outside the premises by reason of the emission or discharge of noise, fumes, vapour, odour, steam, soot, dust, waste water, waste products, grit, oil or other harmful products.

 

121.  Waste facilities - Occupational Health and Safety issues such as slippery floors in waste rooms and the weight of the waste and recycling receptacles will need to be monitored.  Cleaners must monitor the bin storage area and all spills need to be attended to immediately by cleaners.

 

122.  Activities and Storage of Goods Outside Buildings - There will be no activities including storing or depositing of any goods or maintenance to any machinery external to the building with the exception of waste receptacles.

 

123.  Disability Discrimination Act – The applicant is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation.

 

Operational Requirements Under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

 

124.  Requirement for a Construction Certificate - The erection of a building must not commence until a Construction Certificate has been issued.

 

125.  Appointment of a Principal Certifier - The erection of a building must not commence until the applicant has:

 

i)       appointed a Principal Certifier for the building work; and

 

ii)      if relevant, advised the Principal Certifier that the work will be undertaken as an Owner -Builder.

 

If the work is not going to be undertaken by an Owner - Builder, the applicant must:

 

iii)     appoint a Principal Contractor to undertake the building work. If residential building work (within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989) is to be undertaken, the Principal Contractor must be a holder of a contractor licence; and

 

iv)     notify the Principal Certifier of the details of any such appointment; and

 

v)      notify the Principal Contractor of any critical stage inspections or other inspections that are required to be carried out in respect of the building work.

 

126.  Notification Requirements of Principal Certifier - No later than two days before the building work commences, the Principal Certifier must notify:

 

a)      the consent authority and the Council (if not the consent authority) of his or her appointment; and

 

b)      the applicant of the critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out with respect to the building work.

 

127.  Notice of Commencement - The applicant must give at least two days notice to the Council and the Principal Certifier of their intention to commence the erection of a building.

 

128.  Critical Stage Inspections - The last critical stage inspection must be undertaken by the Principal Certifier.  The critical stage inspections required to be carried out vary according to Building Class under the Building Code of Australia and are listed in Clause 162A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

129.  Notice to be given prior to critical stage inspections - The principal contractor for a building site, or the owner-builder, must notify the Principal Certifier at least 48 hours before each required inspection needs to be carried out. Where Georges River Council has been appointed as the Principal Certifier, 48 hours notice in writing, or alternatively 24 hours notice by facsimile or telephone, must be given when specified work requiring inspection has been completed.

 

130.  Occupation Certificate - A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building unless an Occupation Certificate has been issued in relation to the building or part.  Only the Principal Certifier appointed for the building work can issue the Occupation Certificate.

 

Prescribed Conditions

 

131.  Clause 97A - BASIX Commitments - This Clause requires the fulfilment of all BASIX Commitments as detailed in the BASIX Certificate to which the development relates.

 

132.  Clause 98 – Building Code of Australia & Home Building Act 1989 - Requires all building work to be carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia.  In the case of residential building work to which the Home Building Act 1989 relates, there is a requirement for a contract of insurance to be in force before any work commences.

 

133.  Clause 98A – Erection of Signs - Requires the erection of signs on site and outlines the details which are to be included on the sign.  The sign must be displayed in a prominent position on site and include the name and contact details of the Principal Certifier and the Principal Contractor.

 

134.  Clause 98B – Home Building Act 1989 - If the development involves residential building work under the Home Building Act 1989, no work is permitted to commence unless certain details are provided in writing to Council.  The name and licence/permit number of the Principal Contractor or Owner Builder and the name of the Insurer by which work is insured under Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

135.  Clause 98E - Protection & support of adjoining premises - If the development involves excavation that extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on adjoining land, this prescribed condition requires the person who benefits from the development consent to protect and support the adjoining premises and where necessary underpin the adjoining premises to prevent any damage.

 

136.  Clause 98E - Site Excavation- Excavation of the site is to extend only to that area required for building works depicted upon the approved plans.  All excess excavated material shall be removed from the site.

 

All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely and in accordance with appropriate professional standards.

 

All excavations associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.

 

If the soil conditions require it, retaining walls associated with the erection or demolition of a building or other approved methods of preventing movement of the soil shall be provided and adequate provision shall be made for drainage.

 

END CONDITIONS

 

NOTES/ADVICES

 

137.  Review of Determination - Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act confers on an applicant who is dissatisfied with the determination of the application the right to lodge an application with Council for a review of such determination.  Any such review must however be completed within 6 months from its determination.  Should a review be contemplated sufficient time should be allowed for Council to undertake public notification and other processes involved in the review of the determination.

Note: review provisions do not apply to Complying Development, Designated Development, State Significant Development, Integrated Development or any application determined by the Sydney South Planning Panel or the Land & Environment Court.

 

138.  Appeal Rights - Division 8 (Appeals and Related matters) Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 confers on an applicant who is dissatisfied with the determination of the application a right of appeal to the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales.

 

139.  Lapsing of Consent - This consent will lapse unless the development is physically commenced within 5 years from the Date of Operation of this consent, in accordance with Section 95 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as amended.

 

140.  Council as PCA - Compliance with the BCA - Should the Council be appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority in determining the Construction Certificate, the building must comply with all the applicable deemed to satisfy provision of the BCA.  However, if an alternative solution is proposed it must comply with the performance requirements of the BCA, in which case, the alternative solution, prepared by an appropriately qualified fire consultant, accredited and having specialist qualifications in fire engineering, must justifying the non-compliances with a detailed report, suitable evidence and expert judgement. Council will also require if deemed necessary, for the alternative solution to undergo an independent peer review by either the CSIRO or other accredited organisation.  In these circumstances, the applicant must pay all costs for the independent review.

 

141.  Energy Efficiency Provisions - Should Council be appointed as the PCA, a report prepared and endorsed by an Energy Efficiency Engineer or other suitably qualified person must be submitted, detailing the measures that must be implemented in the building to comply with Section J of the BCA. The proposed measures and feature of the building that facilitate the efficient use of energy must be identified and detailed on the architectural plans. At completion of the building and before the issue of an Occupation Certificate, a certificate certifying that the building has been erected to comply with the energy efficiency provisions must be submitted to the PCA.

 

Energy efficiency provisions relate only to new building work or the installation of new measure. Existing building fabric and measures may not be upgraded

 

142.  Compliance with Access, Mobility and AS4299 - Adaptable Housing - Should the Council be appointment as the PCA, the Construction Certificate Application must be accompanied by detailed working plans and a report or a Certificate of Compliance from an Accredited Access Consultant certifying that the building design and access to the adaptable units complies with Council’s DCP and AS 4299 Adaptable Housing.

 

143.  Council as PCA - Total Conformity with BCA - Should the Council be appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority, the Construction Certificate Application must be accompanied by the following details, with plans prepared and certified by an appropriately qualified person demonstrating compliance with the BCA:

 

·    Mechanical ventilation to bathroom, laundry and basement areas not afforded natural ventilation.

·    Provision of natural light to all habitable areas.

·    Fire-fighting services and equipment including hydrant and booster assembly systems, sprinkler and valve room systems, hose reels, portable fire extinguishers, smoke hazard management systems and sound & warning systems.

·    Emergency lighting and exit signs throughout, including terrace areas, lobby and basement areas.

·    Construction of all fire (smoke) doors including warning and operational signage to required exit and exit door areas.

·    Egress, travel distance and the discharge from an exit including the swing of exit doors.

·    The protection of openings including spandrel separation.

·    Fire compartmentation and fire wall separation details including all stairway, lift and service shaft areas.

·    Protection of openings including paths of travel from fire isolated exists

·    Re-entry facilities from fire isolated exit stairways.

·    Sound transmission and insulation details.

·    Window schedule is to include the protection of openable windows.

·    The location of sanitary facilities for employees in accordance with Table F2.1

 

In this regard, detailed construction plans and specifications that demonstrate compliance with the above requirements of the BCA must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority with the Construction Certificate Application. Should there be any non-compliance, an alternative method of fire protection and structural capacity must be submitted, with all supporting documents prepared by a suitably qualified person.

 

In the event that full compliance with the BCA cannot be achieved and the services of a fire engineer are obtained to determine an alternative method of compliance with the BCA, such report must be submitted to and endorsed by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

144.  Site Safety Fencing - Site fencing must be erected in accordance with SafeWork Guidelines, to exclude public access to the site throughout the demolition and/or construction work, except in the case of alterations to an occupied dwelling. The fencing must be erected before the commencement of any work and maintained throughout any demolition and construction work.

 

A demolition licence and/or a high risk work license may be required from SafeWork NSW (see www.SafeWork.nsw.gov.au).

 

145.  Long Service Levy - The Long Service Corporation administers a scheme which provides a portable long service benefit for eligible workers in the building and construction industry in NSW. All benefits and requirements are determined by the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986. More information about the scheme and the levy amount you are required to pay to satisfy a condition of your consent can be found at http://www.longservice.nsw.gov.au.

 

The required Long Service Levy payment can be direct to the Long Service Corporation via their web site https://online.longservice.nsw.gov.au/bci/levy.  Payments can only be processed on-line for the full levy owing and where the value of work is between $25,000 and $6,000,000. Payments will be accepted for amounts up to $21,000, using either MasterCard or Visa.

 

146.  Electricity Supply - This development may need a connection to the Ausgrid network which may require the network to be extended or its capacity augmented. You are advised to contact Ausgrid on 13 13 65 or www.ausgrid.com.au (Business and Commercial Services) for further details and information on lodging your application to connect to the network.

 

147.  Disability Discrimination Act – This application has been assessed in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.  No guarantee is given that the proposal complies with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. The applicant is responsible to ensure compliance with this and other anti-discrimination legislation.  The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 covers disabilities not catered for in the minimum standards called up in the Building Code of Australia which refers to AS1428.1-Design for Access and Mobility.

 

148.  Stormwater & Ancillary Works – Applications under Section 138 Roads Act and/or Section 68 Local Government Act 1993 - To apply for approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993:

 

(a) Complete the Driveway Crossing on Council Road Reserve Application Form which can be downloaded from Georges River Council’s Website at www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au.

(b) In the Application Form, quote the Development Consent No. (DA2018/0038) and reference the relevant condition number.

(c)   Lodge the application form, together with the associated fees at Council’s Customer Service Centre, during business hours.  Refer to Council’s adopted Fees and Charges for the administrative and inspection charges associated with Vehicular Crossing applications

 

An approval for a new or modified vehicular crossing will contain the approved access and/or alignment levels which will be required to construct the crossing and/or footpath.   Once approved, all work shall be carried out by a private contractor in accordance with Council’s specifications prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

The developer must meet all costs of the extension, relocation or reconstruction of any part of Council’s drainage system (including design drawings and easements) required to carry out the approved development. 

 

The preparation of all engineering drawings (site layout plans, cross sections, longitudinal sections, elevation views together with a hydraulic grade analysis) and specifications for the new storm water drainage system to be arranged by the applicant.  The design plans must be lodged and approved by Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. 

 

NOTE: A minimum of four weeks should be allowed for assessment.

 

149.  Development Engineering - Conditions relating to future Strata Subdivision of Buildings

No approval is expressed or implied for the subdivision of the subject building(s).  For any future Strata subdivision, a separate Complying Development Certificate shall be approved by Council or an Accredited Certifier.

 

Prior to the issue of any Strata Certificate of the subject building(s) the following conditions shall be satisfied:

 

(a) Unit Numbering

Apartment type numbers shall be installed adjacent or to the front door of each unit.

The unit number shall coincide with the strata plan lot numbering.

 

(b) Car Parking Space Marking and Numbering

      Each car space shall be line marked with paint and numbered in accordance with the strata plan lot numbering.

 

      “Visitor Parking" signs shall be installed adjacent to any and all visitor car spaces prior to the issue of any Strata Certificate.

 

(c) Designation of Visitor Car Spaces on any Strata Plan

      Any Visitor car spaces shall be designated on the final strata plan as "Visitor Parking - Common Property".

 

(d) Allocation of Car Parking Spaces, Storage Areas and Common Property on any Strata Plan

i.     All car parking spaces shall be created as a part lot of the individual strata’s unit lot in any Strata Plan of the subject building.

ii. All storage areas shall be created as a part lot of the individual strata’s unit lot or a separate Utility Lot (if practical) in any Strata Plan of the subject building.

iii. The minimum number of parking spaces required to be allocated as a part lot to each individual strata’s unit lot shall be in accordance with the car parking requirements of Council's Development Control Plan and as required by the relative development consent for the building construction.

iv. No parking spaces shall be created as an individual strata allotment on any Strata Plan of the subject building unless these spaces are surplus to the minimum number of parking spaces required.

 

If preferred the surplus car spaces shall be permitted to be created as separate Utility Lots, (instead as a part lot of the individual strata’s unit lot), in accordance with section 39 of the Strata schemes (freehold development Act 1973).

 

The above requirements regarding car parking spaces and storage areas may only be varied with the conditions of a separate Development Application Approval for Strata Subdivision of the Building(s).

 

(e)     On Site Detention Requirements

The location any on-site detention facility shall be shown on the strata plan and suitably denoted.

 

(f)      Creation of Positive Covenant

A Positive Covenant shall be created over any on-site detention facility by an Instrument pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919, with the covenant including the following wording:

"It is the responsibility of the Owner's Corporation to keep the on-site detention facilities, together with any ancillary pumps, pipes, pits etc, clean at all times and maintained in an efficient working condition. The on-site detention facilities shall not be modified in any way without the prior approval of Georges River Council."

 

Georges River Council is to be nominated as the Authority to release, vary or modify this Covenant.

 

150.  Strata Subdivision - Council will check the consent conditions on the relevant Strata Subdivision consent. Failure to submit the required information will delay endorsement of the plan of subdivision.

 

Council will undertake the required inspections to satisfy the requirements of the Strata Schemes Development Regulation 2016 to determine the Strata Certificate.

 

Strata Plans, Administration Sheets, 88B Instruments and copies must not be folded. All Strata Plans, Strata Plan Administration Sheets and 88B Instruments shall be submitted to Council enclosed in a protective cardboard tube (to prevent damage during transfer).

 

151.  Security deposit administration & compliance fee - Under Section 97 (5) of the Local Government Act 1993, a security deposit (or part) if repaid to the person who provided it is to be repaid with any interest accrued on the deposit (or part) as a consequence of its investment.

 

Council must cover administration and other costs incurred in the investment of these monies. The current charge is $50.00 plus 2% of the bond amount per annum.

 

The interest rate applied to bonds is set at Council's business banking facility rate as at 1 July each year.  Council will accept a bank guarantee in lieu of a deposit.

 

All interest earned on security deposits will be used to offset the Security Deposit Administration and Compliance fee. Where interest earned on a deposit is not sufficient to meet the fee, it will be accepted in full satisfaction of the fee.

 

152.  Noise - Council will generally enforce noise related conditions in accordance with the Noise Guide for Local Government (http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise/nglg.htm) and the Industrial Noise Guidelines (http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise/industrial.htm) publish by the Department of Environment and Conservation. Other state government authorities also regulate the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

Useful links relating to Noise:

 

(a)       Community Justice Centres—free mediation service provided by the NSW Government (www.cjc.nsw.gov.au).

(b)       Department of Environment and Conservation NSW, Noise Policy Section web page (www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise).

(c)       New South Wales Government Legislation home page for access to all NSW legislation, including the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Noise Control Regulation 2000 (www.legislation.nsw.gov.au).

(d)       Australian Acoustical Society—professional society of noise-related professionals (www.acoustics.asn.au /index.php).

(e)       Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants—professional society of noise related professionals (www.aaac.org.au).

(f)        Department of Gaming and Racing - (www.dgr.nsw.gov.au).

 

153.  Acoustic Engineer Contacts & Reference Material - Further information including lists of Acoustic Engineers can be obtained from:

 

a)        Australian Acoustical Society—professional society of noise-related professionals (www.acoustics.asn.au)

b)        Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants—professional society of noise related professionals (www.aaac.org.au)

c)        NSW Industrial Noise Policy – Office of Environment & Heritage (www.environment.nsw.gov.au)

 

These conditions comprise the operational and statutory conditions which must be satisfied under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000. Please refer to the full details of the Act and Regulations as in force, at www.legislation.nsw.gov.au.  It is the responsibility of the beneficiary of this consent to determine which operational and statutory conditions apply.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Site Plan - 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

Attachment 2

Elevations - 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

Attachment 3

Elevations 2 - 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 4 April 2019

LPP010-19              468-474 Princes Highway, Blakehurst

[Appendix 1]          Site Plan - 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

 

 

Page 137

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 4 April 2019

LPP010-19              468-474 Princes Highway, Blakehurst

[Appendix 2]          Elevations - 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

 

 

Page 138

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 4 April 2019

LPP010-19              468-474 Princes Highway, Blakehurst

[Appendix 3]          Elevations 2 - 468-474 Princes Highway Blakehurst

 

 

Page 139

 


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 4 April  2019

Page 238

 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 04 April 2019

 

LPP Report No

LPP011-19

Development Application No

DA2018/0368

Site Address & Ward Locality

80-84 Regent Street Kogarah

Kogarah Bay Ward

Proposed Development

Demolition of all structures on site and construction of an 11 storey residential flat building containing 64 units over three and a half basement levels of parking accommodating 69 vehicles.

Owners

80 Regent - Xiaoping Sang, 82 Regent - William Fang Xu and Li Hua Mao and 84 Regent - Regent Strett Property Pty Ltd

Applicant

Regent Street Property Pty Ltd

Planner/Architect

Planner - City Plan, Architects – PBD Architects.

Date Of Lodgement

5/09/2018

Submissions

1 Submission Received

Cost of Works

$17,775,250.00

Local Planning Panel Criteria

The application is a residential flat building subject to State Environmental Planning Policy No 65

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy - (Infrastructure) 2007,

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017, State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004, Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No.2 – Georges River Catchment,

Kogarah Local Environmental Plan, Kogarah Development Control Plan

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

 Architectural plans

 

 

 

Report prepared by

Senior Development Assessment Planner

 

 

Recommendation

That the application be approved in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

 

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed, and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Yes  - Height of Buildings

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

No, standard conditions have been attached and Applicant verbally advised of this. The conditions will be available to review when the agenda is published.

 

Site Plan

Site outlined in blue

 

Executive Summary

 

Proposal

1.   Council received a development application (DA2018/0368) seeking planning permission for the demolition of all existing structures on site and construction of a 11 storey residential flat building over three and a half (3.5) levels of basement parking containing sixty one (61) residential units and sixty nine (69) car spaces at 80-84 Regent Street Kogarah (the site).

 

2.   The proposal was lodged by Regent St Property Pty Ltd (the Applicant) on 5 September 2018.

 

Site and Locality

3.   The subject site has a regular rectangular shaped allotment with a combined area of 1358.6sqm comprising the amalgamation of three (3) allotments commonly known as 80, 82 and 84 Regent Street Kogarah, collectively being a corner site occupying 3 street frontages. The site is located within the Kogarah North Precinct; an area which has recently been up zoned to High Density Residential land uses.

 

4.   The site is located on the northern side of Regent Street and is bound by Regent Lane to the east, Stanley Lane to the north and Regent Street to the south with a combined frontage of 29.04m to Regent Street.

 

Adjoining the subject site to the west is an approved development comprising an 11 storey residential flat building containing 104 units. To the north across Stanley Lane is an appr