time: 3.00pm one of two parts - municipality of woollahra · 5/23/2006 · 3. front balcony in...

Agenda: Application Assessment Panel Date: Tuesday 23 May 2006 Time: 3.00pm Part: One of Two Parts

H:\Application Assessment Panel\AGENDAS\2006\may23-06aapage.doc

Outline Of Meeting Protocol & Procedure: The Chairperson will call the Meeting to order and ask the Committee/Staff to present

apologies or late correspondence. The Chairperson will commence the Order of Business as shown in the Index to the

Agenda. At the beginning of each item the Chairperson will ask whether a member(s) of the

public wish to address the Committee. If person(s) wish to address the Committee, they are allowed three (3) minutes in which

to do so. Please direct comments to the issues at hand. If there are persons representing both sides of a matter (eg applicant/objector), the

objector speaks first. At the conclusion of the allotted three (3) minutes, the speaker resumes his/her seat and

takes no further part in the debate unless specifically called to do so by the Chairperson. If there is more than one (1) person wishing to address the Committee from the same

side of the debate, the Chairperson will request that where possible a spokesperson be nominated to represent the parties.

The Chairperson has the discretion whether to continue to accept speakers from the floor.

After considering any submissions the Committee will debate the matter (if necessary), and arrive at a resolution.

Note: Matters where there is a substantive change to the recommendation of the Council

Officer are referred to the next appropriate meeting of the Application Assessment Panel.

Note: Matters can be “called” from this Committee to the Development Control Committee

(DCC) by Councillors subject to the following requirements: - Calling requires two Councillors - Calling must be lodged before 3.00pm on the business day preceding the Application

Assessment Panel meeting at which the item is listed.


WOOLLAHRA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

Notice of Meeting 15 May 2006 To: General Manager Director – Technical Services

Director – Planning & Development Manager – Compliance Manager – Strategic Planning

CC: The Mayor All Councillors

Application Assessment Panel Meeting – 23 May 2006 In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993, I request your attendance at a Meeting of the Council’s Application Assessment Panel to be held in the Committee Room, 536 New South Head Road, Double Bay, on Tuesday 23 May 2006 at 3.00pm. Gary James General Manager

Woollahra Municipal Council Application Assessment Panel 23 May 2006


Meeting Agenda Part One of Two Parts

Item

Subject

Pages

1 2 3

Apologies Late Correspondence Declarations of Interest

Items to be Decided by this Committee using its Delegated Authority

D1 Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting held on 16 May 2006 1

D2 DA635/2005 – 265 O’Sullivan Road, Bellevue Hill – Alterations & additions – Landscaping & siteworks – 20/10/2005 *See Recommendation Page 2

2-41

D3 DA405/2005 – 9 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse – Alterations & additions – 30/6/2005 *See Recommendation Page 57

42-102

D4 DA630/2005 – 56 New Beach Road, Darling Point – Alterations & additions to existing residential flat building including a 2nd floor level addition with roof terrace, new lift & upgrade of the building – 14/10/2005 *See Recommendation Page 127

103-165

D5 DA634/2005 – 7 Pickering Lane Woollahra – Demolition of existing dwelling house & construction of a new two storey dwelling house – 19/10/2005 *See Recommendation Page 178

166-203



Meeting Agenda Part Two of Two Parts

Item

Subject

Pages

D6 DA496/2002 Part 3 – 33 Streatfield Road, Bellevue Hill – Section 96

proposed modification to dwelling & landscaping – 15/8/2005 *See Recommendation Page 217

204-227

D7 DA587/2005 – 45A Bay Street, Double Bay – Section 82A Review of development application proposing outdoor seating – 30/11/2005 *See Recommendation Page 239

228-249

D8 DA68/2006 – 3 & 4/96 Bellevue Road, Bellevue Hill – Demolition of internal wall allowing the consolidations of 3 & 4 – 10/2/2006 *See Recommendation Page 257

250-264

D9 DA56/2005 – 2E Greenoaks Avenue, Darling Point – Alterations & additions to existing RFB to create two strata apartments – 8/2/2005 *See Recommendation Page 268

265-362

D10 DA368/2004 Part 2 – 32A Darling Point Road, Darling Point – Section 96 application proposed modification part of approved roof, delete two windows, add two new julliet balconies & minor changes to internal layout – 25/1/2006 *See Recommendation Page 372

363-380

D11 DA489/2005 – 134 Glenmore Road, Paddington – Alterations & additions to existing dwelling – 9/8/2005 *See Recommendation Page 394

381-414


H:\Application Assessment Panel\AGENDAS\2006\may23-06aapage.doc 3

Item No: D1 Delegated to Committee Subject: Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting held on 16 May 2006 Author: Les Windle, Manager - Governance File No: See Application Assessment Panel Minutes Reason for Report: The Minutes of the Meeting of Tuesday 16 May 2006 were

previously circulated. In accordance with the guidelines for Committees’ operations it is now necessary that those Minutes be formally taken as read and confirmed.

Recommendation: That the Minutes of the Application Assessment Panel Meeting of 16 May 2006 be taken as read and confirmed. Les Windle Manager - Governance



APPLICATION ASSESSMENT PANEL Meeting held on 23 May 2006

Item No. D2 MEMO TO ALL COUNCILLORS

File No. DA 635/2005/1

Address 265 O'Sullivan Road BELLEVUE HILL 2023

Proposal Alterations and additions; landscaping & siteworks

Date lodged Author

20/10/2005 MR S TAYLOR – ASSESSMENT OFFICER

Please note that Item D4 of the Application Assessment Panel meeting held on 9 May 2006 was resolved in the following terms:- THAT Development Application No. 635/2005, for alterations and additions; landscaping and siteworks, on land at No. 265 O'Sullivan Road, Bellevue Hill, be referred to the meeting of the Application Assessment Panel to be held on 23 May 2006, for further consideration due to a substantive change to the Officer’s recommendation, by the deletion of draft Condition No. 2 (Garage). This is in accordance with the Rules of the Panel and the Panel’s recommendation is as follows: Recommendation: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development Application No. 635/2005 for alterations and additions; landscaping and siteworks on land at 265 O'Sullivan Road, Bellevue Hill, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on the plan numbered 1, Issue D, dated 30 January 2006 and drawn by Geoform Design, including the landscape plan numbered LCP.01/A, dated 12 October 2005 and drawn by Narelle Sonter Botannica, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.



2. Deep soil landscaping

To minimise the non-compliance with C4.6.7.1 of Section 4.6 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, a minimum of 10m² of deep soil landscaping is to be provided within the front yard. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

3. Front balcony

In accordance with C5.2.19 of Section 5.2 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the balcony adjoining bedroom 1 at the front of the first floor level is to be deleted. Subsequently, a window is to be established within the street front elevation that matches the materials and proportions of the window on the adjoining semi detached dwelling house to the north-west. This condition is imposed in order to maintain the uniformity of the semi-detached dwelling houses and to retain the visible roof form at the front of the dwelling house. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

4. South-eastern side setback

In accordance with C5.2.5 of Section 5.2 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the south-eastern side setback of the dining room and kitchen on the ground floor level is to be increased by 1.3m to align with the side setback of the existing dwelling house. This condition is imposed in order to minimise the sense of enclosure to the adjoining property to the south-east. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

5. Tree Damage Security Deposit

Description Amount Indexed Annually

Council Account No.

Tree Damage Security Deposit - Making good any damage caused to any public tree as a consequence of the doing of anything to which the consent relates.

$16000 Yes

6. Existing trees which must be retained

The following trees are to be retained on the site and protected during all works.

Council Ref No

Species Location Dimension (Metres)

1 Lophostemon confertus Brush Box Council road reserve 10

A Tree Damage Security Deposit has been applied to trees located on Council land in accordance with Council’s policy. The Tree Damage Security Deposit is required for individual trees when considered appropriate by Council’s Tree Officer. The value of the Deposit represents the full value of the tree as calculated using the Thyer Tree Valuation method. The Tree Damage Security Deposit will not be released until Council has inspected and is satisfied with the condition of the trees to which it applies. Council may use part or the entire Deposit to carry out works to trees or replace them if they are not in a satisfactory condition. Where trees have not been preserved and retained in accordance with this Consent, the applicant may forfeit the total Deposit amount.



The Construction Certificate plans must include reference to the retention of the above mentioned trees and identify the trees by Councils reference number (Ref No:) and colour or shade them in the colour green for trees to be retained and yellow for trees to be transplanted.

7. Tree Protection Zones

To limit the potential for damage to trees to be retained, Tree Protection Zones are to be established for all trees to be retained on site. The Tree Protection Zones are to comply with the following requirements;

Tree Protection Zones are to established within the specified radius from the trunks of

the following trees;

Council Ref No

Species Location Radius from Trunk (metres)


Tree Protection Zones are to be fenced with a 1.8 meter high chainmesh or weldmesh fence to minimise disturbance to existing ground conditions. The area within the fence must be mulched, to a depth of 75mm, irrigated and maintained for the duration of the construction works.

A padding material eg. Hessian or thick carpet underlay, is to be wrapt around the trunk first. Harwood planks, 50x100mm and to the maximum possible length, are to be placed over the padding and around the trunk of the tree at 150mm centres. These planks are to be secured in place by 8 gauge wire at 300mm spacing.

installation of all Tree Protection measures is to be at the direction of and overseen by a qualified Arborist (minimum Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent).

a sign must be erected on each side of the fence indicating the existence of a Tree Protection Zone and providing the contact details of the site Arborist.

existing soil levels must be maintained within Tree Protection Zones. Where excavation is undertaken adjacent such an area, the edge of the excavation must be stabilised, until such time as permanent measures are installed (eg. retaining wall etc) to prevent erosion within the Tree Protection Zone.

sediment control measures are to be installed around all Tree Protection Zones to protect the existing soil levels.

the storage of materials, stockpiling, siting of works sheds, preparation of mixes, cleaning of tools or equipment is not permitted within Tree Protection Zones.

site personnel must be made aware of all Tree Protection requirements, measures and any actions that constitute a breach of the Conditions of Development Consent with regard to tree protection on site during their site induction.

8. Driveways/car parking areas in the vicinity of trees

The driveway/car parking area must be constructed utilising materials/techniques designed to ensure that the existing water infiltration and gaseous exchange to the trees root system is maintained. Driveways are to be designed in consultation with a qualified Arborist (minimum qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent) and are to utilise such measures as semiporous material.



9. Sewer pipe connection

All existing underground sewer pipes affected by the works in this consent must be replaced as far as Sydney Water’s sewer main. These pipes must be welded or jointed in such a manner so as to prevent leakage and must not be located less than five (5) metres from the base of any Council street tree. The replacement work must be inspected by a registered plumber who must certify, by way of a compliance certificate submitted to Council, that this condition has been satisfied.

10. Amenity Landscaping

The owner or principal contractor must install all approved amenity landscaping (screen planting, soil stabilisation planting, etc.) prior to any occupation or use of the site.

11. Landscaping

All landscape work including all planting must be completed by the principal contractor or owner in compliance with the approved landscape plan, arborist report, transplant method statement and tree management plan. The principal contractor or owner must provide to PCA a works-as-executed landscape plan and certification from a qualified landscape architect/designer, horticulturist and/or arborist as applicable that the works as completed comply with this consent.

12. Maintenance of Landscaping

All landscaping must be maintained in accordance with the approved landscape plans. Any alteration from that plan will require the prior written consent of Council.

13. Connection to existing drainage system

Stormwater run-off from the proposed additions are to drain to the existing stormwater drainage system. The existing stormwater drainage pipes on the property must be checked and certified by a practising hydraulic engineer to ensure that all existing stormwater pipes are in good condition and are operating satisfactorily. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Note: connection of stormwater run-off to the Sydney Water sewer system is not permitted. If the existing stormwater pipes are not in good condition and/or not operating satisfactorily, the existing drainage system must be upgraded. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters of the upgraded system must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Stormwater disposal is to comply with the requirements and conditions as set out in Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control and Local Approvals Policy.



14. Requirement for a Construction Certificate

In accordance with the provisions of Section 81A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the erection of the building must not be commenced until:

(a) detailed plans and specifications of the building have been endorsed with a Construction

Certificate by:

(i) Council; or (ii) an accredited certifier; and

(b) a principal certifying authority (PCA) has been appointed and the Council has been

notified in writing of the appointment, and

(c) at least two days notice, in writing, has been given to Council of the intention to commence work.

15. Layout of buildings

The layout of all external walls, including retaining walls and contiguous piling must be checked and verified by survey prior to the commencement of construction to ensure that building construction complies with the development consent and does not encroach beyond the boundaries of the site.

16. Structural adequacy

A statement from a qualified practising Structural Engineer, certifying to the adequacy of the existing structural members, walls and footings to support the additional loads imposed by the proposed development, must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

This condition is imposed to ensure the structural integrity of the proposed building work.

17. Structural details

Structural engineering details and design calculations, prepared and certified by a qualified practising Structural Engineer, must be submitted with Construction Certificate application, for all reinforced concrete work, structural steel work, retaining walls, brick fences, shoring and underpinning, isolated piers, chimneys, parapets and other structural members.


18. Demolition, excavation and construction hours

Demolition, excavation and construction work must not take place outside the hours of 7.00am to 5.30pm Monday to Friday and 7.00am to 1.00pm Saturday. No work and no deliveries are to take place on Sundays and public holidays. Noise from construction activities associated with the development must comply with the guidelines contained in the NSW EPA Environmental Noise Control Manual Chapter 171.



19. Machine excavation

Excavation or removal of any materials involving the use of machinery of any kind, including compressors and jack hammers, must be limited to between 9.00am and 4.00 pm Mondays to Fridays, with regular breaks of 15 minutes each hour. This condition is imposed to ensure reasonable standards of amenity for occupants of neighbouring properties.

20. Building Inspections

The Applicant, Owner and Builder, jointly and severally, must ensure that they call their Principal Certifying Authority ("the PCA") to carry out such critical phase building inspections required by the PCA, the PCA Service Agreement and that the PCA is satisfied with the level of compliance achieved before the Builder proceeds to the next phase of construction. Ample notice of required inspections must be given to the PCA in accordance with the PCA Service Agreement. The Applicant, Owner and Builder must comply with the PCA Service Agreement (Service Contract) and any lawful direction given by the Principal Certifying Authority. Note: It is the responsibility of the PCA to ensure that critical phase building inspections are undertaken in accordance with a PCA Service Agreement and issue to the Applicant, Owner and Builder appropriate Notice under Section 109L of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 ("the Act") where any breach of this consent occurs. Failure of the PCA to issue such notice may result in Council taking action under Section 109V of the Act. Failure of the Applicant, Owner and Builder to comply with a PCA Service Agreement and comply with lawful directions of the PCA under this condition may result in Council issuing fines, notices, orders and commencing legal proceedings. Council will only enter into PCA Agreements with the Owner of the land being developed. Council, if appointed as the PCA, will report to the owner of the land being developed.

21. Occupation of premises

A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building (within the meaning of section 109H (4) of the Act) unless an occupation certificate has been issued in relation to the building or part. Note: new building includes an altered portion of, or an extension to, an existing building. Note: In circumstance where the works do not relate to occupation the required occupation certificate is essentially a certificate of completion of the approved work.

22. Downpipes

Downpipes must not project or discharge from the property boundary onto the footway.

23. Stockpiles

Stockpiles of topsoil, sand, aggregate, soil or other material must not be located on any drainage line or easement, natural watercourse, footpath or roadway, or within the dripline of any Street Tree. Stockpiles within the construction site must be protected with adequate sediment controls, in accordance with Council’s Code for Sediment Control.



24. Location of building operations

Building operations such as brick cutting, washing tools or brushes and mixing mortar must not take place on public roadways or footways or in any other location which could lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater drainage system.

Footpaths, gutters and roadways must be swept regularly to keep them free from sediment.

25. Temporary disposal of roof water

Stormwater from any roof areas must be linked, via a temporary downpipe, to a Council approved stormwater disposal system immediately upon completion of the roof installation.

26. Water conservation

Water saving showerheads must be fitted to all showers within the development to reduce water consumption and promote energy efficiency.

27. Standard for demolition

All demolition work must be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of Australian Standard AS2601-2001: The Demolition of Structures.

28. Site fencing

The site must be appropriately secured and fenced to the satisfaction of Council during demolition, excavation and construction work to ensure there are no unacceptable impacts on the amenity of adjoining properties. Permits for hoardings and or scaffolding on Council land must be obtained and clearly displayed on site.

29. Building & Construction Industry Long Service Payment

The Long Service Levy under Section 34 of the Building & Construction Industry Long Service Payment Act, 1986, must be paid and proof of payment provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate.

Note: The Levy can be paid directly to the Long Services Payments Corporation or to Council. Note: Further information can be obtained from the Long Service Payments Corporation’s website http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/ or by telephoning the Long Service Payments Corporation on 13 14 41.

30. Payment of Section 94A Contribution

In accordance with Schedule 1 of the Woollahra Section 94A Contributions Plan 2005, a $2,800 levy (1% of the total cost of works) is applicable. This levy is applicable to all development applications and will used for a variety of community works as outlined in Schedule 2 of the Section 94A Contributions Plan.



31. Damage security deposit

A security deposit of $7,600 for the cost of making good any damage to Council property caused as a consequence of the construction work, plus an administration fee of $158.00, must be paid to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The security deposit, which may be in the form of a bank guarantee, has been calculated in accordance with the following schedule.

Estimated cost of work Deposit Works up to $50,000 $2,000 Works in excess of $50,000 & up to $100,000 $4,000 Works in excess of $100,000 $4,000+$200/$10,000

estimated cost>$100,000

The security or bank guarantee must not have an expiry date.

Council may use all or part of the Damage Security Deposit to complete damage restoration works if they do not meet Council’s requirements.

32. Footpath levels

The existing footpath level and grade at the street alignment of the property must be maintained.

33. Protection of services

Prior to any excavation works, the location and depth of all services (telephone, cable TV, electricity, gas, water, sewer, drainage, etc.) must be ascertained. The developer must meet all costs of any adjustment, relocation or reinstatement of any services.

34. Storage of materials and plant on Council’s footpath

Building, excavation or demolition materials and plant must not be stored on Council’s footpath and/or roadway unless prior written approval has been obtained from Council’s Development Engineer.

35. Public footpaths

A safe pedestrian circulation route a minimum of 1.5m wide and with a pavement free of trip hazards must be maintained at all times on or adjacent to the public footpaths fronting the construction site. Where the footpath is damaged, repair works must be carried when directed by Council officers and in accordance with the relevant clauses of Council's document "Standard Specifications for Roadworks, Drainage and Miscellaneous Works dated Jan 2003. Where circulation is diverted on to the roadway clear directional signage and protective barricades must be installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS1742-3 2002 “Traffic Control Devices for Work on Roads”. Should the applicant propose to direct pedestrians onto the road pavement of a State road then an application is to be made to the RTA for a Road Occupancy Licence. Licence approval is to be submitted to Council.



If pedestrian circulation is not satisfactorily maintained, and action is not taken promptly to rectify the defects, Council may carry out remedial works and deduct the cost from the Damage Security Deposit.

36. Repair of Damaged Infrastructure

If Council’s infrastructure is damaged during the course of works, Council’s Development Engineer must be notified and necessary repairs must be undertaken within the time stipulated by Council, to Council’s specifications, and at no cost to Council. Works generally must be in accordance with the relevant clauses of the current edition of AUS-SPEC. If work is not undertaken to the satisfaction of the Development Engineer with regard to time or quality, Council may carry out remedial works and deduct the cost from the Damage Security Deposit.

37. Fire safety

In order to ensure adequate fire safety, hard wired smoke alarms are to be installed in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia – Housing Provisions. Such is to be indicated on the plans submitted with the construction certificate application.

38. Compliance with Building Code of Australia

(a) All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

(b) This condition does not apply to the extent to which an exemption is in force under

Clause 187 or 188, of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, subject to the terms of any condition or requirement referred to in Clause 187 (6) or 188 (4) of the Regulation.

39. Residential building work

(a) Building work that involves residential building work (within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989) must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority (PCA) for the development to which the work relates:

in the case of work to be done by a licensee under that Act:

(i) has been informed in writing of the licensee's name and contractor license

number; and (ii) is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the requirements of Part 6 of that

Act; or

in the case of work to be done by any other person: (iii) has been informed in writing of the person's name and owner-builder permit

number; or (iv) has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land, that states that the

reasonable market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work is less than the amount prescribed for the purposes of the definition of owner-builder work in Section 29 of that Act,



and is given appropriate information and declarations under paragraphs (a) and (b) whenever arrangements for the doing of the work are changed in such a manner as to render out of date any information or declaration previously given under either of those paragraphs.

Note: The amount referred to in paragraph (a) (iv) above is prescribed by regulations under the Home Building Act 1989. As at the date on which this Regulation was Gazetted, that amount was $5,000. As those regulations are amended from time to time, so that amount may vary.

(b) A certificate purporting to be issued by an approved insurer under Part 6 of the Home

Building Act 1989 that states that a person is the holder of an insurance policy issued for the purposes of that Part is, for the purposes of this clause, sufficient evidence that the person has complied with the requirements of that Part.

40. Excavations and backfilling

(a) All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely and in accordance with appropriate professional standards.

(b) 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.

41. Retaining walls and drainage

If the soil conditions require it:

(a) retaining walls associated with the erection or demolition of a building or other approved methods of preventing movement of the soil must be provided; and

(b) adequate provision must be made for drainage.

42. Support for neighbouring buildings

(a) If an excavation associated with the erection or demolition of a building extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation to be made:

(i) must preserve and protect the building from damage; and (ii) if necessary, must underpin and support the building in an approved manner; and (iii) must, at least 7 days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings

of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, give notice of intention to do so to the owner of the adjoining allotment of land and furnish particulars of the excavation to the owner of the building being erected or demolished.

(b) The owner of the adjoining allotment of land is not liable for any part of the cost of

work carried out for the purposes of this condition, whether carried out on the allotment of land being excavated or on the adjoining allotment of land.

(c) In this condition, allotment of land includes a public road and any other public place.



43. Signs to be erected on building and demolition sites

(a) A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out:

(i) stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited; and (ii) showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number

at which that person may be contacted outside working hours.

(b) Any such sign must be removed when the work has been completed. (c) This clause does not apply to:

(i) building work carried out inside an existing building; or (ii) building work carried out on premises that must be occupied continuously (both

during and outside working hours) while the work is being carried out.

44. Toilet facilities

(a) Toilet facilities must be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out, at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site.

(b) Each toilet provided:

(a) must be a standard flushing toilet; and

(b) must be connected:

(i) to a public sewer; or (ii) if connection to a public sewer is not practicable, to an accredited sewage

management facility approved by the Council; or (iii) if connection to a public sewer or an accredited sewage management facility

is not practicable, to some other sewage management facility approved by the Council.

(c) The provision of toilet facilities in accordance with this clause must be completed

before any other work is commenced.

(d) In this condition:

accredited sewage management facility means a sewage management facility to which Division 4A of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993 applies, being a sewage management facility that is installed or constructed to a design or plan the subject of a certificate of accreditation referred to in Clause 95B of the Regulation. approved by the Council means the subject of an approval in force under Division 1 of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993. public sewer has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.



sewage management facility has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.

45. Residential building work over $12,000 in value

Council must be provided with the following information prior to the commencement of any works;

(a) the proposed builder's details (in writing); and (b) proof of payment of the required insurance premium pursuant to Part 6 of the Home

Building Act 1989.” Referred to you for action. Les Windle Manager - Governance



DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT ITEM No. D2

FILE No. DA 635/2005/1

ADDRESS:

265 O'Sullivan Road, Bellevue Hill

PROPOSAL:

Alterations and additions; landscaping and siteworks

ZONING:

Residential 2(b)

TYPE OF CONSENT:

Local Development

APPLICANT:

Mr A Sheldon

OWNER:

Mr A Sheldon

DATE LODGED:

20 October 2005 (original submission) 31 January 2006 (amended plans)

AUTHOR: Mr Simon Taylor LOCALITY PLAN

subject site

objectors

north



1. SUMMARY Reason for report Objector’s concerns cannot be comprehensively addressed via conditions of consent. Accordingly, the matter is referred to the Application Assessment Panel for determination in accordance with Council delegations. Issues side setback non-compliance setback of excavation non-compliance deep soil landscaping at the frontage non-compliance car parking forward of the front building line non-compliance garage frontage width non-compliance objectors concerns Objections The following objections were received: - two (2) objections during the initial notification period two (2) objections during the re-notification period Objections were received from a total of three (3) properties. Cost of works The stated cost of the proposed work of $280,000 has been checked using the standard criteria specified in the Cordell Building Guide and is considered to be accurate. Recommendation The application is recommended for conditional approval because it: - is permissible under the zoning is satisfactory with the provisions of WLEP 1995 and WRDCP 2003 is an appropriate design for the subject site will not have adverse effects upon the amenity of adjoining properties or the surrounding

locality such that refusal is justified.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposal was amended on 31 January 2006 in the following manner: - an increase in the front setback of the first floor level from 9.3m to 14.6m the reduction in the rear setback of the first floor level from 16.2m to 13.4m the deletion of the rear balcony on the first floor level the addition of a new front balcony on the first floor level



The proposal, as amended, involves the following works: - the demolition of the existing single garage and construction of a new single car located

forward of the front building line minor addition to the rear of the ground floor level of the dwelling house measuring 17m² in

floor area and comprising an enlarged kitchen and dining room and a new courtyard internal modifications to the ground floor level new first floor level addition measuring 95m² in floor area and comprising three bedrooms

and two bathrooms associated landscaping works in the front and rear yards

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The subject site is located on the south-western side of O’Sullivan Road. The site is rectangular in shape with an area of approximately 296m², a (north-eastern) frontage of 6.515m in length, side boundaries of 45.72m in length and a south-western (rear) boundary of 6.475m in length. The topography of the site is such that the land slopes downwards from the rear of the property to the street; a fall of 3.8m. Currently occupying the site is a single storey, semi detached dwelling-house with a single car garage located on the street frontage. The adjoining property to the north-west (No. 263 O’Sullivan Road) forms the other pair. The adjoining property to the south-east (No. 267 O’Sullivan Road) is occupied by a two-storey residential flat building Royal Sydney Golf Club is located opposite the subject site. The locality is characterised by semi detached and detached dwelling-houses and residential flat buildings of varying age and design.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY None applicable.

5. REFERRALS 5.1 Comments from external approval bodies No comment required. 5.2 Building Satisfactory, subject to Condition No. 39. 5.3 Health No comment required. 5.4 Heritage No comment required.



5.5 Urban Design No comment required. 5.6 Technical Services No comment required. 5.7 Landscaping/Trees Management Council’s Tree Management Officer, Andrew Simpson, has provided the following comment: -

Issues there is a Council street tree that will need to be retained and protected during any

works on the site. there are no trees within the site or on adjacent properties that are likely to be affected

by this proposal. Comments There is no vegetation on the site that is covered by Council’s Tree Preservation Order. The proposed development should have no impact on trees on adjacent properties. However, there is a Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) located on the council road reserve at the front of the property. The tree is positioned approximately 200mm to the north/west of the existing driveway crossover. This tree combines to form part of a row of trees on this side of the road. This tree should be retained and protected during any works on the site. Roots and basal flair of the tree have been severed adjacent to the driveway. This was most likely undertaken to accommodate the driveway crossover. As part of this assessment exploratory trenching was not undertaken to determine the extent of root severance. The tree is showing no apparent signs of instability. The tree is not on a lean and there is no mounding of the soil at the base. The tree appears to be in good health evidenced by the reaction wood around the wound at the base and the normal colour and extension growth of the foliage. Prior to any works being undertaken on the site, a tree protection zone (TPZ) shall be installed. The TPZ shall restrict the storage of materials and tools in the root area of the tree. The TPZ shall be established around the grassed area of the council road reserve under the tree.

Recommendation Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer has determined that the development proposal is satisfactory in terms of tree preservation and landscaping, subject to conditions.

Refer to Condition Nos. 6-13. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:



6. RELEVANT STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION 6.1 SEPPs SEPP 55: Remediation of Land Under Clause 7 (1) (a) of SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether the land is contaminated. An assessment of the initial site evaluation provided by the applicant indicates the land does not require further consideration under Clause 7 (1) (b) and (c) of SEPP 55. 6.2 REPs SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 The provisions of Clauses 13, 25 and 26 of this instrument require Council to consider the visual impact that a development proposal will have upon Sydney Harbour and adjoining foreshore areas and the likely impact upon available views to and from Sydney Harbour. The proposal will not be visible from Sydney Harbour and as such, is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the provisions of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. 6.3 Section 94 Contributions Not applicable. 6.4 Section 94A contributions The Woollahra Section 94A Contributions Plan 2005 is applicable. In accordance with Schedule 1, a 1% levy (of the total cost of works) applies. With a cost of works of $280,000, Condition No. 31 requires the payment of a $2,800 contribution, which will be used for a variety of works as outlined in Schedule 2 of the Section 94A Contributions Plan. 6.5 Other relevant legislation Not applicable.

7. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 7.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5)) The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the WLEP 1995 and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2(b) zone, subject to Condition Nos. 2-5. 7.2 Statutory compliance table Existing Proposed Control Complies

Overall Height 7.6m 8.9m 9.5m YES



7.3 Height The proposal complies with the maximum building height prescribed by Clause 12 of WLEP 1995 and subject to Condition Nos. 2-5, is also acceptable with regard to the height objectives in Clause 12AA of WLEP 1995. 7.4 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 18 Excavation Clause 18 of WLEP 1995 requires Council to consider the impact of excavation associated with a development proposal upon the local environment. Condition No. 2 requires the deletion of the garage and its replacement with a hardstand car space. As such, the proposal involves slab work for the hardstand car space, minor footings for the enlargement of the dining room and kitchen at the rear of the ground floor level and minor excavation for landscaping. The excavation is very minor in nature and the associated impacts are considered to be negligible. Further, Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection to the proposed development. As such, the proposed excavation is acceptable with regard to Clause 18 of WLEP 1995. Clause 24 Land adjoining public open space Clause 24 of WLEP 1995 requires Council to consider the impact of a proposed development upon any adjoining public open space. The Royal Sydney Golf Club is located opposite the subject site, which is zoned as public open space in the WLEP 1995. Subject to Condition No. 2, which requires the substitution of the garage with a hardstand car space, the proposed alterations and additions are sympathetic to the scale of the dwelling house and consistent with the surrounding streetscape. The proposal is considered to be acceptable with regard to Clause 24(2) of WLEP 1995. Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater Clause 25 of WLEP 1995 requires Council to consider the provision of adequate stormwater drainage and the provision of adequate water and sewage services. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Clause 25 of WLEP 1995 and is considered to be satisfactory, subject to Condition No 14. Clause 25D Acid Sulphate Soils The subject site is within a Class 5 Acid Sulphate Soils Area as identified in the Planning NSW Acid Sulphate Souls Risk Map. However, the subject works are not likely to lower the water table below 1.0m AHD on any land within 0.5m of a Class 1, 2 and 3 land classifications. Accordingly, preliminary testing is would not be required. Therefore, there is no issue of acid sulphate affectation in this case.



Clause 27 Heritage provisions Clause 27 of WLEP 1995 requires Council to consider the likely impact of the proposed development upon the heritage significance of any adjoining heritage items. The subject site is located opposite the Royal Sydney Golf Club, which is listed as a heritage item under Schedule 3 of WLEP 1995. The listing relates to the clubhouse and grove of Paperbark trees lining Norwich Road. The proposed alterations and additions are not visible from either elements of the heritage item and are considered to be acceptable with regard to Clause 27 of WLEP 1995.

8. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS None applicable.

9. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 9.1 Woollahra Residential Development Control Plan 2003 Site Area (296m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies

Maximum Number of Storeys – Dwelling 1 2 2 YES

Building Boundary Setbacks Front (north east) Rear (south west) Side (north west) Ground Floor First Floor Side (south east) Ground Floor First Floor

7.5m

14.85m

Nil N/A

1.25m N/A

7.5m

13.4m

Nil Nil

Nil

1.3m

7.5m

11.42m

1.5m 1.5m-1.7m

1.5m

1.5m-1.7m

YES YES

NO* NO

NO* NO

Ancillary Development (Garage) Maximum Height Side Setback Side Setback

2.5m 1.25m 2.0m

2.5m Nil

2.8m

3.6m 1.5m 1.5m

YES NO YES

Building Footprint 46.7% (138.3m2)

52.5% (155.6m2)

59% (174.6m2) YES

Floor Space Ratio 0.43:1 (128.3m2)

0.75:1 (223.7m2)

0.75:1 (223m2) YES

Floor to Ceiling Height – Habitable Rooms 3.2m 2.7m 2.7m YES

Solar Access to Open Space of Adjacent Properties (Hrs on 21 June) > 50% for 2 hours 50% (or 35m2)

for 2 hours YES

Solar Access to Nth Facing Living Areas of Adjacent Properties (Hrs on 21 June) Not north facing windows 3.0 hours N/A

Excavation Piling and Subsurface Wall Setback Nil Nil 1.5m NO*

Deep Soil Landscaping – Dwelling

25.0% (74.0m²)

22.9% (67.8m²)

20.5% (60.7m2) YES

Deep Soil Landscaping – Front Setback

7.3% (3.55m²)

13.75% (6.6m²)

40% (19.2m2)

YES (subject to

Condition 3) Private Open Space at Ground Level – Total

92.1m² 6.4m

85.7m² 6.4m

35m² Min dimension 3m YES



Site Area (296m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies

Private Open Space at Ground Level – Principal Area

70.4m² 6.4m

29.2m² 4.4m

16m² Min dimension 4m YES

Private Open Space at Ground Level – Maximum Gradient 1:9.7 1:1 1:10 YES

Minimum Number of North Facing Habitable Rooms Nil 1 NO

Setback of Bedroom Windows from Streets/Parking Areas of Other Dwellings 13.0m 16.2m 3.0m YES

Height of Garage or Parking Structures on the High Side of the Street 2.5m 2.5m YES

Car Parking Spaces 1 2 NO*

Location of Garage Forward Forward Behind Front Building Line NO*

Garage Frontage Width 50.9% (3.3m)

58.6% (3.8m)

40% (2.6m) NO*

Area of Lockable Storage Spaces per Dwelling > 8m³ 8m³ YES

* Existing non-compliance Desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria The objectives of the Bellevue Hill South precinct seek to establish a transition of development scale throughout the precinct, to reinforce the landscape setting and preserve public views of surrounding areas. C4.6.1 of WRDCP 2003 also requires that development maintain a rich mixture of architectural styles, irregular separation between buildings and a generous residential building scale. The proposal involves the following non-compliances with the performance criteria stipulated under Part 4.6 of WRDCP 2003: - Deep soil landscaping at the frontage C 4.6.7.1 stipulates that a minimum of 40% (19.2m²) of the front setback area is to contain deep soil landscaping. The proposal will provide 13.75% (6.6m²) of deep soil landscaping; a non-compliance of 12.6m². This includes an increase of 3.05m² from existing. Condition No. 2 requires the deletion of the garage and its replacement with a hardstand car space measuring 5.4m by 2.5m. As such, up to 11.7m² of additional deep soil landscaped area can be accommodated within the front setback. In addition, it has been identified that an additional 3.3m² is available for deep soil landscaping near the pedestrian entrance. Accordingly, Condition No. 3 requires an minimum 19m² of deep soil landscaping, therefore ensuring compliance with C4.6.7.1. Garage frontage width C 4.6.5 requires all garages, car parking structures and driveways are designed to not dominate the streetscape, be provided behind the front building line and limited to a width of no greater than 40% (2.6m) of the site frontage. The proposal involves the relocation of the existing garage to the south-eastern boundary and includes an enlargement in the width of the garage from 3.3m to 3.8m. The following comments are provided with regard to the above controls: -



the only area of the site that can facilitate on-site car parking is within the front yard compliance with the frontage width control is unfeasible as it will compromise compliance

with AS2890.1 the garage structure itself is considered unacceptable as it significantly detracts from the

appearance of the dwelling house in the streetscape, particularly as the adjoining semi to the north-west has a carport located behind the front building line and there is little evidence of garages forward of the front building line in O’Sullivan Road

As such, Condition No. 2 requires the deletion of the garage and its replacement with an open hardstand car space in the same location and measuring 5.4m in length and 2.5m in width. Streetscape performance criteria The provisions of Part 5.1 of WRDCP 2003 require development to achieve consistency with the desired future character for the locality and contribute to cohesive streetscapes and desirable pedestrian environments. The proposal responds appropriately to the desired future character objectives and performance criteria for the Bellevue Hill South precinct, subject to Condition No. 2, 3 and 4. Building size and location performance criteria Side setbacks C5.2.5 of WRDCP 2003 requires a side setback of 1.5m, increasing on a pro-rata basis by 0.5m for each metre the building height exceeds 3.0m. The proposed development includes an extension to the rear of the ground floor level that will be built boundary to boundary. It will result in the following non-compliances: - a non-compliance of 1.5m for a length of 10.2m along the south-eastern elevation (dining

room and kitchen) a non-compliance of 1.5m for a length of 1.4m along the north-western elevation (dining

room) As it is a semi-detached dwelling house, the first floor level will have a nil setback along the north-western elevation (part wall) and a 1.3m setback along the south-eastern elevation. It results in the following non-compliances: - a non-compliance of 0.2m-0.4m for a length of 18.0m along the entire south-eastern elevation a non-compliance of 1.5m-1.7m for a length of 18.0m along the entire north-western elevation The extent of the non-compliances is discussed as follows: - the north-western elevation is a party wall and will not pose any unacceptable impacts in

terms of bulk and scale, sense of enclosure, overlooking, overshadowing or loss of views the nil setback on the ground floor level (dining room and kitchen) to the south-eastern

elevation will impose a significant sense of enclosure to Unit 2 on the ground floor level of the residential flat building of the adjoining property to the south-east. As such, Condition No. 5 requires the setback of the kitchen and dining room to be consistent with the remainder of the south-eastern elevation of the dwelling house (1.3m)



the 1.3m setback on the first floor level of the south-eastern elevation results in an element of enclosure to three habitable room windows within Unit 4 on the first floor level of the residential flat building of the adjoining property to the south-east but this is not uncharacteristic of the surrounding neighbourhood. Compliance with C5.2.5 would not bring about a significant improvement in the extent of enclosure whilst it would compromise the internal amenity of the first floor and present significant issues in the building phase

In this regard, subject to Condition No. 5, the proposal is acceptable with regard to the relevant objectives and C5.2.5 of Section 5.2. Ancillary development C5.2.4 requires ancillary development to be setback 1.5m from all property boundaries. The garage within the front yard will be built with a nil setback to the south eastern boundary. Whilst it is acknowledged that concentrating the garage in the south-eastern corner of the property allows greater visibility of the front facade of the semi-detached dwelling house, the location of the garage and its subsequent impression of bulk and scale to the streetscape is unacceptable. Accordingly, Condition No. 2 requires its deletion and replacement with a hardstand car space. Setback of excavation C5.2.16 requires excavation to be setback 1.5m from all property boundaries. The proposal involves excavation at the rear of the ground floor level and the garage at the front of the property. In both instances, the excavation will occur to the property boundary. However, it is minor in nature and not located in the immediate vicinity of any buildings or mature vegetation on Council land or adjoining properties. As discussed in Section 7.4, the associated impacts are negligible and considered acceptable with regard to the relevant objectives of Section 5.2. Semi detached development C5.2.19 requires alterations and additions to one pair of a semi-detached dwelling house not to dominate or compromise the uniformity or geometry of the street elevation The proposal includes the construction of a balcony adjoining bedroom 1 within the roof plane at the front elevation of the first floor level. When viewed from O’Sullivan Road in the general vicinity of No. 267 O’Sullivan Road, the alteration is visible. In addition, the balcony requires a 1.0m balustrade in accordance with Building Code of Australia regulations, which will extend up to 0.4m above the roof. Further, it would be necessary to install privacy screening along the south-eastern edge of the balcony to minimise overlooking to the adjoining property to the south-east. This has a profound impact upon the uniformity of both semi-detached dwelling houses and is considered to be inappropriate. In this regard, Condition No. 4 requires the deletion of the balcony and the installation of a window to match the proportions of the window within the front elevation of the adjoining semi-detached dwelling house. Views performance criteria C5.5.6 of WRDCP 2003 requires building forms to enable a sharing of views, particularly from the main habitable rooms.



Due to the topography of the immediate area, dense vegetation cover and distance to Sydney Harbour, there are no significant views in the immediate locality. Regardless, the proposed development matches the height and front setback of the adjoining semi detached dwelling house to the north-west (No. 263 O’Sullivan Road). In reality, the slope of the land allows for properties on Birriga Road to the rear to overlook over and beyond the subject dwelling house. The impact is therefore confined to the units within the residential flat building on the adjoining property to the south-east (No. 267 O’Sullivan Road). An objection was received from Units 2 and 4 of No. 267 O’Sullivan Road in relation to the loss of view. However, the impact relates to a loss of outlook rather than a loss of view. This is discussed in Section 11. Energy efficiency performance criteria C5.6.2 requires buildings to be sited and designed in order to maximise mid winter solar access to north facing windows of habitable rooms. C5.6.3 also requires at least one north facing room capable of use as a habitable room. The subject dwelling house is the southernmost of a pair of semi detached dwelling houses. In terms of the above mentioned controls, it is considered impractical or unrealistic to require compliance. Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria The owners of Nos. 2/267 and 4/267 O’Sullivan Road (adjoining property to the south-east) have objected to the proposed development on the basis of overlooking. C5.8.5 of WRDCP 2003 requires habitable room windows with a sightline to habitable room windows on adjoining properties within 9.0m to be off-set, have sill heights of 1.7m or have fixed obscure glazing. C5.8.6 also requires balconies to be suitably screened to prevent direct views into habitable rooms of adjoining dwelling houses. Privacy impact to units within No. 267 O’Sullivan Road The proposal is acceptable in the following manner: - the new window to the study on the ground floor level is similar in width to the combined

width of the two existing windows. An element of mutual overlooking is expected between both properties where such minimal side setbacks are evident

the front balcony has been deleted in Condition No. 4 the two outer windows to the rear elevation of the first floor level consist of obscure louvres.

The extent of overlooking from these windows is significantly reduced the size of and subsequent overlooking form the two transparent inner windows is not

inconsistent within the neighbourhood the window to bedroom 2 is offset sufficiently from the living room window within Unit 4.

The side setback of 1.7m also limits any sightlines downwards to the corresponding windows within Unit 2 on the ground floor level

Privacy impact to No. 263 O’Sullivan Road The proposal is acceptable in the following manner: -



the two outer windows to the rear elevation of the first floor level consist of obscure louvres. The extent of overlooking from these windows is significantly reduced

the size of and subsequent overlooking form the two transparent inner windows is not inconsistent within the neighbourhood

the front balcony has been deleted in Condition No. 4 Car parking and driveways performance criteria C5.9.5 requires two on-site car parking spaces to be provided for dwelling-houses. The proposal maintains a single on-site car parking space. The only area of the site that can facilitate on-site car parking is the front yard area. No objection is raised in relation to this area of non-compliance on the basis that a second on-site car parking space within the front yard area would: - result in a significant increase in the impression of bulk to the streetscape substantially reduce the visibility of the front facade of the semi require a wider driveway, which would impact upon the existing street tree adjacent to the

driveway crossing further reduce the amount of deep soil landscaping within the front yard Objective O5.9.3 ensures that car parking and driveways do not dominate or detract from the appearance of the development and the local streetscape. The garage structure is unacceptable in this regard. Accordingly, subject to the deletion of the garage and its replacement with a hardstand car space in Condition No. 2, the proposal is considered to be acceptable with regard to the relevant objectives of Section 5.9. 9.2 DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities The provisions of Council's DCP for Off-Street Car Parking Provision and Servicing Facilities requires the provision of two off-street car parking spaces for a dwelling-house. As discussed in car parking and driveways performance criteria, the provision of a second car parking space would have an unacceptable impact upon the streetscape. The proposal is therefore acceptable with regard to the DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities. 9.3 Woollahra Access DCP The Woollahra Access DCP encourages, rather than requires, visitor access for older people or people with a disability for alterations and additions to Class 1 dwellings. The proposal retains a bathroom and study (which can be utilised as a bedroom) within the ground floor level of the dwelling house. In this regard, it is considered to be acceptable with regard to the intent of the Woollahra Access DCP.

10. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Clause 92 of the EPA Regulation 2000 requires that Council take into consideration Australian Standard AS 2601-1991: The demolition of structures, as in force at 1 July 1993. This requirement is addressed via Condition No. 28.



11. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL Loss of outlook With the addition of the ground floor level, the south-eastern side setback of the existing dwelling house is maintained and the rear setback is extended an additional 1.0m to the rear of the property. As it complies with the rear setback control (C5.2.3), it is considered that the outlook from Unit 2 on the ground floor level of the adjoining residential flat building is not adversely affected. With the addition of the first floor level, an outlook from Unit 4 on the first floor level of the adjoining residential flat building is lost from two bedrooms, a living room and, to a lesser extent, from the kitchen at the rear of the property. The neighbourhood is characterised by two-storey dwelling houses on relatively thin allotments or two and three-storey residential flat buildings. As such, the addition of a first floor level is consistent with the height and form of the adjoining semi and the character of the streetscape. There is insufficient justification for the deletion of one or more rooms from the first floor level. Meanwhile, an uninterrupted outlook is still afforded from the main bedroom of Unit 4 at the front of the residential flat building towards the open space of Royal Sydney Golf Club and from the kitchen at the rear. The impact of the proposed development upon the outlook from Units 2 and 4 within the residential flat building on the adjoining property to the south-east is relatively apparent but otherwise considered acceptable. Sense of enclosure to adjoining property to the south-east A sense of enclosure is established to Unit 2 on the ground floor level of the residential flat building on the adjoining property to the south-east as a result of the addition to the rear of the ground floor level (dining room and kitchen). This is suitably rectified by Condition No. 4. The sense of enclosure to Unit 4 on the first floor level is less profound but it is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons: - compliance with C5.2.5 of WRDCP 2003 would not bring about a significant improvement in

the extent of enclosure whilst it would compromise the internal amenity of the first floor and present significant issues in the building phase

the area is characterised by two storey dwelling houses on thin allotments and two and three-storey residential flat buildings

the setback is considered to be consistent with surrounding developments - the residential flat building on the adjoining property to the south-west has a 1.15m setback at first floor level and the width of the first floor level of the adjoining semi to the north-west is relatively similar

Loss of daylight In accordance with the definition of north facing in Part 6 of WRDCP 2003, the windows along the north-western elevation of the residential flat building on the adjoining property to the south-east are not considered to be north facing. As such, the specific control relating to solar access to north facing windows (C5.2.14) does not apply



Regardless, the proposal will eliminate some sunlight and natural daylight from north-west facing windows on the ground floor level (Unit 2) and the first floor level (Unit 4). Unit 2 The submitted shadow diagrams illustrate that sunlight access to all side windows (two bedrooms, bathroom, living room and kitchen) will be reduced from approximately three hours between 9am and midday on June 21 to approximately less than an hour. Unit 4 The proposed development will maintain at least three hours of sunlight to the two bedrooms at the front of the unit and the main living room between 9am and midday on June 21. This is considered to be acceptable. Sunlight to the kitchen at the rear will be reduced from six hours to approximately two hours. Conclusion The proposal is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons: - regardless of not being north facing windows, compliance with C5.2.14 of WRDCP 2003 is

still maintained in several instances the area is characterised by two storey dwelling houses on thin allotments and two and three-

storey residential flat buildings sunlight is still maintained to the front (north-eastern) elevation of both units the south-eastern setback of the first floor of the subject site is greater than the setback of the

residential flat building an impact upon daylight and sunlight access will occur regardless of any first floor level

addition to the semi detached dwelling house. In fact, an element of the impact upon daylight and sunlight access arises from the non-compliant north-western side setback of the residential flat building on the adjoining property to the south-east

All other likely impacts have been addressed elsewhere in the report.

12. THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE The site is suitable for the proposed development.

13. SUBMISSIONS 13.1 Notification and Advertising The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. Submissions were received from: 1. Peter and Maree Colbron of 263 O’Sullivan Road, Rose Bay 2. Jennifer O’Riordan of No 2/267 O’Sullivan Road, Rose Bay 3. Ms J Melman of No. 4/267 O’Sullivan Road, Rose Bay The objectors raised the following issues: loss of solar access



Refer to Section 11. impact upon visual privacy excessive bulk Refer to Section 9.1. insufficient side setback and subsequent lack of separation and sense of enclosure Refer to Section 9.1 and 11. damage arising from building works Refer to Condition No. 41 and 41. working hours Refer to Condition Nos. 19 and 20. floor space ratio The proposal, as amended, complies with the maximum floor space ratio outlined in C5.2.9 of WRDCP 2003. This is detailed in Section 9.1. front setback The proposal, as amended, complies with the required front setback in C5.2.2 of WRDCP 2003 and is consistent with the front setback of the adjoining semi detached dwelling house to the north-west (No. 263 O’Sullivan Road). 13.2 Replacement plans The replacement application (as defined by Clause 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000) received on 31 January 2006 was renotified under Clause 5.1 of the DCP because, having considered Clause 9 of the DCP, the replacement application was considered to have a potentially greater environmental impact upon adjoining properties. Two further objections were received.

14. CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under Section 79C. 15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development Application No. 635/2005 for alterations and additions; landscaping and siteworks on land at 265 O'Sullivan Road Bellevue Hill, subject to the following conditions:



46. Approved Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on the plan numbered 1, Issue D, dated 30 January 2006 and drawn by Geoform Design, including the landscape plan numbered LCP.01/A, dated 12 October 2005 and drawn by Narelle Sonter Botannica, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.

47. Garage

In accordance with C4.6.5 of Section 4.6 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the single garage is to be deleted and replaced with an uncovered hardstand car space measuring 5.4m in length by 2.5m in width. This condition is imposed as the garage structure imposed upon the appearance of the semi detached dwelling house, disrupts the uniformity with the pair of semi detached dwelling houses and results in an unsympathetic streetscape. Details are to be provided in the application for a Construction Certificate.

48. Deep soil landscaping

To ensure compliance with C4.6.7.1 of Section 4.6 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, a minimum of 19m² of deep soil landscaping is to be provided within the front yard. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

49. Front balcony

In accordance with C5.2.19 of Section 5.2 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the balcony adjoining bedroom 1 at the front of the first floor level is to be deleted. Subsequently, a window is to be established within the street front elevation that matches the materials and proportions of the window on the adjoining semi detached dwelling house to the north-west. This condition is imposed in order to maintain the uniformity of the semi-detached dwelling houses and to retain the visible roof form at the front of the dwelling house. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

50. South-eastern side setback

In accordance with C5.2.5 of Section 5.2 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the south-eastern side setback of the dining room and kitchen on the ground floor level is to be increased by 1.3m to align with the side setback of the existing dwelling house. This condition is imposed in order to minimise the sense of enclosure to the adjoining property to the south-east. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

51. Tree Damage Security Deposit

Description Amount Indexed Annually

Council Account No.


$16000 Yes





Council Ref No





53. Tree Protection Zones


Tree Protection Zones are to established within the specified radius from the trunks of


Council Ref No

Species Location Radius from Trunk (metres)

1 Lophostemon confertus Brush Box Council road reserve 6 Tree Protection Zones are to be fenced with a 1.8 meter high chainmesh or weldmesh

fence to minimise disturbance to existing ground conditions. The area within the fence must be mulched, to a depth of 75mm, irrigated and maintained for the duration of the construction works.


installation of all Tree Protection measures is to be at the direction of and overseen by a qualified Arborist (minimum Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent).

a sign must be erected on each side of the fence indicating the existence of a Tree Protection Zone and providing the contact details of the site Arborist.



existing soil levels must be maintained within Tree Protection Zones. Where excavation is undertaken adjacent such an area, the edge of the excavation must be stabilised, until such time as permanent measures are installed (eg. retaining wall etc) to prevent erosion within the Tree Protection Zone.

sediment control measures are to be installed around all Tree Protection Zones to protect the existing soil levels.

the storage of materials, stockpiling, siting of works sheds, preparation of mixes, cleaning of tools or equipment is not permitted within Tree Protection Zones.

site personnel must be made aware of all Tree Protection requirements, measures and any actions that constitute a breach of the Conditions of Development Consent with regard to tree protection on site during their site induction.

54. Driveways/car parking areas in the vicinity of trees

The driveway/car parking area must be constructed utilising materials/techniques designed to ensure that the existing water infiltration and gaseous exchange to the trees root system is maintained. Driveways are to be designed in consultation with a qualified Arborist (minimum qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent) and are to utilise such measures as semiporous material.



56. Amenity Landscaping

The owner or principal contractor must install all approved amenity landscaping (screen planting, soil stabilisation planting, etc.) prior to any occupation or use of the site.

57. Landscaping

All landscape work including all planting must be completed by the principal contractor or owner in compliance with the approved landscape plan, arborist report, transplant method statement and tree management plan. The principal contractor or owner must provide to PCA a works-as-executed landscape plan and certification from a qualified landscape architect/designer, horticulturist and/or arborist as applicable that the works as completed comply with this consent.






Stormwater run-off from the proposed additions are to drain to the existing stormwater drainage system. The existing stormwater drainage pipes on the property must be checked and certified by a practising hydraulic engineer to ensure that all existing stormwater pipes are in good condition and are operating satisfactorily. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Note: connection of stormwater run-off to the Sydney Water sewer system is not permitted. If the existing stormwater pipes are not in good condition and/or not operating satisfactorily, the existing drainage system must be upgraded. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters of the upgraded system must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Stormwater disposal is to comply with the requirements and conditions as set out in Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control and Local Approvals Policy.




Certificate by:






















A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building (within the meaning of section 109H (4) of the Act) unless an occupation certificate has been issued in relation to the building or part.



Note: new building includes an altered portion of, or an extension to, an existing building. Note: In circumstance where the works do not relate to occupation the required occupation certificate is essentially a certificate of completion of the approved work.

68. Downpipes


69. Stockpiles











74. Site fencing






Note: The Levy can be paid directly to the Long Services Payments Corporation or to Council. Note: Further information can be obtained from the Long Service Payments Corporation’s website http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/ or by telephoning the Long Service Payments Corporation on 13 14 41.

76. Payment of Section 94A Contribution

In accordance with Schedule 1 of the Woollahra Section 94A Contributions Plan 2005, a $2,800 levy (1% of the total cost of works) is applicable. This levy is applicable to all development applications and will used for a variety of community works as outlined in Schedule 2 of the Section 94A Contributions Plan.



Estimated cost of work Deposit Works up to $50,000 $2,000 Works in excess of $50,000 & up to $100,000 $4,000 Works in excess of $100,000 $4,000+$200/$10,000 estimated cost>$100,000



78. Footpath levels









A safe pedestrian circulation route a minimum of 1.5m wide and with a pavement free of trip hazards must be maintained at all times on or adjacent to the public footpaths fronting the construction site. Where the footpath is damaged, repair works must be carried when directed by Council officers and in accordance with the relevant clauses of Council's document "Standard Specifications for Roadworks, Drainage and Miscellaneous Works dated Jan 2003. Where circulation is diverted on to the roadway clear directional signage and protective barricades must be installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS1742-3 2002 “Traffic Control Devices for Work on Roads”. Should the applicant propose to direct pedestrians onto the road pavement of a State road then an application is to be made to the RTA for a Road Occupancy Licence. Licence approval is to be submitted to Council. If pedestrian circulation is not satisfactorily maintained, and action is not taken promptly to rectify the defects, Council may carry out remedial works and deduct the cost from the Damage Security Deposit.



83. Fire safety

In order to ensure adequate fire safety, hard wired smoke alarms are to be installed in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia – Housing Provisions. Such is to be indicated on the plans submitted with the construction certificate application.










(i) has been informed in writing of the licensee's name and contractor license number; and

(ii) is satisfied that the licensee has complied with the requirements of Part 6 of that Act; or

in the case of work to be done by any other person:

(iii) has been informed in writing of the person's name and owner-builder permit number; or

(iv) has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land, that states that the reasonable market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work is less than the amount prescribed for the purposes of the definition of owner-builder work in Section 29 of that Act,


























(b) Any such sign must be removed when the work has been completed.

(c) This clause does not apply to:
















accredited sewage management facility means a sewage management facility to which Division 4A of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993 applies, being a sewage management facility that is installed or constructed to a design or plan the subject of a certificate of accreditation referred to in Clause 95B of the Regulation. approved by the Council means the subject of an approval in force under Division 1 of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993. public sewer has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993. sewage management facility has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.




Building Act 1989. Mr Simon Taylor Mr Nick Economou ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ADVISINGS 1. Other approvals

This development consent does not remove the need to obtain any other statutory consent or approval necessary under any other Act, including an application for an Occupation Certificate under Section 109(C)(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. An application for an Occupation Certificate may be lodged with Council if the applicant has nominated Council as the Principal Certifying Authority.



2. Works and requirements of other authorities Australia Post has requirements for the positioning and dimensions of mail boxes in

new commercial and residential developments. A brochure is available from your nearest Australia Post Office.

AGL Sydney Limited has requirements for the provision of gas connections. Sydney Electricity has a requirement for the approval of any encroachments including

awnings, signs etc, over a public roadway or footway. The Engineer Mains Overhead Eastern Area should be contacted on 9663 9408 to ascertain what action, if any, is necessary.

Telstra has requirements concerning access to services that it provides. 3. Application for a Construction Certificate

The required Application for a Construction Certificate may be lodged with Council. Alternatively, you may apply to an accredited private certifier for a Construction Certificate. WARNING: Failure to obtain a Construction Certificate prior to the commencement of any building work is a serious breach of Section 81A(2) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. It is also a criminal offence which attracts substantial penalties and may also result in action in the Land and Environment Court and orders for demolition.

4. Occupational Health and Safety

All site works must comply with the occupational health and safety requirements of the NSW WorkCover Authority.

5. Hazardous Material Management

Builders are advised to obtain a copy of the EPA publication Solutions to Pollution for Builders which provides environmental information including hazardous material management. The EPA can be contacted by phone on 131 555 or at www.epa.nsw.gov.au.

6. Hazardous waste removal

Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition process must be removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover and the EPA, and in accordance with the provisions of:

New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1983 New South Wales Construction Safety Act, 1912; Regulation 84A-J Construction Work

Involving Asbestos or Asbestos Cement 1983 The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 1996 The Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 1996 The Waste Minimisation and Management Act and Regulations

7. Modifications to the consent

Changes to the external configuration of the building, changes to the site layout or any changes to the proposed operation or use will require the submission and approval of an application under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 before the issue of a Construction Certificate.



8. Tree preservation

Where tree work has not been approved by this Development Consent the developer is notified that a general Tree Preservation Order applies to all trees in the Municipality of Woollahra with a spread of branches greater than three (3) metres and also on all trees, irrespective of the spread of branches, with a height greater than five (5) metres. This order prohibits the ringbarking, cutting down, topping, lopping, pruning, transplanting, injuring, or wilful destruction of such trees except with the prior written consent of the council. Written consent from Council for such tree works must be in the form of a Tree Preservation Order Permit for Pruning or Removal of Protected Trees obtained from the Parks and Streetscape Section of Council.

9. Storage bins on footpath and roadway

Approval is required from Council prior to the placement of any storage bin on Council's footpath and/or roadway.

10. Home Building Act insurance

Home Building Act Insurance must be obtained from an insurance company approved by the Department of Fair Trading prior to the commencement of demolition or construction work.

11. Long Service Levy

The current rate of the levy required by this consent is 0.35% of the cost all building and construction work costing $25,000 or more.

12. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr Simon Taylor. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

ANNEXURES 1. Plans and elevations




FILE No. DA 405/2005/1

ADDRESS: 9 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse

PROPOSAL: Alterations and additions

ZONING: Residential 2(a)

TYPE OF CONSENT:

Local Development

APPLICANT:

Mr D Kane and Mrs H Kane

OWNER:

Mr D Kane and Mrs H Kane

DATE LODGED:

30 June 2005

AUTHOR: Mr Simon Taylor LOCALITY PLAN

subject site

objectors (renotification

period)

objector (initial

notification)

north



1. SUMMARY Preamble DA405/2005/1 originally proposed the following alterations and additions to the existing dwelling-house:- Lower ground floor level new internal stairs Ground floor level new double garage sited forward of the front building line new entry area and storeroom, measuring 14.0m² in floor aea various alterations and additions including an internal re-configuration new front fence(s) new front forecourt New first floor level a new first floor level, measuring 129m² in floor area and comprising four bedrooms, an en-

suite, walk-in robe, bathroom, gallery and internal stairs. A balcony is also proposed off bedroom No 1

The following conditions were given in the Assessment Officer recommendation: -

2. Garage to be deleted/soft landscaping

The proposed double garage is to be deleted and substituted with a two car, hard-stand parking area with a maximum width of 6.14m. Further, a minimum of 37m² of deep soil landscaping is to be provided within the front setback area. This condition has been imposed to ensure compliance with the desired future character provisions stipulated under Part 4.13 of WRDCP 2003 and to maintain the visual quality of the streetscape. Details demonstrating compliance shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate Application.

3. Front fence

To ensure the proposal achieves compliance with C4.13.5.5 of Section 4.13 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the front fence(s) are to be no greater than 1.2m in height. This condition is has been imposed to maintain the visual quality of the streetscape. Details demonstrating compliance shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate Application.



4. Dwelling height

To ensure the views from No 7 Village Lower Road are maintained to an acceptable degree and to achieve compliance the provisions of Part 5.5 of WRDCP 2003, the dwelling height is to be modified as follows:-

the deletion of the proposed roof light-well structure and its replacement with a

skylight flush with the roof plane the reduction of the floor to ceiling height of the first floor level from 2.93m to

2.7m the reduction of the parapet height above Bedroom Nos 3 and 4 (front section of

the dwelling) from 0.6m to 0.3m

Details are to be provided with the application for the Construction Certificate. 5. Roof materials

In order to reduce roof glare (reflectivity) to adjoining properties, the proposed metal roof is to be finished in a recessive or non-reflective colour. Details are to be provided with the application for the Construction Certificate.

6. Balcony off Bedroom No 1

To ensure the privacy of No 15 Village Lower Road is maintained to an acceptable level and to achieve compliance with the provisions of Part 5.8 of WRDCP 2003, the wrap-around balcony off Bedroom No 1 is to be reduced to a maximum width of 1.0m and the balustrade along its eastern edge is to be translucent glass. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

7. North facing window to Bedroom No 3

To ensure the privacy of No 11 Village Lower Road is maintained to an acceptable level and to achieve compliance with the provisions of Part 5.8 of WRDCP 2003, the lower half (of the north facing window to Bedroom No. 3 is to be fixed and provided with obscure glazing.

Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

The matter was considered at the Application Assessment Panel meeting on 7 February 2006 with the following resolution: -

THAT Development Application No. 405/2005/1 for alterations and additions on land at No. 9 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse, be deferred to a future meeting of the Application Assessment Panel to allow the applicant to confer with staff in relation to an alternative proposal, behind the building line, for car parking .

The original report is included as Annexure 1. As a consequence of the above resolution, an amended design was submitted to Council on 7 March. It involved the following modifications:



deletion of the double garage forward of the front building line and its replacement with a single car garage alongside the northern boundary

changes in accordance with Condition No. 2 (compliance with the deep soil landscaping at the frontage control)

changes to the front fence changes in accordance with Condition No. 4 (deletion of the roof light-well and its

replacement with a skylight, reduction of the floor to ceiling height of the first floor level from 2.93m to 2.7m and the reduction of the parapet height above Bedroom Nos 3 and 4 from 0.6m to 0.3m)

changes in accordance with Condition No. 6 (redesign of first floor level rear balcony to bedroom 1)

changes in accordance with Condition No. 7 (obscure glazing to the north facing window to bedroom 3)

Due to the relocation of the garage, the potential environmental impact has increased. In accordance with the requirements of Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP, the application was renotified to 14 neighbours and a further three objections were received. This report relates to the proposed amendments and issues raised by objectors. Issues side setback non-compliance front fence height non-compliance location of parking structure non-compliance objectors concerns Objections The following submissions were received: - three objections were received in the initial advertising and notification period three additional objections were received in the re-notification period a total of six objections from five properties were received REFERRALS No further referrals were required. Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection to the proposed parking arrangements, except for the provision of only one car space where a minimum of two spaces are required. This is discussed in Section 5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

3. SREP 23: SYDNEY AND MIDDLE HARBOURS The proposed modifications remain appropriate with regard to the relevant clauses of SREP 23.



4. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 Existing Proposed Proposed

Amendments Control Complies

Overall Height 7.5m 9.5m 8.7m 9.5m YES

4.1 Clause 12 Height The proposal complies with the maximum building height prescribed by Clause 12 of WLEP 1995. 4.2 Clause 18 Excavation of Land Clause 18 requires Council to consider the impact of excavation associated with a development proposal upon the local environment. The proposal, as amended, includes the construction of the garage within 0.85m of the northern boundary. However, it is primarily located at or above existing ground level and outside of the required footings and slab work, will not require any noticeable excavation. Regardless, it is located a considerable distance from any structures on adjoining properties. Accordingly, the extent and siting of excavation associated with the garage is considered to be acceptable with regard to Clause 18 of WLEP 1995.

5. WOOLLAHRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2003 Site Area (670.3m²) Existing Initial

Proposal Proposal as Amended Control Complies

Ground Floor Boundary Setbacks Front (west) Side (north)

5.8m-8.0m

4.1m

5.8m-8.0m

4.1m

5.8m-6.9m

0.85m

4.2m-6.3m

1.5m

YES NO

Ancillary Development (Garage) Maximum Height Side Setback (north) Side Setback (south)

N/A

3.6m 1.2m 7.2m

3.5m

0.85m 10.4m

3.6m 1.5m 1.5m

YES NO YES

Setback from Significant Mature Trees > 3.0m 3.0m 3.0m YES

Building Footprint Approx 25% (168m2)

30.1% (212.0m2)

27.3% (183.5m2)

41% (288.0m2) YES

Floor Space Ratio 0.256:1 (171.6m2)

0.549:1 (368.6m2)

0.55:1 (368.66m2) YES

Floor to Ceiling Height – Habitable Rooms 2.7m 2.7-2.9m 2.7m 2.7m YES

Maximum Unarticulated Length to Street 5.8m 4.4m 6.0m YES

Solar Access to Open Space of Adjacent Properties (Hrs on 21 June)

> 50% for 6 hours 100% for 3 hours

50% (or 35m2) for 2 hours YES

Solar Access to Nth Facing Living Areas of Adjacent Properties (Hrs on 21 June)

Approx 4 hours

3 hours and 5 mins

> 3 hours and 5 mins 3.0 hours YES

Excavation Piling and Subsurface Wall Setback > 1.5m 0.85m 1.5m NO

Deep Soil Landscaping – Dwelling Min 250m² (60%) Additional 23m² 50%

(207.25m2) YES



Site Area (670.3m²) Existing Initial Proposal

Proposal as Amended Control Complies

Deep Soil Landscaping – Front Setback

77.1% (77.1m²)

21.3% (19.9m²)

57.4% (53.4m²)

40% (37.2m²) YES

Front Fence Height 1.2m 1.8m 1.3m-2.8m 1.2m/1.5m NO

Location of Garages and Car Parking Structures N/A Forward of

Front Setback Forward of

Front Setback Behind Front

Setback NO

Garage Frontage Width 25.5% (4.0m)

41.7% (6.4m)

22.8% (3.5m)

40% (6.14m) YES

Car Parking Spaces – Dwellings 2 2 2 2 YES

Minimum Access Driveway Width 4.0m 5.5m 3.9m 3.5m – 6.0m YES

Access Driveway Grades – Overall 5.2% 5.0% 4.0% 15% YES

Area of Lockable Storage Spaces per Dwelling > 8m3 8m³ YES

Desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria The objectives of the Vaucluse East precinct relate to the mitigation of adverse impacts upon the local public domain, maintaining the existing landscape character of the locality and ensuring the development responds to the existing built forms in the streetscape. The proposal involves the following non-compliances with the performance criteria stipulated under Part 4.14 of WRDCP 2003:- Location of parking spaces C 4.14.5 requires all garages and car parking structures to be designed so as to not dominate the streetscape, be provided behind the front building line and limited to a width of no greater than 40% (6.14m) of the site frontage. The proposed garage, as amended, will be less than 40% in width but will be located 0.9m forward of the front building line. In addition, it is possible and likely that a car will be parked in front of the garage. Overall, however, the proposal is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons: - the garage has been relocated to the side of the dwelling house, and as such, the dwelling

house remains entirely visible in the streetscape, devoid of any parking structures the establishment of a parked vehicle within the driveway will not detract from the streetscape

as the dwelling house remains entirely visible and the vehicle remains partially screened behind the front fence

the garage is minimal in scale and does not detract from the overall appearance of the dwelling house

the 0.9m projection forward of the front building line of the dwelling house is relatively minor and provides articulation to the front facade

the proposal still complies with the front setback control in C5.2.2 of WRDCP 2003 the relocation of the garage further towards the rear of the subject property would result in a

potentially adverse impact in terms of bulk of the northern elevation of the garage



Front fence height C 4.14.7.4 stipulates that front fences are to be no greater than 1.2m in height, where solid. Front fences to a maximum height of 1.5m may be permitted where 50% of the fence is transparent. The proposal, as amended, includes the establishment of a brick fence and vehicular entrance to a height of 1.5m-1.8m within the front setback. Whilst it is more than 50% open, the height of the fence remains non-compliant with C4.14.7.4 and is inconsistent and excessive within the streetscape, which is characterised by stone retaining walls, low style fences and hedges. In addition, the proposal involves the establishment of a covered pedestrian entrance, which will be established to a height of 2.5m-2.8m. Likewise, it is excessive in height and uncharacteristic of the streetscape. With regard to the above comments, the front fence is considered to be unacceptable and is amended accordingly in Condition No. 2. Streetscape performance criteria The provisions of Part 5.1 of WRDCP 2003 require development to achieve consistency with the desired future character for the locality and contribute to cohesive streetscapes and desirable pedestrian environments. Subject to Condition No. 2, the proposal, as amended, remains appropriate within the Village Lower Road streetscape. Building size and location performance criteria Side setbacks C5.2.5 of WRDCP 2003 requires a side setback of 1.5m, increasing on a pro-rata basis by 0.5m for each metre the building height exceeds 3.0m. The owners of Nos. 7 and 11 Village Lower Road have objected to the proposal, as amended, with regard to the respective side setbacks. It involves the establishment of a garage along the northern boundary, which will result in a side setback of 0.85m, a non-compliance of 0.65m for a length of 6.5m. It is, however, considered acceptable for the following reasons: - a suitable level of separation is achieved as the side boundary of the subject site adjoins the

rear boundary of the adjoining property to the north the structure itself is of an appropriate height (2.8m or 1.0m above a standard 1.8m high side

fence), is not excessive in length (limited to 43% (6.5m) of the length of the rear boundary of No. 11 Village Lower Road) and does not result in an excessive level of bulk to Nos. 11 and 13 Village Lower Road

side access is still maintained along a 0.85m wide pathway it will not affect views, privacy or overshadowing to or from any adjoining properties it involves a very minimal and acceptable amount of excavation



Setback of excavation Refer to Section 4.2. Open space and landscaping performance criteria The proposal, as amended, complies with the relevant objectives and controls of Section 5.3 of WRDCP 2003. Fences and walls performance criteria Refer to desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria. Views performance criteria Due to two further objections during the re-notification period from Nos. 5 and 7 Village Lower Road, an overall assessment of view loss has been undertaken. Height poles, certified by a Registered Surveyor and depicting the siting and overall height of the proposed development, were erected and subsequently a view analysis was undertaken from No. 7 Village Lower Road on 25 October 2005. The proposal, as amended, involves an overall reduction in the building height from 9.5m to 8.7m. C5.5.6 of WRDCP 2003 requires building forms to enable a sharing of views, particularly from the main habitable rooms. Village Lower Road is a relatively steep, north-south running road. Subsequently, each dwelling house enjoys varied views of Sydney Harbour primarily from their northern elevation and to a lesser degree from their eastern and western elevations. Views from the first floor level of No. 7 Village Lower Road are currently relatively expansive due to the existing dwelling house on the subject development site being single storey in height. As the subject development site is the northernmost east-west orientated site, a two-storey dwelling house on the development site is likely to achieve relatively expansive and uninterrupted views over the two and three-storey dwelling houses on the adjoining properties at the bottom end of Village Lower Road (Nos. 11-15 Village Lower Road). In assessing the reasonableness or otherwise of the degree of view loos, this report has had regard to the case law established by Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140 (paragraphs 23-33) which has established a four step assessment of view sharing. The steps are as follows: - The assessment of the views affected The Court said: "The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (eg. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, eg a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured."



From No. 5 Village Lower Road The view is northwards towards Sydney Harbour and the North Shore, from Chowder Head and Middle Head in the west towards Manly in the east. From No. 7 Village Lower Road The view extends from Balgowlah Heights in the east to North Head in the west. It includes the Vaucluse foreshore in the foreground and Sydney Harbour and the North Shore in the background. Views towards Middle Head and Manly are interrupted by existing mature vegetation. Consideration from what part of the property the views are obtained The Court said: "The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example, the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic." From No. 5 Village Lower Road The only available view is available from the main bedroom at the rear of the first floor level. From No. 7 Village Lower Road The following views are available: - limited and interrupted water glimpses are available from the living room and rear deck on the

ground floor level a confined but interrupted view of Sydney Harbour and Middle Head is available from the

north facing window to the hallway/staircase on the first floor level (due to the limitations imposed by the staircase)

the primary view from the west facing window to the hallway at the front of the first floor level is of dwelling houses on the opposite side of Village Lower Road, but also includes Sydney Harbour and the North Shore west from Taylors Bay

a largely similar but more acute northerly view is available from the west facing window to the main bedroom at the front of the first floor level

a view of the Vaucluse foreshore, Sydney Harbour and the North Shore (from Taylors Bay in the west to Middle Head in the east) is available from the north facing bathroom window on the first floor level

views of the Vaucluse foreshore, Sydney Harbour and North Head (from the vicinity of Mosman/Cremorne in the east to Middle Head in the west) are obtained from the main bedroom at the rear of the first floor level

The extent of the impact The Court said: "The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20%



if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating." From No. 5 Village Lower Road Due to the existing rear setback of No. 7 Village Lower Road (adjoining to the north), the proposed development is likely to eliminate a very minute portion of the North Shore and the sky when standing in the north eastern corner of the main bedroom. The impact is considered to be negligible. From No. 7 Village Lower Road As the sightlines from the first floor level of No. 7 Village Lower Road (approximate RL 67.50) is higher than the maximum height of No. 9 Village Lower Road (RL 66.75), the sightlines from the first floor level are partially over and above the roof of the proposed development. Accordingly, the real impact is likely to be slightly less than the apparent impact as shown on the submitted plans. The following impact is evident: - the water glimpses from the ground floor level are lost in a standing position from the hallway/staircase window, the entire view of the Vaucluse

foreshore and approximately 15% of the view of Sydney Harbour (adjoining Vaucluse) is lost and the view of the North Shore is retained

from the west facing windows to the first floor level (hallway and bedroom), the entire view of the Vaucluse foreshore and less than 15% of Sydney Harbour (adjoining Vaucluse) is lost when looking towards the north. The general outlook towards the north west and west and views of the North Shore remain uninterrupted.

from the north facing bathroom window, the entire view of the Vaucluse foreshore and approximately 10% of Sydney Harbour (adjoining Vaucluse) is lost

in a sitting position in the main bedroom, the entire view of the Vaucluse foreshore and less than 15% of Sydney Harbour (adjoining Vaucluse) is lost. The view of the North Shore is retained.

The reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact The Court said: "The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.” From No. 5 Village Lower Road Given the impact upon existing views from No. 5 Village Lower Road is negligible to nil, the proposal is considered to be reasonable. From No. 7 Village Lower Road The impact from No. 7 Village Lower Road is more profound.



The Court poses two questions in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140 (paragraphs 23-33). The first question relates to whether a non-compliance with one or more planning controls results in view loss. The proposal complies with the floor space ratio, building footprint, front and rear setback and height controls. It does, however, consist of side setback non-compliances. However, these non-compliances do not directly result in the loss of views from No 7 Village Lower Road and the establishment of compliant side setbacks would not bring about any noticeable improvement in views. The proposal also involves the establishment of a three-storey dwelling house at the rear (as there is an existing basement level) where only two storeys are permitted. Yet, the impact is more profound from the front of No. 7 Village Lower Road where the dwelling house is two storeys in height. As such, the retention of a two-storey structure across the entire length of the proposed dwelling house would not reduce the view affectation from the front of No. 7 Village Lower Road and would only marginally improve views of Sydney Harbour from the first floor level at the rear. At this point, it is noted that the view affectation can be attributed to the views from No 7 Village Lower Road being across the development site (side views). Given that the proposal complies with or is acceptable with regard to the relevant controls, the second question posed by the Court relates to whether a more skilful design could provide the same development potential whilst reducing the impact on views. The proposal, as amended, incorporates a flat roof design and several changes outlined in Condition No. 4 of the original report, including: - the deletion of the proposed roof light-well structure and its replacement with a skylight flush

with the roof plane the reduction of the floor to ceiling height of the first floor level from 2.93m to 2.7m the reduction of the parapet height above Bedroom Nos 3 and 4 (front section of the dwelling

house) from 0.6m to 0.3m This achieves an overall height of 8.6m, which easily complies with 9.5m height control prescribed by Clause 12 of WLEP 1995. In addition, the impacts that No. 9 Village Lower Road imposes upon the available views from No. 7 Village Lower Road are relatively acceptable when considering the impact that the existing two-storey dwelling house at No. 7 Village Lower Road imposes upon the existing two-storey dwelling house at No. 5 Village Lower Road In terms of a more skilful design, the full retention of existing views for No 7 Village Lower Road Avenue would require the deletion of a large portion of the first floor level, which would not satisfy the objects (Clause 5) of the EPA Act 1979 relating to the orderly economic development of land. The extent of view loss could only be further minimised via a reduction in the floor to ceiling height of the ground floor level to 2.7m and the first floor level to 2.6m, an overall reduction in the height of the dwelling house of 0.3m. It is considered that the internal amenity of either level would not be unduly affected as a result. Alternatively, As such, the view from the ground floor level is unchanged. However, from each window on the first floor level, the view of Sydney Harbour is retained. Accordingly, Condition No. 4 requires a 0.3m reduction in the height of the dwelling house.



With regard to reasons outlined above, the changes required in Condition No. 4, in terms of appropriate view sharing and with regard to the relevant objectives and controls in Section 5.5, the proposal is satisfactory for the following reasons: - Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria C5.8.5 of WRDCP 2003 requires habitable room windows with a sightline to habitable room windows on adjoining properties within 9.0m to be off-set, have sill heights of 1.7m or have fixed obscure glazing. C5.8.6 also requires balconies to be suitably screened to prevent direct views into habitable rooms of adjoining dwellings. A further objection concerning visual privacy was received from No. 11 Village Lower Road. Privacy to No. 11 Village Lower Road (adjoining to the north) Acoustic privacy The garage is located a minimum of 9.0m from the habitable spaces of No. 11 Village Lower Road. This is considered to be a sufficient distance in order to maintain an adequate level of acoustic privacy. Window to bedroom 3 As detailed in the original report, the deletion of or imposition of obscure glazing to the north facing window to bedroom 3 on the first floor level would be unreasonable due to the available views of Sydney Harbour. In addition, the elimination of a north facing window would significantly reduce the amount of solar access to the room. Accordingly, the lower half of the window was required to be made obscure. This has been reflected in the amended plans. The intent of the condition was to direct the main outlook horizontally towards Sydney Harbour and to minimise the overlooking in a downwards direction towards the rear yard of No. 11 Village Lower Road. Ultimately, however, it is acknowledged that it is unlikely that overlooking to the rear yard would be entirely eliminated unless the window was deleted or made obscure. In this regard and for the following reasons, the window in its current form is considered acceptable with regard to C5.8.5: - the transparent portion of the window is 2.2m² in size, which is not excessive in size when standing or sitting in the bedroom, the general outlook is in a horizontal direction across

the roof of No. 11 Village Lower Road towards the prominent view of Sydney Harbour rather than downwards to the rear yard of the property

the window is to a bedroom, which is not a heavily utilised room during daylight hours due to the proximity of the subject site (itself an east-west facing allotment) to the private

open space area of the adjoining property to the north (which is a north-south facing allotment), it is acknowledged that some overlooking is inevitable

Window to bedroom 2 The window to bedroom 2 on the first floor level is acceptable for the following reasons: - it is appropriately sized (2.1m²) it is the only window to the room



it is located immediately adjacent to and orientated towards the heavily vegetated rear yard of No. 13 Village Lower Road

Window to dining room The window to the dining room on the ground floor level incorporates a sill height of 1.8m and therefore complies with C5.8.5. Window to living/family room The window to the living room on the ground floor level is acceptable for the following reasons: - it is located in the immediate vicinity of the existing bay window and has relatively similar

proportions it is located immediately adjacent to and orientated towards the heavily vegetated rear yard of

No. 13 Village Lower Road any potential overlooking from the window towards the rear yard of No. 11 Village Lower

Road is partially obscured by the garage Privacy to No. 13 and 15 Village Lower Road (adjoining to the north) The proposal, as amended, has addressed any initial concerns raised by Council or objectors (outlined in Condition Nos. 6 and 7 of the original determination) in relation to acoustic and visual privacy. The garage is located in excess of 12.0m and 21.0m from habitable spaces of No. 13 and 15 Village Lower Road, respectively. This is considered to be a sufficient distance in order to maintain an adequate level of acoustic privacy. The proposal, as amended, is therefore considered to be acceptable with regard to the relevant objectives and controls of Section 5.8 of WRDCP 2003. Car parking and driveways performance criteria Number of parking spaces C5.9.5 stipulates that a minimum of two car spaces are required for dwelling houses. The second car space can be stacked. The proposal involves the establishment of a single car garage alongside the northern boundary. A second uncovered, stacked car space could be accommodated forward of the garage (and dwelling house). In this regard, the proposal is acceptable with regard to the relevant objectives and controls of Section 5.9.

6. DCP FOR OFF-STREET CAR PARKING PROVISION AND SERVICING FACILITIES

The proposal is acceptable with regard to the DCP for off-street car parking.

7. SUBMISSIONS



7.1 Advertising and Notification The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. Submissions were received from: 1. RL Deutsch of No. 5 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse 2. Steffan Jacob of No. 7 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse 3. Mark Driscoll of No. 11 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse This is in addition to the objections received in the initial notification period: - 1. Betty and Uri Laurence of No. 12 Olphert Avenue, Vaucluse 2. Steffan and Pamela Jacob of No. 7 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse 3. A and M.F. Mayson of No. 15 Village Lower Road, Vaucluse The objectors raised the following issues: insufficient side setbacks Refer to Section 5 (building size and location performance criteria) for the assessment of the side setback of the garage. Overall, however, the following conclusion, which is still concurred with, was provided during the initial assessment: -

At the lower ground floor and ground floor levels, the existing setbacks for the dwelling house of 1.0m from the southern boundary and 4.1m from the northern boundary will not be altered by the proposal. The proposed first floor level addition will be setback 1.0-3.5m from the southern boundary and 2.8-4.1m from the northern boundary. This results in the following non-compliances: a non-compliance of 0.65m for a length of 5.0m from the northern boundary (bedroom

3) a maximum non-compliance of 0.25m for a length of 5.0m from the northern boundary

(bedroom 1) a non-compliance of 0.8m-1.3m for a length of 5.75m from the northern boundary (rear

balcony) a non-compliance of 0.8m for a length of 4.6m from the southern boundary (bedroom 4) a non-compliance of 0.25m for a length of 1.6m from the southern boundary (bathroom) a non-compliance of 3.95m for a length of 2.8m from the southern boundary (staircase) a non-compliance of 0.75m for a length of 6.6m from the southern boundary (WIR and

ensuite to the main bedroom) The proposed setbacks are considered acceptable for the following reasons: - substantial separation along the northern boundary is achieved with a 3.5m side

setback on the subject site and the existing rear yards of the adjoining properties to the north

the subject dwelling matches the predominant form of development on both sides of Village Lower Road where dwellings are sited on the southern or uppermost portion of the allotment, which aids in maximising views and solar access from the northern elevation of dwellings and allows vehicular access along the side boundary



83% (12.8m) of the 15.6m southern side elevation is non-compliant by 0.8m or less and is therefore considered to achieve appropriate separation and limit any sense of enclosure

subject to Condition No. 4 (accommodated in the amended plans), adequate view sharing is achieved from the first floor level of the adjoining dwelling to the south (No. 7 Village Lower Road)

subject to Condition No. 6 (accommodated in the amended plans),, the proposal will not result in any adverse visual and acoustic privacy impacts on adjoining properties

the proposal complies with the solar access requirements stipulated under WRDCP 2003

the scale and bulk of the proposal is compatible with that of surrounding development. side access, including vehicular access, is maintained the proposal will not result in the loss or removal of any significant trees on the site

loss of views loss of visual privacy Refer to Section 5 (views performance criteria) and (acoustic and visual privacy) respectively. loss of sunlight C5.2.13 of Section 5.2 of WRDCP 2003 requires a minimum of two hours of sunlight to at least 50% of the main private space area (or 35m², whichever is smaller) between 9am and 3pm on June 21. An analysis of the submitted shadow diagrams has demonstrated that the proposal maintains three hours of sunlight to 100% of the main private open space area (rear yard) of the adjoining property to the south (No. 7 Village Lower Road), which satisfies C5.2.13. C5.2.14 also requires a minimum of three hours sunlight to north-facing windows to habitable rooms between 9am and 3pm on June 21. It has been demonstrated that the proposal maintains more than three hours of sunlight to the north facing windows of No. 7 Village Lower Road (adjoining property to the south), including the ground floor level living area and sunroom, which satisfies C5.2.14. overbearing development to habitable spaces or private open space The proposal complies with the height, front and rear setbacks, floor space ratio, building footprint and deep soil landscaping controls. Whilst non-compliant with the side setback controls (with regard to the amended garage and first floor level), these non-compliances have been considered acceptable in Section 5 (building size and location performance criteria). Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal will not result in an overbearing development. insufficient detail to determine height The height of the dwelling house, as measured to the existing ground level immediately below, has been measured at 8.67m. This is acceptable with regard to Clause 12 and 12AA of WLEP 1995. suitability of side fence height and materials



Refer to Condition No. 2. 7.2 Replacement Plans The replacement application (as defined by Clause 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000) was re-notified under Clause 5.1 of the DCP because, having considered Clause 9 of the DCP, the replacement application was considered to have a potentially greater environmental impact upon the adjoining neighbours to the north.

8. CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under Section 79C. 15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development Application No. 405/2005 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling on land at 9 Village Lower Road Vaucluse, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on the plan numbered 01, Issue A, dated 27 June 2005, drawn by Wayne Black and Associates Pty Ltd and which carries a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.

2. Front fence

In accordance with C4.13.5.5 in Section 4.13 of Woollahra RDCP 2003, the fence along the Village Lower Road frontage is limited to a maximum height of 1.5m. In addition, the fence forward of the garage along the rear boundary of No. 11 Village Lower Road must match the height of the existing fence. This condition has been imposed in order to maintain the visual quality of the streetscape. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.

3. Roof materials

In order to reduce roof glare (reflectivity) to adjoining properties, the proposed metal roof is to be finished in a recessive or non-reflective colour. Details are to be provided with the application for the Construction Certificate.

4. Dwelling height

In accordance with C5.5.6 of Section 5.6 of Woollahra RDCP 2003 and to allow a suitable level of view sharing between the subject property and the adjoining property to the south (No. 7 Village Lower Road), the height of the dwelling house is to be reduced by 0.3m to a maximum RL of 66.40. Details are to be included in the application for a Construction Certificate.






Certificate by: (i) Council; or (ii) an accredited certifier; and





Structural engineering details and design calculations, prepared and certified by a qualified practising Structural Engineer, must be submitted with Construction Certificate application, for all reinforced concrete work, structural steel work, retaining walls, brick fences, shoring and underpinning, isolated piers, chimneys, parapets and other structural members. This condition is imposed to ensure the structural integrity of the proposed building work.






The Applicant, Owner and Builder, jointly and severally, must ensure that they call their Principal Certifying Authority ("the PCA") to carry out such critical phase building inspections required by the PCA, the PCA Service Agreement and that the PCA is satisfied with the level of compliance achieved before the Builder proceeds to the next phase of construction. Ample notice of required inspections must be given to the PCA in accordance with the PCA Service Agreement. The Applicant, Owner and Builder must comply with the PCA Service Agreement (Service Contract) and any lawful direction given by the Principal Certifying Authority.



Note: It is the responsibility of the PCA to ensure that critical phase building inspections are undertaken in accordance with a PCA Service Agreement and issue to the Applicant, Owner and Builder appropriate Notice under Section 109L of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 ("the Act") where any breach of this consent occurs. Failure of the PCA to issue such notice may result in Council taking action under Section 109V of the Act. Failure of the Applicant, Owner and Builder to comply with a PCA Service Agreement and comply with lawful directions of the PCA under this condition may result in Council issuing fines, notices, orders and commencing legal proceedings. Council will only enter into PCA Agreements with the Owner of the land being developed. Council, if appointed as the PCA, will report to the owner of the land being developed.




Stormwater run-off from the proposed addition is to drain to the existing stormwater drainage system. The existing stormwater drainage pipes on the property must be checked and certified by a practising hydraulic engineer to ensure that all existing stormwater pipes are in good condition and are operating satisfactorily. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Note: connection of stormwater run-off to the Sydney Water sewer system is not permitted. If the existing stormwater pipes are not in good condition and/or not operating satisfactorily, the existing drainage system must be upgraded. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters of the upgraded system must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Stormwater disposal is to comply with the requirements and conditions as set out in Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control and Local Approvals Policy.

12. Long Service Levy Payment

A Long Service Levy under Section 34 of the Building & Construction Industry Long Service Payment Act, 1986, must be paid and proof of payment provided prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The Levy can be paid directly to the Long Services Payments Corporation or to Council.



13. Stockpiles









17. Site fencing

The site must be appropriately secured and fenced during demolition, excavation and construction work to ensure there are no unacceptable impacts on the amenity of adjoining properties.








19. Footpath levels










24. Lighting

Any lighting on the site must be designed so as not to cause nuisance to other residences in the area or to motorists on nearby roads and to ensure no adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding area by light overspill. All lighting must comply with the Australian Standard AS4282:1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.
















Note:The amount referred to in paragraph (a) (iv) above is prescribed by regulations under the

Home Building Act 1989. As at the date on which this Regulation was Gazetted, that amount was $5,000. As those regulations are amended from time to time, so that amount may vary.













accredited sewage management facility means a sewage management facility to which Division 4A of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993 applies, being a sewage management facility that is installed or constructed to a design or plan the subject of a certificate of accreditation referred to in Clause 95B of the Regulation. approved by the Council means the subject of an approval in force under Division 1 of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.

public sewer has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.





Building Act 1989. Mr Simon Taylor Mr Nick Economou ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ADVISINGS 1. Other approvals

This development consent does not remove the need to obtain any other statutory consent or approval necessary under any other Act, including an application for an Occupation Certificate under Section 109(C)(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. An application for an Occupation Certificate may be lodged with Council if the applicant has nominated Council as the Principal Certifying Authority.



2. Works and requirements of other authorities Australia Post has requirements for the positioning and dimensions of mail boxes in


AGL Sydney Limited has requirements for the provision of gas connections. Telstra has requirements concerning access to services that it provides.

3. Application for a Construction Certificate





Builders are advised to obtain a copy of the EPA publication Solutions to Pollution for Builders which provides environmental information including hazardous material management. The EPA can be contacted by phone on 131 555 or at www.epa.nsw.gov.au.


Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition process must be removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover and the EPA, and in accordance with the provisions of: New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1983 New South Wales Construction Safety Act, 1912; Regulation 84A-J Construction Work

Involving Asbestos or Asbestos Cement 1983 The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 1996 The Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 1996 The Waste Minimisation and Management Act and Regulations











11. Long Service Levy

The current rate of the levy required by this consent is 0.35% of the cost all building and construction work costing $25,000 or more.

12. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr Simon Taylor. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

ANNEXURES 1. Amended plans and elevations 2. Original assessment report and plans




FILE No. DA 630/2005/1

ADDRESS: 56 New Beach Road, Darling Point

PROPOSAL:

Alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building including a second floor level addition with roof terrace, new lift and upgrade of the building.

ZONING: Residential 2(b)

TYPE OF CONSENT:

Local Development

APPLICANT:

Mr A Yared

OWNER:

P M Yared

DATE LODGED:

14/10/2005

AUTHOR: Mr D Waghorn LOCALITY PLAN

Subject Site Objectors

North

Locality Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report Objector’s concerns could not be comprehensively addressed by conditions of consent. Accordingly, the matter is referred to the Application Assessment Panel for determination in accordance with Council delegations. Preamble The subject development application (630/2005) is reliant upon a significant portion of the works approved under Development Application No 61/2004 being constructed. Development Application No 61/2004 incorporated alterations and additions to an existing residential flat building consisting of three residential units. This application is best described as an ‘amending’ development application. Council has received legal advice indicating that a separate development application can be lodged to amend a previously approved development application. This is reiterated by the case of Waverley Council v C M Harris Architects (2002) 123 LGERA 100. In this case His Honour Justice Talbot stated:

“It is conceivable, although not necessarily desirable, that the person entitled to act on the consents could rely on DA 138/02 to construct and use the lower part of the proposed building and to carry out the minor works shown in the supporting plans at the upper levels and then rely on DA 133/98 for the balance of the work. Whether there are anomalies in that approach that cannot be resolved remains to be determined by the consideration and determination of the new development application on its merits. It is, however, not so far as the Court can see, contrary to any principle established by the regime provided in the EP&A Act or otherwise. It may be complicated, inept, inconvenient, inappropriate or conceptually unsound but that does not make it incompetent. There is no statutory or other legal constraint upon the number of development applications that a person can make in respect of the same land. A shopping centre complex is a demonstrative example of the way in which there can be a mosaic of development consents extending around the different parts or sections of a single site. Section 80A(1)(b) of the EP&A Act provides a facility for the consent authority to insist on the surrender of an existing development consent. It follows that the Act contemplates there can be more than one valid and operating consent in existence at the one time.”

The works proposed under this subject application could not be accommodated via a Section 96 Application on the grounds of, not substantially the same development as a result of a change to the number of units. Given that the proposed works under this application (630/2005) are interlocked with a significant portion of works approved under development application No 61/2004, it is prudent that a condition be imposed requiring development consent No 61/2004 be modified by this consent (No 630/2005) pursuant to Section 80A(1)(b) of EPA Act 1979 (see Condition No 2). Issues height non-compliance FSR non-compliance setbacks non-compliance



building footprint non-compliance deep soil landscaped area non-compliance objector’s concerns Objections Two (2) – one withdrawn on 2 May 2006 Cost of works The stated cost of the proposed work of $100,000 has been checked using the standard criteria specified in the Cordell Building Guide and is considered to be accurate. Recommendation The proposal is recommended for conditional approval because it: 1. is permissible under the zoning 2. satisfies the objectives of the relevant planning standards contained in WLEP 1995 and

WRDCP 2003 3. is an appropriate design for the site 4. will not have adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining properties and the locality such that

refusal is justified

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The applicant is seeking to carry out alterations and additions to the approved residential flat building (Development Application No 61/2004). The significant alterations include the addition of a second floor level and an internal reconfiguration to convert the approved three (3) unit residential flat building into a two (2) unit residential flat building (see Condition No 6) The proposal involves the following alterations and additions: Basement level new garbage and storage rooms new internal access incorporating a lift and pedestrian access stairs beneath the building

footprint Ground floor level internal reconfiguration so that Unit No 2 occupies the entire ground floor level and includes a

new bathroom, lift and extension of the western (front) elevation terraces a 15.8m² addition to the rumpus room and bathroom of Unit No 2 (adjacent the northern

boundary)



First floor level internal reconfiguration so that Unit No 1 occupies the western (front) portion of the first floor

level and includes a combined sitting, dining and lounge room, new lift, new bathroom and stairs to the second floor level, while Unit No 2 occupies the eastern (rear) portion of the first floor level and will contain 4 bedrooms, 3 bathrooms and a laundry

a new 15.8m² addition to the bathroom, laundry, ensuite and WIR of bedroom No 1 for Unit No 2 (adjacent the northern boundary)

Second floor level a new 45.5m² addition incorporating bedroom No 1 with WIR and ensuite with access stairs

from Unit No 1 subject to Condition No 4, a new 35m² roof terrace accessible by Unit No 1 only External works rendering and painting all external brick walls new external access stairs to Unit No 1 new concrete slate roof with integral solar panels for the second floor level new glazing to windows and minor alterations to the size and location of the approved windows new external air conditioning condenser unit adjacent the northern boundary

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The site is located on the eastern (high) side of New Beach Road, is irregular in shape and has an area of 684m². The site has a western frontage to New Beach Road of 15.315m in length, a northern (side) boundary of 45.75m in length, a southern (side) boundary of 45.71m in length and an eastern (rear) boundary of 15.105m in length. The topography of the site is such that land slopes downwards from the eastern (rear) boundary to New Beach Road; a fall of approximately 15.5m. The site is currently occupied by a residential flat building containing a two-storey main house containing a three (3) bedroom unit at ground level and a two (2) bedroom unit at first floor level. While, a free standing, partly collapsed two-storey building at the rear contains a two (2) bedroom self-contained unit. A four car garage with associated storage and pedestrian entrance gate is located on the New Beach Road boundary within the existing wall. The adjoining property to the north (No 21 Yarranabee Road) consists of a stepped design residential flat building fronting Yarranabee Road. While adjoining to the south (No 55 New Beach Road) is a two storey dwelling-house. The locality is characterised by an eclectic mix of both dwelling-houses and residential flat buildings of varying age and design.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY Development Application No 61/2004 for alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building was approved by Council’s Application Assessment Panel on 24 May 2005. The proposal involved the following works:



Generally replacement of rear retaining wall repair, paint and rendering the entire main building, with new tiles installed to the existing

retained portions of the roof Basement (Street Level) extension of existing 4-car garage to accommodate 6 cars (including 2 stacked small car

spaces) internal stairs to Unit 1 relocation of common external staircase provision of an internal garbage room Ground Floor (Garden) Level deep planting and a pool and landscaped terrace fronting New Beach Road are proposed to be

located above the basement parking internal alterations to the main house and additions to the rear linking the proposed new rear 2

storey structure to the main building new terrace to Unit 1, replacing the existing terrace and new rear gardens and private open

spaces, with screen planting between Units 1 and 2 First Floor Level internal alterations to the main house and additions at the rear to integrate the proposed new

rear 2-storey structure with the main building a new terrace to Unit 3 is proposed to replace the existing terrace Unit Configuration The existing unit configuration consists of 2 x 2-bedroom and 1 x 3-bedroom dwellings, (containing 7 bedrooms in total) and the proposal retains this configuration and number of bedrooms. The demolition works associated with the above-mentioned development application has commenced, however no new works relating to the development consent (No 61/2004) have commenced. Subject to Condition No 2, the proposed works will be carried out concurrently with the development consent (No 61/2004).

5. REFERRALS 5.1 Comments from external approval bodies Not applicable. 5.2 Building Satisfactory, subject to Condition No 41. 5.3 Health Council’s Environmental Health Officer – Tonya Lego provided the following comment on 3 November 2005:



Comment Reference is made to the above-mentioned development application, please be advised further information is required from the applicant in relation to the following: Pool location of the pool filter and intended acoustical housing Garbage Room Details of mechanical ventilation to the garbage room must be provided prior approval Rainwater tanks Further detail of the rainwater and grey water storage tanks such as number of tanks, capacity,

intended use of the water. Please provide details of first flush diversion system, location of any dangerous plants that may contaminate the system (check with a horticulltist), construction materials the tank will lead flashing be used. Inlet and outlet protection of the tank. Intended chlorination of the tank, details of backflow prevention devices, material the tanks will be constructed of. Also are any wood based heaters used on the premises of in the surrounding vicinity?

The applicant provided additional information in relation to the lift specifications. Council’s Environmental Health Officer – Tonya Lego provided the following comment on 21 November 2005: Reference is made to the abovementioned proposal, I have only received lift specifications no indication on the location of where the lift motor / plant will be located in the building. No statement of Environmental Effects was provided with this application. Air Conditioning No details of any air conditioning to be installed where provided with this application therefore a separate application will be required for any air conditioning for this site. Noise control

1. The use of plant (lift motor) must not be audible within any residential area of the building (regardless of whether any door or window to that room is open).

2. 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.

Planning Comment The proposed external air-conditioning condenser unit will be located at ground level and setback 1.4m from the northern boundary, opposite a blank wall of No 21 Yarranabee Road. Subject to Condition Nos 50 and 51, the external air conditioning condenser unit will be acoustically housed and will not have an adverse affect on the amenity of adjoining properties. All details relating to the air-conditioning system will be submitted to Council or an accredited certifier with the application for a construction certificate, certifying compliance with the relevant Australian Standards. As such, the detail submitted for the air conditioning system is satisfactory in this instance. Refer to Condition No 28 regulating noise from the proposed lift.



5.4 Heritage No comment required. 5.5 Urban Design No comment required. 5.6 Technical Services Council’s Development Engineer Team Leader – Nick Tomkins provided the following comment: I refer to the following documents received for this report: 1. Architectural plans by The Individual House Studio P/L Dwg No DA2_01-20 dated 10

October 2005 2. Statement of Environmental Effects by Individual House Studio P/L dated 11 October 2005 3. Geotechnical Report by Jeffery & Katauskas P/L Ref:18648Wrpt dated 28 June 2004 Comments have been prepared on the following. Where Approval is recommended, Conditions of Consent follow at the end of the comments. Site Drainage There are no objections to connecting the drainage from the proposed works to the existing stormwater system. The existing and new systems are to be designed and certified by a practising hydraulic engineer. The certification and plans must be submitted to the accredited certifier prior to the final building release. Details are to be in accordance with Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control Plan and Local Approvals Policy. This is to ensure that site stormwater is disposed in a controlled and sustainable manner - Conditions applied. Flooding & Overland Flow Not affected Impacts on Council Infrastructure Council's street assets are satisfactory. Geotechnical, Hydrogeological and/or Structural A Geotechnical Report by Jeffery and Katauskas Pry Ltd Ref: 18648Wrpt dated 28 June 2004 has been resubmitted in support of this application. The previous comments and conditions as used with DA61/2004 are still appropriate. Comments as follows:

“The site comprised fill/building material to a variable depth up to 1.3 over sandstone. Proposes excavation is up to a max of 6m below the existing ground levels on eastern side for garage extensions. Groundwater was observed in boreholes.



Conditions have been applied on the recommendations in the above report concerning Existing conditions of structures Dilapidation reports Vibration monitoring Construction techniques and rock excavation Support /underpinning, temporary anchors Further inspections/construction monitoring

Conditions covering these matters as well as others identified by Council have been added to the Referral.”

RECOMMENDATION Council’s Development Engineer has determined that the proposal satisfies Technical Services concerns, subject conditions. Refer to Condition Nos 7-26. 5.7 Landscaping/Trees Management No comment required. 5.8 Fire Officer Council’s Fire Officer – Robert Lawrence has assessed the proposal and considers it to be satisfactory, subject to Condition No 27. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

6. RELEVANT STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION 6.1 SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 The proposal involves alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building and as such, BASIX does not apply in this instance. SEPP No 55 – Remediation of Land Under Clause 7 (1) (a) of State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 – Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether the land is contaminated. An assessment of the documentation provided by the applicant indicates that the land does not require further consideration under Clause 7(1) (b) and (c) of SEPP 55.



6.2 REPs SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 The provisions of Clauses 13, 25 and 26 of this instrument require Council to consider the visual impact that a development proposal will have upon Sydney Harbour and adjoining foreshore areas and the likely impact upon available views to and from Sydney Harbour. In this regard, the following assessment is provided: the proposed alterations and additions will present as a well modulated form and is generally

consistent with the height, scale and external finishes of surrounding development. As such, the proposal will appear compatible with adjoining development and the natural foreshore environment

the location and density of the approved landscaping coupled with the recessive design of the second floor level will reduce the visual bulk when viewed from the harbour

the proposal will be distantly visible from Sydney Harbour and will not appear incongruous with the built and natural environment. As such, the proposal will not have any adverse impacts upon Sydney Harbour or the foreshore area

subject to Condition Nos 3-5, the proposal will have no adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties

the marine ecology and foreshore area of Rushcutters Bay will be retained and protected Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with Clauses 13, 25 and 26 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. 6.3 Section 94 contribution Council’s Section 94 Contribution Plan provides the mechanism to levy development for monetary contributions towards community services and facilities where it can be determined that there will be a net increase in the number of dwellings. In this regard, the proposal will result in a net decrease of one (1) residential unit and as such, no Section 94 Contribution levy is required. However, Section 94A Contributions apply to the subject site given the development application was submitted after 28 September 2005. Refer to Condition No 14. 6.4 Other relevant legislation None relevant.

7. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 7.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5)) The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2(b) zone.



7.2 Statutory compliance table Site Area: 684m² Existing Proposed Control Complies

Lot Frontage 15.315m 15.315m 15m YES

Overall Height 10.3m 10.35m 9.5m NO*

Floor Space Ratio 0.83:1 (570.5m²)

0.99:1 (680.6m²)

0.75:1 (513m2) NO*

* SEPP No 1 Objection submitted 7.3 Lot Frontage requirements Clause 10B(1) of Woollahra LEP 1995 states that “a site must not be developed for the purpose of a residential flat building containing three dwellings or fewer unless the width of the site at the front alignment is 15m or more.” The proposed residential flat building consists of two (2) residential units and has a frontage of 15.315m², thereby complying with the above-mentioned requirements of Clause 10B and the objectives under Clause 10A of WLEP 1995. 7.4 Height Under the provisions of Clause 12 of WLEP 1995, a maximum height of 9.5m applies to the subject site. The approved building (DA No 61/2004) attains a maximum height of 10.3m. The proposal attains a maximum height of 10.35m; resulting in a maximum non-compliance of 0.85m. The non-compliance is limited to the proposed second floor level addition. The applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards in relation to the non-compliance. The SEPP 1 objection forwarded by the applicant is paraphrased as follows: (a) The attic extension, partially replacing the existing roof, is on the northern side of the site,

essentially below the property to the north, set back from the street and the side boundaries as well as behind the existing main ridge and therefore has no impact on any adjoining neighbours site lines

(b) The proposed building density, bulk and scale are essentially unchanged from the existing situation. The locality exhibits a wide range of architectural styles with new medium density developments scattered throughout the locality. In addition, it is proposed to aesthetically reinvigorate the building, making it more in keeping with modern trends pertaining to contextual residential architecture

(c) The attic extension, partially replacing the existing roof, is on the northern side of the site, essentially below the property to the north, set back from the street and side boundaries with no overlooking and overshadowing effect. The rooftop planters also intend to act as screening

(d) The proposal does not impact on the existing situation. The shadow diagrams submitted with this submission demonstrates that the proposal will not have an adverse impact on adjoining properties

(e) Neither the existing nor proposed alterations will obscure public views or impact the amenity of the public domain

In applying the principles set out in the Hooker case, the proposed SEPP 1 objection has been considered by reference to the following tests:



1. Is the planning control in question a development standard? 2. What is the underlying purpose of the standard? 3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in

particular, does the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in s.5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

4. Is compliance with the standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case?

5. Is the objection well founded? 1. Is the planning control in question a development standard? The planning control in question is the height standard set by Clause 12 of the WLEP 1995. As such, any variation of this standard requires a SEPP 1 objection, as has been prepared in this case. 2. What is the underlying purpose of the standard? The objectives of the height standard listed under Clause 12AA of WLEP 1995 are: (a) to minimise impact of new development on existing views of Sydney Harbour, ridgelines,

public and private open spaces and views of the Sydney City skyline, (b) to provide compatibility with the adjoining residential neighbourhood, (c) to safeguard visual privacy of interior and exterior living areas of neighbouring dwellings, (d) to minimise detrimental impacts on existing sunlight access to interior living rooms and

exterior open space areas and minimise overshadowing, (e) to maintain the amenity of the public domain by preserving public views of the harbour and

surrounding areas and the special qualities of the streetscapes. 3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in

particular, does the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in s.5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

Having regard to the objectives, it is considered that: the approved building attains a maximum height of 10.3m, with the approved ridge height being

RL 18.75. The proposal attains a maximum height of 10.35m, with a ridge height for the second floor level being RL 18.51. As such, the proposed second floor level is 0.24m lower than the approved ridge height

the proposal attains a maximum height of RL of 18.51, which is lower than the maximum height of the adjoining building to the south (No 55 New Beach Road) RL 19.22 and the adjoining building to the north (No 21 Yarranabee Road) RL 24.94

the element of non-compliance, being the second floor level addition is setback 7.9m from the front (western) building alignment and will not be visible from the street, thereby reducing the perceived visual bulk and scale of the proposal

insisting on full compliance with the height standard would not have any significant benefits to the amenity of adjoining properties given the modest non-compliance and setbacks from the approved building envelope

the proposed alterations and additions will present as a well modulated form and is generally consistent with the height, bulk, scale and external finishes of surrounding development

subject to Condition Nos 3-4, the proposal will maintain the visual and acoustic privacy of adjoining properties (see Acoustic and Visual Privacy Performance Criteria below)

the proposal will have no adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing and complies with Council’s solar access requirements



the proposal will not have an adverse impact on public or private views of the Harbour 4. Is compliance with the standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the

case? The proposal achieves consistency with the objectives of Council's height standard and therefore the SEPP No 1 objection to the standard is supported. It is recommended that Council resolve to vary the standard in this instance as compliance is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary. 5. Is the objection well founded? In light of the above issues, compliance with the height standard is considered to be unnecessary and the objection is considered to be well founded. Accordingly, it is considered that granting development consent would be consistent with the aims and objectives set out in Clause 3 of SEPP No. 1. 7.5 Floor space ratio Under the provisions of Clause 11 of WLEP 1995, a maximum FSR of 0.75:1 (513m²) applies to the subject site. The approved building (DA No 61/2004) attains an FSR of 0.83:1 (570.5m²). The proposal attains an FSR of 0.99:1 (680.6m²); a maximum non-compliance of 167.6m². The applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 – Development Standards in relation to the non-compliance. The SEPP 1 objection forwarded by the applicant is paraphrased as follows: (a) The proposed increase to the FSR does not increase the density or number of units on the

allotment (b) The proposed building density, bulk and scale is essentially unchanged from the existing

situation as the increase is confined to three areas in the form of the ground floor infill under the approved first floor footprint, infill against the rear retaining wall and the attic extension that partially replaces the existing roof

(c) There is no adverse impact on adjoining properties for the following reasons: the ground floor infill under the approved first floor footprint is essentially below

ground the infill against the rear retaining wall is substantially below adjoining properties to

the north and east the attic extension is on the northern side of the site, essentially below the property to

the north, setback from the street and side boundaries with no overlooking or overshadowing effect

(d) the proposed increase in FSR does not impact on the existing character of the surrounding built and natural environments as the areas or increase are not visible from the street due to the elevated nature of the site

In applying the principles set out in the Hooker case, the proposed SEPP 1 objection has been considered by reference to the following tests: 1. Is the planning control in question a development standard? 2. What is the underlying purpose of the standard?



3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in particular, does the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in s.5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

4. Is compliance with the standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the

case? 5. Is the objection well founded? 1. Is the planning control in question a development standard? The planning control in question is the FSR standard set by Clause 11 of the WLEP 1995. As such, any variation of this standard requires a SEPP 1 objection, as has been prepared in this case. 2. What is the underlying purpose of the standard? The objectives of the FSR standard listed under Clause 11AA of WLEP 1995 are: (a) to set the maximum density for new development (b) to control building density, bulk and scale in all residential and commercial localities in the

area in order to achieve the desired future character objectives of those localities (c) to minimise adverse environmental effect on the use or enjoyment, or both of adjoining

properties (d) to relate new development to the existing character of surrounding built and natural

environment as viewed from the streetscape, the harbour or any other panoramic viewing point

3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and

in particular, does the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in s.5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

Having regard to the objectives, it is considered that: the proposal will add 110.138m² to the approved FSR of 0.83:1 (570.5m²). However, this is, in

part, due to the additions to the basement level and the reduction of the number of units (see Condition No 6). The reduction in the number of units from three to two renders two (2) off street car parking spaces excess to requirements, therefore adding 32.9m² to the GFA calculation. In terms of the above ground additions, only the rear additions to the ground and first floor level (total of 31.68m²) and the second floor level (45.5m²) have the potential to add bulk and scale to the building. These additions will be either located to the rear of the site or be setback 7.9m from the western (front) building line, respectively, and will not be seen from New Beach Road

the proposal is considered to be comparable with the height, bulk and scale of adjoining developments. Insisting on full compliance the FSR standard would result in a building of incompatible bulk and scale, having regard to the context and setting of the locality

the proposed alterations and additions will present as a well modulated form and is generally consistent with the height, scale and external finishes of surrounding development

subject to Condition Nos 3-4, the proposal will maintain the visual and acoustic privacy of adjoining properties (see Acoustic and Visual Privacy Performance Criteria below)

the proposal will have no adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of overshadowing and complies with Council’s solar access requirements

the proposal will not have an adverse impact on public or private views of the Harbour




The proposal achieves consistency with the objectives of Council's FSR standard and therefore the SEPP No 1 objection to the standard is supported. It is recommended that Council resolve to vary the standard in this instance as compliance is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary. Paragraph 3 of Circular No B1 from the former Department of Planning states-

“As numerical standards are often a crude reflection of intent, a development which departs from the standard may in some circumstances achieve the underlying purpose of the standard as much as one which complies. In many cases a variation will be numerically small in others it may be numerically large, but nevertheless be consistent with the purpose of the standard.”

The underlying purpose of the standard as expressed by the objectives under clause 11AA is to achieve compatibility with the height, bulk and scale of surrounding development. Having regard to the context of surrounding development, the underlying purpose of the standard would be achieved. 5. Is the objection well founded? In light of the above issues, compliance with the FSR standard is considered to be unnecessary and the objection is considered to be well founded. Accordingly, it is considered that granting development consent would be consistent with the aims and objectives set out in Clause 3 of SEPP No. 1. 7.8 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 18 Excavation Clause 18 of WLEP 1995 requires Council to consider the impact of excavation associated with a development proposal upon the local environment. The extent of additional excavation associated with the subject development application involves excavation to a maximum depth of 6.5m over an area of 56.2m²; a volume of approximately 232m³ for the basement level garbage and storage rooms, access corridor, stairs and lift shaft. The additional excavation associated with the proposal will be setback in excess of 1.5m from all boundaries, which accords with C 5.2.16 of WRDCP 2003 requiring a 1.5m setback of excavation from all boundaries. The extent and siting of excavation is considered to satisfy the provisions of Clause 18 of WLEP 1995 for the following reasons: Council’s Development Engineer Team Leader – Nick Tomkins has assessed the geotechnical

report submitted with the development application and considers the proposal to be satisfactory, subject to Condition Nos 21-26

Council’s Trees and Landscape Officer – David Grey has assessed the extent and siting of excavation in Council’s Development Application Review Committee (DARC) and considers that the proposed excavation will have no impact on the existing trees and landscaping

Subject to the above-mentioned conditions, the extent and siting of the proposed excavation is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the provisions of Clause 18 of WLEP 1995.



Clause 19 HFSPA The subject site is located in the Harbour Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. Clause 19 of WLEP 1995 requires Council to assess the visual impact of a proposal upon Sydney Harbour and its foreshore areas. As discussed previously under the section SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in terms of its visual impact upon Sydney Harbour and the adjoining foreshore area.

Clause 24 Land adjoining public open space The provisions of Clause 24 of WLEP 1995 requires the consideration of the impact of a proposal upon the amenity of any adjoining public open space and whether the proposal is in conflict with any plan of management for the adjoining public open space. The proposal is located directly opposite Yarranabee Park. The proposal will not have any adverse impact on the amenity of the public open space and does not conflict with any plan of management. Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the provisions of Clause 24 of WLEP 1995. Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater Clause 25(1) and (2) of WLEP 1995 requires Council to consider the provision of adequate stormwater drainage and the provision of adequate water and sewage services. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Clause 25 and is considered to be satisfactory, subject to Condition No 7 and Advising No 2. Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils The subject site is identified to be within a Class 5 Acid Sulfate Soil area within the Woollahra Council Acid Sulfate Soil Map. In accordance with Acid Sulfate Soil Manual 1998 Assessment Guidelines issued by DUAP (now Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources) Classification 5 land requires preliminary testing to be conducted if the works are within 500m of Class 1, 2, 3 or 4 lands where the works are likely to lower the water table beyond 1m from the existing ground level. Although the subject site is located within 500m of Class 2 land, the excavation associated with the proposal would not lower the existing water table beyond 2m, and therefore preliminary testing to confirm the presence of potential or actual acid sulfate soils would not be required. Hence, it is considered there is no issue of acid sulfate affectation.

8. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Act requires that in determining a development application, a consent authority is to take into consideration any draft environmental planning instrument "EPI" that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority.



Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 ("the proposed SEPP") was publicly exhibited from 10 May to 18 June 2004. In considering how much weight should be placed upon an exhibited draft environmental planning instrument under section 79C of the Act one must assess how likely it is that the draft EPI will commence, in what form it is likely to commence and consider what effect the instrument would have if applied. The proposed SEPP received significant criticism from the development industry in submissions. Officers of DIPNR have advised that it will not be made in the form it was exhibited and that it will now be included as part of the new Integrated LEP Template. This template will be placed on public exhibition in late April/May 2005. Therefore, it is not known in what form the draft SEPP will be made. Clause 14 of the draft SEPP provides Saving and Transitional provisions. These provisions provide that any application submitted prior to the commencement of the proposed SEPP and within 28 days after the commencement of the proposed SEPP is to be determined in accordance with the former SEPP No.1 as if the former SEPP No.1 had not been repealed by the proposed SEPP. It is likely that the draft SEPP, if made, will contain transitional provisions. The draft SEPP would, if it commenced in its exhibited form, require a higher threshold test in order for an objection against a development standard to be sustained. However, the draft policy should not be given determining weight in the assessment of development applications for the following reasons: 1. The draft SEPP will not be made in the form it was exhibited 2. It is not known whether the threshold tests contained in the exhibited SEPP will be retained 3. It is likely that, if made, the draft SEPP will contain savings and transitional provisions. This means that objections submitted under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 must be assessed under the current policy.

9. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 9.1 Numeric Compliance table - Woollahra Residential Development Control Plan 2003 Site Area (684m²) Approved (DA No

61/2004) Proposed Control Complies

Maximum Number of Storeys – RFB 2 3 3 Yes

Building Boundary Setbacks Front (west) Rear (east) Side (north) Ground Floor First Floor Second Floor Side (south) Ground Floor First Floor Second Floor

11-13.5m

0.6m

1-2.5m 1-2.5m

-

0.8-7.8m 0.8-7.8m

-

10.6-13.5m

0.6m

1-2.5m 1-2.5m 3.8m

0.8-7.8m 0.8-7.8m 3.3-4.6m

8m

11.4m

1.5-1.8m 1.5-4m

3.25-4.9m

1.5-2.05m 1.5-4.25m 3.45-4.8m

Yes No*

No* No*

No (partial)

No* No*

No (partial) Setback from Significant Mature Trees <3m <3m 3.0m No*

Building Footprint 41% (280.9m2)

43% (296.3m2)

35% (239.4m2) No



Site Area (684m²) Approved (DA No 61/2004) Proposed Control Complies

Floor to Ceiling Height – Habitable Rooms 2.7-3m 2.6-3m 2.7m No

Maximum Unarticulated Length to Street <6m <6m 6.0m Yes

Solar Access to Open Space of Adjacent Properties (Hrs on 21 June)

>50% for 2 hours >50% for 2 hours 50% (or 35m2) for 2 hours Yes

Solar Access to Nth Facing Living Areas of Adjacent Properties (Hrs on 21 June)

>3 hours >3 hours 3.0 hours Yes

Excavation Piling and Subsurface Wall Setback 1.1m 2.8-6.2m 1.5m Yes

Deep Soil Landscaping – RFB

28.9% (198.1m²)

26.7% (182.7m²)

40% (273.6m2) No

Deep Soil Landscaping – Front Setback (Consolidated Area) >20m² >20m² 12m²/20m² Yes

Private Open Space at Ground Level – Total

Unit 1 and 2: >35m² by 3m

Unit 1: >35m³ by 3m

35m² Min dimension 3m Yes

Private Open Space at Ground Level – Principal Area

Unit 1 and 2: >16m² by 4m

Unit 1: >16m² by 4m

16m² Min dimension 4m Yes

Private Open Space at Ground Level – Maximum Gradient <1:10 <1:10 1:10 Yes

Private Open Space – Upper Floor Units in RFBs Unit 3: >8m² by 2m Unit 2: >8m² by 2m 8m²

Min dimension 2m Yes

Solar Access to North-Facing Living Areas of Development (Hrs on 21 June)

>3 hours >3 hours 3.0 hours Yes

Minimum Number of North Facing Habitable Rooms 8 9 1 Yes

Car Parking Excavation Outside footprint Outside footprint Within Building Footprint No

Car Parking Spaces – RFB/Dual Occupancy

5 residential 1 visitor

5 residential 1 visitor

3 residential 1 visitor No*

Area of Lockable Storage Spaces per Dwelling >8m³ >8m³ 8m³ Yes

* Approved non-compliance Site analysis performance criteria (Part 3) Part 3 of Council’s WRDCP 2003 requires adequate site analysis documentation for development applications. The application is considered to be satisfactory in this regard. Performance Criteria 3.2.1 requires development to fit into the surrounding environment and pattern of development by responding to the surrounding neighbourhood character and streetscape. The locality is characterised by a mix of dwelling-houses and residential flat buildings of various scales and architectural styles. The proposed residential flat building is considered to be comparable with the bulk and scale of approved residential flat buildings (DA No 61/2004) and respond satisfactorily to the streetscape character and urban context of the locality. Accordingly, it is considered the proposal satisfies the above-mentioned criteria.



Desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria (Part 4) The relevant desired future character objectives of the Darling Point Precinct relate to maintaining the garden settings and streetscape elements, ensuring new development reinforces the stepped and sloping topography, retaining the setting of mature street trees and garden plantings, ensuring new development addresses the street, ensuring that the built form and streetscape elements reinforce the hierarchy of curving streets and maintaining the evolution of low rise residential building styles through the introduction of well designed contemporary buildings. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the above-mentioned objectives for the following reasons: the approved landscaping in the front yard will be retained which will contribute satisfactorily to

the landscape character of the locality the proposed alterations and additions will present as a well modulated form and is generally

consistent with the height, bulk and scale of approved residential flat building. As such, the proposal will appear compatible with adjoining development of New Beach Road

the deep balconies coupled with the recessive design of the proposed second floor level will add further articulation to the approved residential flat building, thereby reducing the visual bulk when viewed from the streetscape

the proposed alterations and additions will have a positive visual impact on the streetscape and respond appropriately to the topography and low rise built form of the locality

The proposal involves the following non-compliances with the relevant performance criteria stipulated under Part 4.1 of WRDCP 2003: Building footprint C 4.1.3 stipulates a maximum building footprint of 35% (239.4m²) for the site. The proposal attains a building footprint of 43% (296.3m²) for the site; a non-compliance of 56.9m². Notwithstanding the non-compliance, it is noted that the approved proposal (DA No 61/2004) was assessed under the WRDCP 1999 which stipulated a maximum building footprint of 40% (273.6m²). Based on this assessment, the approved proposal (No 61/2004) represents a non-compliance of 7.3m², while the proposed alterations and additions represent a non-compliance of 22.7m². The underlying objectives of the building footprint control is to limit the site coverage and excavation, maximise on-site filtration of stormwater, maximise deep soil landscaping areas, maintain subterranean water flows, protect significant vegetation and minimise the likelihood of instability due to excavation. In this regard, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with the underlying objectives of the building footprint control for the following reasons: the proposed alterations and additions represent an increase on the approved building footprint

of 15.4m². The additional 15.4m² will occur at the rear and will not be seen from New Beach Road

Council’s Development Engineer Team Leader – Nick Tomkins has assessed the proposal and considers the extent and siting of excavation to be satisfactory, with the proposal not having any adverse affect on the structural stability of adjoining properties, subject to Condition Nos 21-26



Council’s Development Engineer Team Leader – Nick Tomkins has assessed the proposal and considers the disposal of stormwater to be satisfactory, subject to Condition No 7

whilst the proposal does not comply with Council’s deep soil landscaping requirement, the proposal provides approximately 300m² of soft landscaped area which is sufficient to contribute to the landscape character of the locality. The provision of this soft landscaping coupled with the disposal of stormwater will satisfy the intent of the deep soil landscaped area requirement to assist the natural permeation of stormwater and enable stormwater runoff from the site

the approved significant vegetation will not be altered by the proposal Streetscape performance criteria (Section 5.1) The objectives of Council’s streetscape performance criteria require development to achieve a scale and character in keeping with the desired future character for the locality, contribute to a cohesive streetscape and promote desirable pedestrian movements, provide a safe environment and recognise predominant streetscape qualities. The proposed alterations and additions are considered to be comparable in scale and form with the approved residential flat buildings and surrounding residential flat developments in the Darling Point locality for the following reasons: the proposal will have a positive visual impact on the streetscape with a well modulated form

comprising of deep balconies and a recessive design of the second floor level reducing the visual bulk when viewed from the streetscape

the rendered finish and new parapets will give the proposal a contemporary look which is consistent with the external finishes and designs of recently constructed residential flat buildings in the locality

the proposal will maintain the streetscape and landscape character of the locality Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.1 of WRDCP 2003. Building size and location performance criteria (Section 5.2) The proposal involves the following non-compliances with the performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.2 of WRDCP 2003: Setbacks Rear: C 5.2.3 stipulates that buildings are to have a minimum rear setback of 25% (11.4m) of the average site length. The approved residential flat building attains a rear setback of 0.6m. The proposed alterations and additions will not reduce the approved 0.6m rear setback, however the approved non-compliance will be extenuated and setback 0.6m for a length of 1.2m for the ground and first floor levels. Side: C 5.2.5 stipulates that the proposal is to be setback 1.5-4.9m from the northern boundary and 1.5-4.8m from the southern boundary. The approved residential flat building is set back 1-2.5m from the northern boundary and 0.8-7.8m from the southern boundary on the ground and first floor levels. The proposal will extenuate the approved setbacks with the exception of minor alterations to the ground and first floor levels which will replicate the approved situation. The additional non-compliances are as follows:



a maximum non-compliance of 1.1m for a length of 12.7m from the northern boundary (second floor level bedroom 1 and roof terrace)

a maximum non-compliance of 0.6m for a length of 11.4m from the southern boundary (second floor level bedroom 1 and roof terrace)

The purpose of the setback controls are to protect the visual and aural privacy of residents, provide side access to the rear of properties, avoid buildings or part of buildings encroaching onto adjoining properties, enable opportunities for screen planting, protect significant vegetation, avoid an unreasonable sense of enclosure, safeguard the privacy and minimise the noise impacts for dwellings. The non-compliances with the rear and side setback controls are considered to be satisfactory with regard to the above-mentioned purpose for the following reasons: in the case of Woollahra Municipal Council v Noel Elmowry, Hon. Moore held that variation of

the rear building setback was acceptable given that no substantive impacts upon the amenity of adjoining properties would arise. Having regard to the findings of the case, it is considered that as the siting of the proposed alterations and additions would not adversely impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties and primarily replicates the existing situation in terms of rear setback, there is no substantive basis for refusal on the grounds of non-compliance with the rear setback requirement

the roof ridge at the rear will be a maximum height of RL 17.25 which is approximately 1.7m below the ground level of the property to the rear (No 11 Yarranabee Road). Further, No 11 Yarranabee Road is a multi storey building that is approximately 50m to the south-east of the approved building and will not be adversely affected by the non-compliance with the rear setback requirement

subject to Condition No 4, non-compliance with the side boundary setbacks for the second floor level bedroom 1 and roof terrace will not have any adverse impact on the visual and acoustic privacy on adjoining properties. Further, the roof terrace is only accessible by the occupants of Unit No 1 and is located off a bedroom which is neither used frequently or for extended periods during the day

the floor level of the roof terrace is RL 15.05 which is 0.44m above the head height of windows at No 55 New Beach Road, while no habitable room windows are located on the southern elevation of No 21 Yarranabee Road. As such, the proposed alterations and additions will not have an adverse impact on the privacy of adjoining properties (refer to Acoustic and Visual Privacy Performance Criteria below)

the proposal will not have any adverse affects of the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of view loss and solar access

the proposal will retain side access to the rear of the dwelling-house the proposal will not result in the loss or removal of any significant trees to ensure the landscape

character of the locality is maintained the height, bulk and scale of the proposal is compatible with that of surrounding development Floor to ceiling height C 5.2.10 stipulates that habitable rooms to have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.7 metres. The proposal attains a floor-to-ceiling height of 2.6-3 metres. The BCA stipulates a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 2.4 metres for habitable rooms. The proposal complies with this requirement and is considered to be satisfactory in this instance. Accordingly, no objection is raised to this area of non-compliance.



Open space and landscaping performance criteria (Section 5.3) The proposal involves the following non-compliances with the performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.3 of WRDCP 2003: Deep soil landscaped area C 5.3.2 stipulates that at least 40% (273.6m²) of the site is located at ground level and comprises of deep soil landscaped area. The approved residential flat building will provide 28.9% (198.1m²) of deep soil landscaped area. The proposed alterations and additions results in a deep soil landscaped area of 26.7% (182.7m²) which represents a decrease to the approved deep soil landscaped area by 15.4m²; the extent of the rear addition adjacent the northern boundary. Notwithstanding the non-compliance, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory for the following reasons: the proposal will provide approximately 300m² of soft landscaping in the form of planters and

soft landscaping for the site, including soft landscaping above the approved garage forward of the front building alignment

The 300m² of deep soil landscaped area will satisfy the underlying intent of the deep soil landscaped area requirement which is to assist in the natural permeation of stormwater and enable stormwater runoff from the site

the retention of the soft landscaped area will enable the proposal to continue to contribute to the landscape character of the locality

Fences and walls performance criteria (Section 5.4) The proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.4 of WRDCP 2003. Views performance criteria (Section 5.5) The proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.5 of WRDCP 2003. Energy efficiency performance criteria (Section 5.6) The proposed alterations and additions are considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.6 of WRDCP 2003. Stormwater management performance criteria (Section 5.7) Subject to Condition No 7, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.7 of WRDCP 2003. Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria (Section 5.8) The owners of No 2/21 Yarranabee Road and No 55 New Beach Road have objected to the proposal on the grounds of loss of visual and acoustic privacy. On 2 May 2006, the owners of No 55 New Beach Road wrote to Council withdrawing their objection, subject to conditions. These are addressed via Condition Nos 3-5.



C 5.8.5 stipulates that habitable room windows with a direct sightline to a habitable room window in adjacent dwelling within 9 metres is to be offset, contained at your glazing or have sill height of more than 1.7 metres. C 5.8.6 stipulates that balconies, terraces, decks and other like areas within a development suitably screened to prevent direct views into habitable rooms or private open space of adjacent dwellings. Privacy impact on No 2/21 Yarranabee Road An inspection of the subject site revealed the proposal will not have an adverse impact on the privacy of No 2/21 Yarranabee Road for the following reasons: the approved privacy relationship between properties on the northern elevation of the ground

and first floor level will not be significantly altered with the exception of the addition of new windows and doors to the ensuite, WIR, bathroom and laundry on the first floor level. These are off non-habitable rooms and will look directly into the blank wall at No 21 Yarranabee Road

the north facing windows for the second floor level are either off the ensuite/laundry or the stairwell to bedroom No 1. While the window for the ensuite / laundry is a non-habitable room, the north facing floor to ceiling windows for the stairwell to bedroom 1 is considered to be important to provide natural light to bedroom 1. Further, the bedroom 1 will not have any adverse impact on the privacy on No 21 Yarranabee Road given that it is not used frequently or for extended periods during the day and will more than likely contain curtains to protect the privacy of a bedroom

the southern elevation of No 21 Yarranabee Road does not contain any habitable room windows and is separated from the second floor level by 7m. Further, the terraces for No 21 Yarranabee Road with the potential to be overlooked contain lattice privacy screens to protect the areas of private open space

the primary outlook of the roof terrace is to the west towards Sydney Harbour subject to Condition No 4, the second floor roof terrace has an area of 35m² and is only

accessible through a bedroom by the owners of Unit No 1 thereby limiting the potential for noise transmissions

Privacy impact on No 55 New Beach Road The owners of No 55 New Beach Road have written to Council of 2 May 2006 withdrawing their objection, subject to conditions (refer to Condition Nos 3-5). Notwithstanding this, a site inspection of the subject site revealed the proposal will have no adverse affect on the privacy of No 55 New Beach Road for the following reasons: the approved privacy relationship between properties on the southern elevation of the ground

and first floor level will not be significantly altered. Further, the height of the side boundary fence coupled with the density of existing landscaping adjacent the southern boundary will minimise the potential for loss of privacy

the windows for the second floor level will be either from a non-habitable WIR or bedroom 1 which is neither used frequently or for extended periods during the day and will more than likely contain curtains to protect the privacy of a bedroom

the proposed roof terrace will have a floor level of RL 15.05 which is 0.44m above the head height of adjoining habitable room windows. As such, the proposed roof terrace will look predominately onto the roof of No 55 New Beach Road

subject to Condition No 4 no overlooking to the front yard or private open space of No 55 is possible

the primary outlook of the roof terrace is to the west towards Sydney Harbour



subject to Condition No 4, the second floor level roof terrace is reduced in size to an area of 35m² and is only accessible through a bedroom by the owners of Unit No 1 thereby limiting the potential for noise transmissions

Privacy impact of No 11 Yarranabee Road Although the owners of No 11 Yarranabee Road have not objected to the proposal on the grounds of loss of visual and acoustic privacy, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory for the following reasons: habitable room windows will be separated by approximately 50m the roof ridge at the rear will be a maximum height of RL 17.25 which is approximately 1.7m

below the ground level of the property to the rear (No 11 Yarranabee Road) Accordingly, the proposed alterations and additions are considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.8 of WRDCP 2003. Car parking and driveways performance criteria (Section 5.9) The proposal involves the following non-compliances with the performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.9 of WRDCP 2003: Car parking excavation C 5.9.1 stipulates that the area of site excavated for the purposes of underground car parking is limited to the building footprint of development and the site excavation requirements contained in Section 5.2 – Building Size and Location. The approved car park is set back 1.1m from the northern and southern (side) boundaries, accommodates six (6) off-street car parking spaces and is located forward of the front building line. The proposed alterations and additions comply with the setback of excavation requirements, but will not alter the approved number of car parking spaces and is located forward of the front building line. The proposal involves excavation for a new storage and garbage rooms and pedestrian access (including a lift) to Unit Nos 1 and 2. Whilst the proposed pedestrian access (including lift) will be located within the building envelope, the proposed storage and garbage rooms will be located outside the building footprint. Notwithstanding the non-compliance, the proposed storage and garbage rooms will be located behind the existing car parking spaces and will not be seen from New Beach Road. Further, the proposed excavation complies with Council’s setback of excavation requirement and is considered to be satisfactory in terms of siting and extent of excavation (see Clause 18 – Excavation above), Accordingly, no objection is raised to the non-compliance in this instance. Site facilities performance criteria (Section 5.10) The proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.10 of WRDCP 2003.



Harbour foreshore development performance criteria (Section 5.11) For the reasons discussed previously under SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and performance criteria stipulated under Part 5.11 of WRDCP 2003. Access and mobility performance criteria (Section 5.13) Refer to Woollahra Access DCP below. 9.2 DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities The proposed alterations and additions are considered to be satisfactory with regard to the relevant objectives and requirements of this DCP. 9.3 Woollahra Access This proposal is for a Class 2 building involving 2 dwellings. The Access DCP encourages, rather than requires, visitor access for older people or people with a disability. A lift has been provided from the car park level to the existing first floor level. However, the second floor level is only accessible via a staircase. This is considered acceptable under the provisions of the DCP. 9.4 Other DCPs, codes and policies None relevant.

10. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Clause 92 of the EPA Regulation 2000 requires us to consider Australian Standard AS 2601-1991: The demolition of structures. Refer to Condition No 39. Clause 94 requires us to consider fire safety measures for alterations and enlargements of existing buildings. Refer to Condition No 27.

11. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL All likely impacts from the proposal have been discussed elsewhere in this report.


13. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. Two (2) submissions were received. An objection from Marilynne Paspaley (No 55 New Beach Road, Darling Point) was withdrawn on 2 May 2006, subject to conditions (refer to Condition Nos 3-5). As such, the sole objector to the proposal is: Gwenda McGregor – 2/21 Yarranabee Road, Darling Point



The objector raised the following issues: drawing accuracy size and location of second floor level bedroom window roof top landscaping and fencing is the proposal for strata units or a house These concerns have been addressed elsewhere in the report, with the exception of the following: drawing accuracy The proposed drawings and RL’s of adjoining properties are considered to be reasonably accurate. roof top landscaping and fencing Condition No 4 stipulates the planter box is to be a minimum depth of 600mm to enable planting to be maintained and a 1m high balustrade is required around the inner edge of the planter box to comply with the BCA requirements. is the proposal for strata units or a house The proposal is a two unit residential flat building.

14. CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under s79C of EPA Act 1979. 15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT the Council, as the consent authority, is of the opinion that the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to Clause 11 (Floor Space Ratio) and Clause 12 (height) under WLEP 1995 is well founded. The Council is also of the opinion that strict compliance with the development standards is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of this case as the development will achieve the objectives for the FSR and Height standards under Clause 11AA and 12AA of WLEP 1995.

AND

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, being satisfied that the objection under SEPP No. 1 is well founded and also being of the opinion that the granting of consent to Development Application No. 630/2005 is consistent with the aims of the Policy, grant development consent to DA No. 630/2005 for alterations and additions to the existing residential flat building including second floor level addition with roof terrace, new lift and upgrade of the building on land at 56 New Beach Road, Darling Point, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on plans numbered DA2_01-01 – DA2_01-20, dated 10 October 2005, drawn by The Individual House Design Studio, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.



2. Relationship to Development Application No 61/2004

Development consent No 61/2004 shall be modified by the works, shown in colour, by this consent pursuant to Section 80A(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Further, the works under DA No 61/2004 and DA No 630/2005 are to be carried out concurrently. The provisions of Clause 97 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 are to be met prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued. This condition has been imposed to ensure the development, as constructed, will be consistent with this application.

3. Setback of Bedroom No 1 of Unit No 2

The southern elevation wall for bedroom 1 of Unit No 2 on the first floor level is to be setback a minimum of 2.3m from the southern boundary to be aligned with bedroom No 4 of Unit No 2 on the first floor level. Further, the roof is to be amended to reflect the modification. This condition has been imposed to protect the visual and acoustic privacy of No 55 New Beach Road. Details demonstrating compliance are to be submitted with the construction certificate application.

4. Roof terrace

The roof terrace is to incorporate the following modifications: the inner wall bounding the second floor level roof terrace is to be a minimum height of

1m (RL 16.05) when measured from floor level of the roof terrace. the planters are to contain a minimum soil depth of 600mm to provide sufficient soil

area to permit planting the roof terrace is to be reduced in size and not to extend beyond the southern elevation

wall of bedroom No 1. This area is to be replaced with planters that are integrated into the proposed planters on the second floor level

all planting within the planters to the south of the southern elevation wall of bedroom No 1 is to be maintained at a maximum height of 1m (RL 16.05)

the roof terrace is only to be used by the occupants of unit No 1 This condition has been imposed to maintain the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of solar access and visual and acoustic privacy. Details demonstrating compliance are to be submitted with the construction certificate application.

5. Colour of the second floor level

The external walls of the second floor level are to be painted a light colour (i.e Dulux New Beige or lighter). This condition has been imposed to ensure the colour of the second floor level will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjoining properties. Details demonstrating compliance are to be submitted with the construction certificate application.



6. Unit Numbers

The proposal must not exceed two (2) residential units. Unit No 2 will occupy the ground floor level and the eastern end of the first floor level, Unit No 1 will occupy the western end of the first floor level and the second floor level. This condition has been imposed to ensure the applicant cannot alter the proposal to contain three (3) units approved under DA No 61/2004. Details demonstrating compliance are to be submitted with the construction certificate application.

7. Stormwater disposal

Stormwater must be disposed of by an appropriate method specified in Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control Plan and Local Approvals Policy. Details of the proposed method/s of disposal must be submitted with the Construction Certificate Application.

8. Erosion and sediment control

Erosion and sediment controls, designed in accordance with the SSROC Soil and Water Management Brochure and the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s Managing Urban Stormwater: Construction Activities, must be implemented during demolition, excavation and construction of the development. All controls must be maintained at all times.

9. Stockpiles





11. Construction Management

A construction management plan must be submitted for the approval of Council’s Development Engineer before the commencement of demolition, excavation or construction works. The plan must:-

a. describe the anticipated impact of the construction works on: local traffic routes pedestrian circulation adjacent to the building site and on-street parking in the local area, and; b. describe the means proposed to: manage construction works to minimise such impacts, provide for the standing of vehicles during construction, provide for the movement of trucks to and from the site, and deliveries to the site, and;



c. show the location of: any site sheds and any anticipated use of cranes and concrete pumps, any areas of Council property on which it is proposed to install a Works Zone

(Construction Zone), structures to be erected such as hoardings, scaffolding or shoring, any excavation.

The Plan must make provision for all materials, plant, etc. to be stored within the development site at all times during construction. Structures or works on Council property such as hoardings, scaffolding, shoring or excavation need separate approval from Council. Standing of cranes and concrete pumps on Council property will need approval on each occasion. Note: A minimum of eight weeks will be required for assessment. Work must not commence until the Construction Management Plan is approved. Failure to comply with this condition may result in fines and proceedings to stop work.

12. Compliance with the construction management plan

All excavation, demolition and construction work and traffic movements must be carried out in accordance with the approved construction management plan. All controls in the Plan must be maintained at all times. A copy of the Plan must be kept on-site at all times and made available to the PCA or Council on request.

13. Works Zone

A Work Zone (Construction Zone) is required for this development. Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate an application for the required Works Zone must be submitted to Woollahra Council, for consideration by the Woollahra Local Traffic Committee. Prior to commencement of any demolition, land clearing, piling, piering, excavation, construction or like work or the issue of a Notice of Commencement of building works, any Works Zone approval by the Woollahra Local Traffic Committee shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the Committee’s terms and conditions. Note: The Woollahra Local Traffic Committee meets monthly. A minimum of eight weeks is required for assessment and determination of a Works Zone

application. Failure to comply with this condition may result in fines and proceedings pursuant to Part

6 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. 14. Payment of Long Service Levy, Security, Development Levy and Fees

The person(s) with the benefit of this consent must pay the following long service levy, security, development levy, and fees prior to the issue of any construction certificate, subdivision certificate or occupation certificate, as will apply. The certifying authority must not issue any Part 4A Certificate until provided with the original receipt(s) for the payment of all of the following levy, security, contributions, and fees. Specifically



a) prior to the issue of a construction certificate, where a construction certificate is required; or

b) prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate, where only a subdivision certificate is required; or

c) prior to the issue of an occupation certificate in any other instance.

Description Amount Indexed Council Fee Code

LONG SERVICE LEVY under Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986

Long Service Levy (Currently 0.35% of contract value – subject to change. Contact LSL Corporation to confirm current rate)

Contact LSL Corporation No

SECURITY under section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Property Damage Security Deposit - Making good any damage caused to any property of the Council as a consequence of the doing of anything to which the consent relates.

$4,000 + Index Amount Yes, yearly T600

DEVELOPMENT LEVY under Woollahra Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2005

This plan may be inspected at Woollahra Council or downloaded from our website www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au .

Development Levy $1,000 + Index Amount Yes, quarterly T94 INSPECTION FEES

under section 608 of the Local Government Act 1993 Security Administration Fee $158 No T16

TOTAL SECURITY, CONTRIBUTIONS, LEVIES AND

FEES $5,158

Plus any relevant indexed amounts and long service levy

How must the payments be made? Payments must be made by: 1. Cash deposit with Council, 2. Credit card payment with Council, or 3. Bank cheque made payable to Woollahra Municipal Council. The payment of a security may be made by a bank guarantee where: a) the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b) the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council

on completion of the development or no earlier than 12 months from the provision of the guarantee whichever occurs first;

c) the bank agrees to pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other person who provided the guarantee and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development in accordance with the development consent; and

d) the bank’s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with the guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required.

How will a security and a section 94A levy be indexed? To ensure that the value of a security and development levy are not eroded over time by increases in costs, the security and proposed cost of carrying out development (from which the development levy is calculated) will be indexed either annually or quarterly (see table above). Clause 3.13 of the Woollahra Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2005 sets out the formula and index to be used in adjusting the s.94A levy. Do you need HELP indexing the security, bond or levy?



Please contact our customer service officers. Failure to correctly calculate the adjusted security, bond or development levy will delay the issue of any Part 4A Certificate and could void any Part 4A Certificate (construction certificate, subdivision certificate, or occupation certificate). Deferred periodic payment of section 94A levy under the Woollahra Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2005

Where the applicant makes a written request supported by reasons for payment of the section 94A levy other than as required by clause 3.9, the Council may accept deferred or periodic payment. The decision to accept a deferred or periodic payment is at the sole discretion of the Council, which will consider:

a) the reasons given; b) whether any prejudice will be caused to the community deriving benefit from the public facilities; c) whether any prejudice will be caused to the efficacy and operation of this plan; and d) whether the provision of public facilities in accordance with the adopted works schedule will be adversely

affected. Council may, as a condition of accepting deferred or periodic payment, require the provision of a bank guarantee where:

a) the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b) the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council


c) the bank agrees to pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other person who provided the guarantee and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development in accordance with the development consent; and

d) the bank’s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with the guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required.

Any deferred or outstanding component of the section 94A levy will be adjusted in accordance with clause 3.13 of the plan. The applicant will be required to pay any charges associated with establishing or operating the bank guarantee. Council will not cancel the bank guarantee until the outstanding contribution as indexed and any accrued charges are paid.

15. Footpath levels




17. Road Opening Permit

Prior to the commencement of any excavation in Council controlled roadways or footpath areas, the developer must obtain a road opening permit from Council’s Customer Services Counter. Restoration of roads, footpaths, retaining walls, kerbs and gutters must be carried out in accordance with the relevant clauses of the current edition of AUS-SPEC.









21. Dilapidation survey

A dilapidation survey of the following property and infrastructure must be conducted prior to any site work. The extent of the survey must cover the likely “zone of influence” that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. A practicing structural engineer must prepare a full dilapidation report on the structural condition of all existing structures at the following locations:

21 Yarranabee Road 55 New Beach Road

The Report must be completed and submitted to Council prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or construction works. A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed prior to the commencement of works, must be carried out at the completion of the works and be submitted to Council.



22. Compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical and hydrogeological reports

The development works are to be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical and Hydrogeological report/s prepared by Jeffery and Katauskas Pry Ltd Ref: 18648Wrpt dated 28 June 2004

23. Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Monitoring Program

Excavation works associated with the proposed development must be overseen and monitored by a qualified and practising geotechnical engineer. A Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Monitoring Program must be produced to ensure that all geotechnical matters are regularly assessed during the construction to prevent adverse effects resulting from the excavation. The Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Monitoring Program for the construction works must be in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical and Hydrogeological Report prepared by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd Ref: 18648Wrpt dated 28 June 2004 Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the applicant must submit to the Accredited Certifier details of the proposed Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Monitoring Program. A suitably qualified and practising geotechnical engineer must prepare the Program which must consist of the following; Recommendations as contained within the Geotechnical and Hydrogeological Report

prepared by Geotechnical Report by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd Ref: 18648Wrpt dated 28 June 2004

Recommended hold points to allow for inspection by a geotechnical engineer during the following construction procedures;

Excavation of the site (face of excavation, base, etc) Installation and construction of temporary and permanent shoring/ retaining walls. Foundation bearing conditions and footing construction. Installation of sub-soil drainage.

Location, type and regularity of further geotechnical/hydrogeological investigations and testing.

24. Compliance with the Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Monitoring Program

Excavation and construction works must be undertaken in accordance with the “Geotechnical and Hydrogeological Monitoring Program” submitted as required by condition of consent. A qualified and registered geotechnical engineer shall provide certification to the Accredited Certifier that all earth works have been carried out; In accordance with the Hydrogeological and Geotechnical Monitoring Program. In accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Codes of Practise. In a manner that does not compromise the structural integrity of all adjacent structures,

property and infrastructure.



The certification and a complete record of inspections, testing and monitoring (with certifications) must be submitted in report form to the Accredited Certifier for approval, prior to the issue of a Final Building Certificate.

25. Vibration Monitoring Program

Vibration resulting from construction activities can adversely affect surrounding property and infrastructure. To ensure that vibration created by the method of construction does not adversely impact on the existing building, surrounding property and infrastructure, a Vibration Monitoring Program must be implemented. Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the applicant must submit to the Accredited Certifier details of the proposed Vibration Monitoring Program. A qualified and practising geotechnical and/or hydrogeological engineer must prepare the Vibration Monitoring Program and undertake all associated investigations. Details to be included in Vibration Monitoring Program to include:

a) pre-set acceptable limits for the variation of:

settlement deflection or movement of retaining mechanisms such as shoring and bracing and vibration in accordance with AS 2187.2 1993 Appendix J, including acceptable

velocity of vibration.

b) the location and type of monitoring systems to be used c) the period of monitoring in terms of construction stages d) recommended hold points to allow for inspection and certification by a geotechnical

engineer and e) a contingency plan should the pre-set acceptable limits be exceeded.

26. Compliance with the Vibration Monitoring Program

The Vibration Monitoring Program submitted as required by condition of consent must be implemented during excavation works on the site. All controls within the Program must be maintained at all times. A copy of the Program must be kept on site at all times and made available to the accredited certifier and Council officers on request. A record of inspections, monitoring and activities associated with the Program must be submitted to the accredited certifier in report format prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate. A qualified and practising geotechnical and/or hydrogeological engineer must prepare certification that all controls and activities within the Program have been maintained.

27. Fire safety

A schedule of all existing and proposed safety measures within the building must be submitted to Council with or before the application for a Construction Certificate.



28. Health Condition

The use of plant (lift motor) must not be audible within any residential area of the building (regardless of whether any door or window to that room is open).

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.




Certificate by:


(b) a principal certifying authority (PCA) has been appointed and the Council has been notified in writing of the appointment, and

(c) at least two days notice, in writing, has been given to Council of the intention to

commence work.



















37. Wet areas

All floors of wet areas are to be constructed and finished so as to be impervious to water and graded to a sufficient number of floor drains.





Note: The Levy can be paid directly to the Long Services Payments Corporation or to Council.

Note: Further information can be obtained from the Long Service Payments Corporation’s website http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/ or by telephoning the Long Service Payments Corporation on 13 14 41.



40. Facilities for waste storage and collection

Details of facilities for waste storage and collection must be submitted to the accredited certifier prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. Details must meet the following requirements. a) Multiple occupancies:

For developments containing four dwellings or less a communal bin bay external to the building is permitted subject to it being located within the property boundary with minimal impact on adjoining properties. For developments containing more than four units a Waste Storage Room is required. The waste storage room/bin bay must be sufficiently sized so as to accommodate;

i) 100 litres of putrescible waste per residential dwelling stored in 240 and/or 120

litre mobile garbage bins. Developments containing more than 4 dwellings must not use more than one 120 litre mobile garbage bin.

ii) 50 litres of recyclables per residential dwelling stored in colour coded, shared use, mobile garbage bins and/or 50 litre crates

iii) One 240 litre mobile garbage bin for garden organics, per 500 square metres of landscaped area.

iv) For residential developments with four storeys and greater, a waste storage cupboard must be provided on each floor. In each cupboard, storage must be provided for putrescible waste in mobile garbage bins and recyclables in colour coded crates.

v) For residential developments with three storeys or less, residents may use the central waste storage area.

vi) Residents must not be required to wheel bins a distance greater than 75m from the waste storage area to the collection point (usually the kerb) for collection. For development applications assessed using SEPP 5 (State Environmental Planning Policy 5: Housing for Older People or People with a Disability) the maximum distance is 50m.



b) Inside the Waste Storage Area

The interior of the Waste Storage Area must meet the following requirements i) Bins to be stored with lids down to prevent vermin from entering the waste

containers. ii) The area must be constructed with a smooth impervious floor graded to a floor

waste and provided with a tap and hose to facilitate regular cleaning of the bins. A waste storage area that is located internal to the building must be fitted with both a hot and cold water supply and hose cocks. Waste water must be discharged to the sewer in accordance with the requirements of Sydney Water.

iii) Walls and ceilings of the waste storage area must be constructed of an impervious material with a smooth finish. The junction between the walls and the floor must be coved with a minimum radius of 25mm to prevent the accumulation of waste matter.

iv) The garbage storage area must be well lit to enable use at night. A timer switch must be fitted to the light fitting to ensure the light is turned off after use.

v) Odour problems to be minimised by good ventilation. The air flow must not be close to units.

vi) Air-conditioned waste storage areas to be provided with a separate air-conditioning system to units.

vii) For developments of four storeys and above, waste storage areas, garbage and recycling rooms must be fitted with fire sprinklers and be rated to fire safety standards in accordance with the Building Code of Australia.

viii) Both putrescible and recycling bins/crates must be stored together. Recycling bins must never stand alone. They must always be located beside putrescible waste bins. Putrescible bins must be located closest to the entrance to the waste storage room.

ix) Signage on the correct use of the waste management system and what materials may be recycled must be posted in the communal waste storage cupboard/ room or bin bay.
















46. Protection of public places

(a) If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building:

(i) is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic on a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or

(ii) building involves the enclosure of a public place;

a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.

(b) If necessary, an awning must be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the public place.

(c) The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous

to persons in the public place.

(d) Any such hoarding, fence or awning must be removed when the work has been completed.

Note: Prior to the erection of any hoarding, fence or the like on any footpath or other property owned or controlled by Council, permission must be sought and obtained from Council and the prescribed rental fee paid.









Building Act 1989.

50. Mechanical ventilation/services

Prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate

Detailed mechanical ventilation system plans and specification prepared by a professional engineer, as defined by the Building Code of Australia, must be submitted to Council or an Accredited Certifier with the application for a Construction Certificate certifying compliance with AS/NZS 1668 The Use of Mechanical Ventilation and Air Conditioning in Buildings, Part 1-1998: Fire and smoke control in multi-compartment buildings and Part 2-1991: Mechanical ventilation for acceptable indoor-air quality.

Installation and Commissioning

The mechanical ventilation system must be installed and commissioned in accordance with AS/NZS 1668 The Use of Mechanical Ventilation and Air Conditioning in Buildings, Part 1-1998: Fire and smoke control in multi-compartment buildings and Part 2-1991: Mechanical ventilation for acceptable indoor-air quality under the supervision of a professional engineer.

Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate

Detailed "works as executed" mechanical ventilation system plans and specification prepared by a professional engineer, as defined by the Building Code of Australia, must be submitted to Council or an Accredited Certifier together with certification from the supervising professional engineer that the system as commissioned complies with AS/NZS 1668 The Use of Mechanical Ventilation and Air Conditioning in Buildings, Part 1-1998: Fire and smoke control in multi-compartment buildings and Part 2-1991: Mechanical ventilation for acceptable indoor-air quality.

Note: Part 1 of AS/NZS 1668 only applies to multiple compartment buildings.

51. Noise from mechanical ventilation This condition has been applied to maintain a reasonable level of amenity to the area. Prior to the issue of any construction certificate, the developer must submit to the Council or accredited certifier a report from a qualified practicing acoustic engineer (who is a member of either the Australian Acoustical Society or the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants). The report must certify that the method of treating the mechanical ventilation system will ensure that the noise level, as measured at the boundaries of the subject property, will not exceed the ambient noise level. After completion of the works and prior to the issue of an occupation certificate or occupation, the developer must submit to the principal certifying authority, a report from a qualified practicing acoustic engineer (who is a member of either the Australian Acoustical Society or the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants) certifying that the works have been undertaken to meet the above design criteria.



Mr D Waghorn Mr G Fotis SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ADVISINGS 1. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr D Waghorn. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

2. Works and requirements of other authorities

Sydney Water may require the construction of additional works and/or the payment of additional fees. Other Sydney Water approvals may also be necessary prior to the commencement of construction work. You should therefore confer with Sydney Water concerning all plumbing works, including connections to mains, installation or alteration of systems, and construction over or near existing water and sewerage services.

Contact Sydney Water, Rockdale (Urban Development Section) regarding the water and sewerage services to this development.





5. Compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act

This decision does not ensure compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act. You should therefore investigate your liability under that Act. Australian Standard 1428 - Design for Access and Mobility, Parts 2, 3 and 4 may assist in determining compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act.











10. Air Conditioning Systems Residential Premises

Under Clause 52 of the Noise Control Regulation 2000 a person must not cause or permit an air conditioner to be used on residential premises in such a manner that it emits noise that can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises (regardless of whether any door or window to that room is open): before 8am or after 10pm on any Saturday, Sunday or Public Holiday, or before 7am or after 10pm on any other day.

11. Other approvals

This development consent does not remove the need to obtain any other statutory consent or approval necessary under any other Act, including: an application for an Occupation Certificate under Section 109(C)(2) of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. an Application for Strata Title Subdivision under the Strata Schemes (Freehold

Development) Act 1973, if strata title subdivision of the development is proposed.



12. Hazardous Material Management (to be included in all Development Consents)

"Builders are advised to obtain a copy of the EPA publication Solutions to Pollution for Builders which provides environmental information including hazardous material management. The EPA can be contacted by phone on 131 555 or at www.epa.nsw.gov.au "

ANNEXURES 1. Plans and elevation 2. Photomontage




FILE No. DA 634/2005/1

ADDRESS: 7 Pickering Lane WOOLLAHRA 2025

PROPOSAL:

Demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a new two storey dwelling house

TYPE OF CONSENT:

Local Development

APPLICANT:

Archengine Pty Ltd

OWNER:

Mr S R & Mrs K P Wales

DATE LODGED:

19/10/2005

AUTHOR: Mr R Hedstrom LOCALITY PLAN


North

Locality Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report This report assesses the impact of a new two storey dwelling to replace the existing single storey dwelling at 7 Pickering Lane, Woollahra. The application is referred to the Application Assessment Panel because it has received several objections some of which are disagreed with and some are unable to be fully addressed by conditions of consent, as discussed in the report. Issues

Acoustic and visual privacy Cost of works The stated cost of the proposed work of $379,000.00 has been checked using the standard criteria specified in the Cordell Building Guide and is considered to be accurate. Recommendation The proposed development is recommended for conditional approval because it:

1. is a permissible use consistent with the aims and objectives of the WLEP 1995 and the Residential 2(a) Zone,

2. satisfies the objectives and controls of the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area DCP 2003,

3. would create no substantial impacts within the locality, 4. is an appropriate form of development for the subject site, and 5. is not considered to be contrary to the public interest.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposal is for a single dwelling containing two storeys of contemporary design to replace the existing single storey dwelling. The new dwelling accommodates a single garage, living and dining spaces on the ground floor with three bedrooms and two bathrooms at the upper level. The new dwelling has a similar footprint to the existing dwelling with the western side wall built on the western boundary. Amended drawings were submitted on 23 January 2006 incorporating the following modifications:

Deletion of rear balcony at the first floor level Lowering overall building height by 490mm including wall heights and roof pitch Internal length of garage increased to 5.5m to comply with the Australian Standard.

Further amended drawings were submitted on 2 and 4 May 2006 to satisfy the requirements of an amended Basix certificate which was submitted on 2 May 2006.



3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE WITHIN WOOLLAHRA HCA Description Heritage Item or Contributory Item Group Element Precinct Contemporary infill No No West Woollahra

4. PROPERTY HISTORY No history relevant to the subject DA.

5. REFERRALS 5.1 Comments from external approval bodies No comments required. 5.2 Heritage Council’s Heritage Officer, Louise Thom, has assessed the subject proposal twice. The second assessment was in response to a submission by a heritage consultant acting for an objector. The Heritage Officer’s first referral response states that Pickering Lane is dominated by double storey structures and garages and that the proposed house will not have an adverse impact upon the heritage significance of the heritage listed properties facing Queen Street Nos.170, 172A and 178 to 198 Queen Street are all listed as heritage items and are on the opposite side of Pickering Lane to the subject property (180 Queen Street is directly opposite). The response concludes that the proposed house has a well articulated façade and will blend in well with the existing streetscape. Approval was recommended subject to a standard condition requiring photographic archival recording. The Heritage Officer’s second referral response deals with specific points raised by an objector’s heritage consultant and concludes that the proposal is acceptable in terms of its impact upon the streetscape and the heritage significance of the heritage listed properties facing Queen Street. Again the proposal was recommended for approval subject to a special condition that the front wall should be set back a minimum of 900mm from Pickering Lane. This condition is agreed with and would also be required for pedestrian safety at the Lane frontage (See Condition No.3). 5.3 Stormwater Drainage Council’s Team Leader, Development Engineer, Nick Tomkins has assessed the stormwater disposal concept plan as being acceptable subject to submission of a stormwater management plan with the application for a Construction Certificate (See Condition Nos.25 & 26). 5.4 Landscaping/Trees Management No formal referral was made when the application was submitted, however it is considered that a condition should be imposed requiring a landscape plan to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application to ensure that an existing mature tree in the rear of the property is retained and privacy screening along the rear boundary is provided (See Condition No.17).



5.5 Parking and Traffic Tech Services assessed the proposal as acceptable subject to the internal length of the garage being increased to 5.4m and the front fence being splayed at the driveway access to ensure that there is no conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. The garage has been increased in length as shown on the amended drawings. A condition is imposed requiring that the front fence be set back by 900mm to align with the front façade of the garage to ensure an adequate sight distance (See Condition No.3). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

6. STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION 6.1 SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 ("BASIX") applies to the proposed development. The development application was accompanied by BASIX Certificate No. 67584S committing to environmental sustainability measures. These requirements have been imposed by standard condition prescribed by clause 97A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000. They have also been shown on the DA drawings as required by the BASIX Certificate. It is noted that a solar (gas boosted) hot water service has been shown on the roof plan. Advice from the Applicant has been received that the hot water service is to be a split system with the solar collector panels only at roof level thus the resulting visual impact would be negligible. State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land The subject property is not shown on the Council map for potential contaminated sites. From information received by the applicant, it appears that the residential use of the property dates back to 1919 which would indicate that the site is unlikely to be contaminated. It is considered that the land is not required to be further assessed under Clause 7(1)(b) and (c) of SEPP 55. 6.2 REPs None relevant. 6.3 Other legislation None relevant.



7. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 7.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5)) The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2(a) zone. 7.2 Statutory compliance table Site Area (153.4m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies

Overall Height (metres) 4.5 6.9 9.5 YES

7.3 Height The height of the proposed dwelling complies with the maximum allowable. 7.4 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 18 Excavation: The proposed excavation is acceptable in terms of Clause 18. Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 25(1) and (2). Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils: The proposed works do not require the need for an assessment of acid sulfate soils under clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995. Clauses 26-33 Heritage and conservation area provisions: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clauses 26-33.

8. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 applies. Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Act requires that in determining a development application, a consent authority is to take into consideration any draft environmental planning instrument "EPI" that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority. Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 ("the proposed SEPP") was publicly exhibited from 10 May to 18 June 2004. In considering how much weight should be placed upon an exhibited draft environmental planning instrument under section 79C of the Act one must assess how likely it is that the draft EPI will commence, in what form it is likely to commence and consider what effect the instrument would have if applied. The proposed SEPP received significant criticism from the development industry in submissions. Officers of DIPNR have advised that it will not be made in the form it was exhibited and that it will now be included as part of the new Integrated LEP Template. This template will be placed on public exhibition in late April/May 2005. Therefore, it is not known in what form the draft SEPP will be made.



Clause 14 of the draft SEPP provides Saving and Transitional provisions. These provisions provide that any application submitted prior to the commencement of the proposed SEPP and within 28 days after the commencement of the proposed SEPP is to be determined in accordance with the former SEPP No.1 as if the former SEPP No.1 had not been repealed by the proposed SEPP. It is likely that the draft SEPP, if made, will contain transitional provisions. The draft SEPP would, if it commenced in its exhibited form, require a higher threshold test in order for an objection against a development standard to be sustained. However, the draft policy should not be given determining weight in the assessment of development applications for the following reasons: 1. The draft SEPP will not be made in the form it was exhibited 2. It is not known whether the threshold tests contained in the exhibited SEPP will be retained 3. It is likely that, if made, the draft SEPP will contain savings and transitional provisions. This means that objections submitted under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 must be assessed under the current policy.

9. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 9.1 Compliance table - Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area DCP 2003 Site Area (153.4m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies

Floor Space Ratio (m²) 0.6:1 (92.8)

0.99:1 (152.15)

1.01:1 (154.934) YES

Deep Soil Landscaped Area (m²) 2.2% (3.4m²)

12% (18.48m²)

8% (12.27m²) YES

Minimum Floor to Ceiling Height – Habitable Rooms (metres)

Not known 2.7 2.7 YES

Solar Access to Ground Level Open Space of Adjacent Properties -

negligible change to solar

access

50% or 35m² minimum dimension

2.5m 2 hours

YES

Solar Access to North-Facing Living Areas of Development (Hours in mid winter)

In excess of 3 3 3 YES

Solar Access to North-Facing Living Areas of Adjacent Properties (Hours in mid winter)

- Negligible

change to solar access

3 YES

Private Open Space Per Dwelling -

45m² principal area

20m² dimension 3.9m

Area – 24.5m² (minimum 12m²) Dimension – 3m

YES

Front Fence Height (metres) 3 2.5 1.5 NO

Side and Rear Fence Height (metres) 2.1/2.89 2.2/2.5/2.89 1.8 NO

Car Parking Spaces Nil 1 Max 2 YES

Location of Car Parking Structures - behind 900mm building line

Behind Front Building Line YES



9.2 Precinct Controls The proposal conserves the significant characteristics of the West Woollahra Precinct and complies with the specific controls for the Precinct. 9.3 Significant items and group significant buildings The existing house on the subject property is not listed as a contributory item in the Woollahra heritage conservation area DCP 2003. Nos. 1, 3 & 5 Pickering Lane are Victorian houses, listed as contributory items in the DCP and are located to the east of the subject property at a considerable distance. No. 15 Forth Street adjoins the subject property to the rear and is listed as a contributory item as are Nos. 17 and 21 Forth Street 9.4 Building Type Controls The subject property is identified as a single storey house. The existing house has its western wall on the property boundary. The existing house is proposed to be demolished and replaced with a two storey house of contemporary design. With non-contributory buildings the DCP allows a greater scope for design flexibility including demolition and infill development with a contemporary design approach which respects the context. It is considered that the subject proposal as modified satisfactorily respects the context. 9.5 General controls for development Buildings and elements adjoining heritage items The subject property is in the vicinity of the following heritage items:

170 & 172A Queen Street and 178 to 198 Queen Street These properties are all listed as heritage items by WLEP 1995 and are located on the opposite side of Pickering Lane to the subject property. Nos.178, 180 and182 are directly opposite and each contain a dwelling facing Queen Street. The house on each of these properties is located at the opposite end of a long block and addresses Queen Street. Council’s Heritage Officer, Louise Thom has assessed the proposed house at 7 Pickering Lane as not having an adverse impact on the heritage significance of the heritage listed properties facing Queen Street. This complies with the objective and control of Part 3.4.1 regarding adjoining heritage items. Building location The proposed infill development is a contemporary design which is encouraged by the DCP provided the new structure complements and enhances the existing character of the area.



Subject to the new dwelling being set back 900mm from the front boundary (including the front entry wall) the proposal as modified would be in accordance with the objectives and controls of Part 3.4.3.of the DCP. Building height, form, bulk, scale and character The proposal satisfies the controls contained in Part 3.4.4. Materials, finishes and colours The materials and finishes proposed are appropriate for a new development and would have an acceptable relationship to the existing urban fabric. The objective and controls of Part 3.4.5 are complied with. Open space and landscaping Deep soil area is proposed to be substantially increased compared to the existing. The proposal complies with the deep soil landscaped area requirement of the DCP. Concern is raised at the location of the proposed spa pool on the common boundary of two adjoining properties. This matter is further discussed later in this report. Fences, gates and retaining walls

Front fence The proposed front fence height of 2.5m exceeds the maximum allowable of 1.5m. A condition is recommended to be imposed requiring lowering of the front fence to comply with the maximum allowable height and also that the front fence be set back from the front boundary by 900mm to ensure compliance with the existing setbacks in the Lane and also to address sight lines for pedestrian safety (see Condition No.3). Side and rear boundary fences Most of the existing side and rear boundary fences are a maximum of 2.8m high with the top portion consisting of a lattice screen. These fences are proposed to remain and would not comply with the maximum height control of 1.8m. In this case it is considered that the non-compliance should be allowed to remain so that the existing fences can be retained to address privacy issues as discussed later in this report. A new short length (2.4 metres) of lapped and capped timber paling fence is proposed to the western boundary from the rear of the new dwelling to the rear boundary. This portion of fence is proposed to be 2.2 metres high which exceeds the maximum of 1.8 metres but is reasonable in this case as it would be more in keeping with the height of the existing fences.

Roofs and skylights The roof form as originally proposed has been lowered (by 490mm) and modified by the amended drawings. It is considered that the roof form would reasonably fit in with the character and context of the streetscape.



Two small skylights are proposed over the first floor bathrooms. A solar hot water collector panel is also proposed on the roof. These would have a negligible impact when viewed from adjoining properties or the public domain. Parking and garages The existing dwelling contains no off-street car parking. The proposed dwelling incorporates a single garage set back 900mm from the front boundary and within the principal building form. Although the proposed garage does not comply with control C4 of Part 3.4.9 Parking and garages: No parking is permitted under the principal form of a dwelling, in this case it would comply with the objectives in that the proposed garage door is relatively narrow and would not be an overly-dominant element in the building façade or the character of the Lane. Pickering Lane is characterised by a predominance of double storeyed structures and garages. The new garage facing the Lane is acceptable and would be in context as the major part of the Lane frontage comprises garages facing the Lane. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed garage is acceptable in terms of the objectives and controls of Part 3.4.9.of the DCP. Acoustic and visual privacy

Acoustic privacy Concern is raised at the proposal to locate a spa pool in the north-eastern corner of the property. It is considered that the proposed spa pool would not comply with the Objective O5 of Part 3.4.6 as it would have an adverse acoustic impact on the amenity of neighbours. It is recommended that the spa pool be deleted from the proposal to protect the acoustic privacy of the adjoining properties to the rear and the eastern side. This matter is further considered under Part 13 of this report. Visual privacy North elevation: The proposed window to the northern elevation (master bedroom) at the first floor level would result in overlooking of the private open space and rear living room of the adjoining property to the rear, 15 Forth Street, where the rear dogleg boundary is closer to the rear of the proposal. After assessment of sight lines, it is recommended that the western half of the proposed bedroom window which is opposite the closer part of the boundary, be fixed and glazed with translucent glass (see Condition No.6) to address this concern. It is also recommended that a 300mm minimum width planting strip be provided against the dogleg part of the northern boundary to accommodate screen planting to address the privacy concerns of the adjoining owner (see Condition Nos.2 and 17).



East elevation: The proposed windows to the eastern elevation at the first floor level would result in overlooking of the adjoining properties to the east, 9A Pickering Lane and 17 Forth Street. To address this issue it is recommended that the window to the master bedroom on the eastern façade be glazed with translucent glass or have a sill height of 1.7m and the glazing enclosing the void at first floor level be translucent glass (see Condition No.6). Subject to the above modifications and conditions regarding boundary fences, the proposal would comply with Part 3.4.12 Acoustic and visual privacy of the DCP.

Stormwater management The proposal is acceptable subject to conditions (See Condition Nos.25 and 26). Energy efficiency BASIX Certificate submitted. 9.6 Other DCPs, codes and policies None relevant.

10. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Australian Standard AS2601: The demolition of structures, applies. The proposal complies by condition (See Condition No.48).

11. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL The likely impacts of the proposal are assessed elsewhere in this report.

12. THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE Acid Sulphate Soil Area

The site is not shown as potentially acid sulphate soils by the Department of Planning Acid Sulphate Soils Risk map. The proposed works do not require the need for an assessment of Acid Sulphate Soils under Clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995.

13. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP on 2 November 2005 and in response to amended drawings, on 2 February 2006. Submissions were received from: Peter Muller 182 Queen Street Tony Green OBO Freda Korman 11 Pickering Lane



Sylvain Remy 17 Forth Street Natalie Trimarchi 11 Forth Street Tom Chin & Ruth Daniell OBO T Chin 180 Queen Street Jodie Baker & Dennis & Company OBO J Baker 15 Forth Street F & H Torok 9 Forth Street A A Sheina 19 Forth Street The objectors raised the following issues:

Acoustic and visual privacy Loss of view Overshadowing Intrusive bulk and form Location of Spa pool and lack of soft landscaped area Adverse impact on the heritage significance of No.180 Queen Street Character unsympathetic to streetscape Vehicle manoeuvring area in Lane Notification omission

The objections are responded to as follows:

Acoustic and visual privacy Acoustic privacy: The concerns regarding acoustic privacy are related to the spa pool and the use of the rear of the property as an outdoor dining area. As discussed previously, it is considered that the spa pool would cause an adverse impact on the acoustic amenity of the adjoining properties to the rear and to the east (Nos. 15 and 17 Forth Street) because of its close proximity. It is proposed to be butted against the rear and eastern side boundaries. It is recommended that the spa pool be deleted (See Condition No.4). The use of the rear of the property as an outdoor dining area is considered to be reasonable with normal use and should not cause an unacceptable acoustic impact to the adjoining properties.

Visual privacy: Concerns have been raised about overlooking from windows at the new first floor level:



North elevation: The proposed window at first floor level on the north elevation to the master bedroom would increase overlooking of the adjoining property to the rear, 15 Forth Street. The separation distance between the subject proposal (at first floor level) and the dwelling on the property immediately to the rear (15 Forth Street) is 10.6m which complies with control C11 of Part 3.4.12 of the DCP. Notwithstanding this adequate separation distance it is recommended that the existing lattice screen above the rear boundary wall be extended for the full length of the dogleg rear boundary (See Condition No. 5) and screen planting be provided (see Condition Nos. 2 and 17). To address concerns regarding overlooking of the rear yard of 15 Forth Street, it is recommended that the western half of the window be fixed and glazed with translucent glass (see Condition No.6) as previously discussed in this report.

East elevation: To address concerns regarding overlooking of the properties adjoining to the east especially 9A Pickering Lane and 17 Forth Street, it is recommended that the proposed window to the master bedroom has a sill height of 1.7m or be glazed with translucent glass and that the glazing enclosing the void at first floor level be translucent glass (See Condition No. 6). South elevation: It is considered that the windows to bedrooms 1 & 2 on the south elevation at the new first floor level are acceptable due to existing partial foliage screening and adequate separation distances of approximately 30 metres (rear yards of 25 metres depth and 5 metres width of Pickering Lane) between the proposed dwelling and the rear of properties on the opposite side of Pickering Lane with frontages to Queen Street.

Loss of view

The proposal does not obstruct district or water views. The outlook impact objected to is related to mainly close and middle distant surrounding built fabric and tree foliage. The new two storeyed structure would be visible within the outlook from the rear of properties 178, 180 and 182 Queen Street and other properties in close proximity fronting Pickering Lane and Forth Street. Although the proposed dwelling would be visible from adjoining and surrounding properties it is considered that the loss of outlook would be minor and acceptable due to existing partial foliage screening and that the proposal is for a modest, two storeyed, mostly compliant structure which is a reasonable expectation for redevelopment of the subject property in its local context.

Overshadowing The extent of increased overshadowing impact on adjoining properties (as indicated by the shadow diagrams) would be negligible.

Intrusive bulk and form Subject to the modifications recommended, the bulk and form of the amended proposal are considered to be acceptable in terms of visual impact when viewed from the Lane and adjoining and nearby properties.

Location of Spa pool and lack of soft landscaped area The Spa pool is recommended to be deleted. The area of deep soil area proposed is compliant.



Adverse impact on the heritage significance of No.180 Queen Street According to Councils Heritage Officer the impact is acceptable.

Character unsympathetic to streetscape The proposal as recommended to be modified satisfactorily respects the existing character of the streetscape of Pickering Lane.

Vehicle manoeuvring area in Lane Subject to the recommended modifications the proposal satisfies the concerns in this regard of Councils Team Leader Development Engineer.

Notification omission The original objection on behalf of the owner of No.15 Forth Street stated that this property was not notified of the proposal. Councils file indicates that No.15 Forth Street was notified correctly in accordance with the Advertising and Notifications DCP.

The replacement application (related to amended plans as discussed previously in this report)(as defined by Clause 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000) was renotified under clause 5.1 of the DCP. 14.CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under s79C and would not be contrary to the public interest.

15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development Application No. 634/2005 for demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a new two storey dwelling house on land at 7 Pickering Lane Woollahra, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved Plans

The development must be carried out in accordance with plans numbered WRW 01/F dated 2 May 2006. 02/D and 03/D dated 10 January 2006, 04/D dated 24 April 2006, 05/C, 06/C, 07/C and 11/B, dated 10 January 2006 and 15/A dated 2 May 2006, drawn by Archengine, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.

2. Screen planting strip against the northern boundary

Provide a minimum 300mm wide planting strip across the full length of the rear dogleg boundary. This planting strip shall accommodate evergreen screen planting with a height at maturity equivalent to the height of the existing lattice screen on top of the masonry boundary wall. This condition is imposed to protect the privacy of the adjoining property to the rear, 15 Forth Street. Details shall be submitted on the landscape plan with the application for a Construction Certificate.



3. Front boundary wall

The proposed front boundary wall shall be setback a minimum of 900mm from the front boundary and its height shall be reduced to a maximum of 1.5m. This condition is imposed to provide adequate pedestrian safety and to reduce the visual impact on the lane. Details shall be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate.

4. Deletion of spa pool

The proposed spa pool shall be deleted and replaced with deep soil landscaped area. This condition is imposed to protect the acoustic amenity of the adjoining properties. Details shall be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate.

5. Existing lattice screen

The existing lattice screen above the rear and side boundary wall shall be extended at the same height for the full length of the dogleg rear boundary to match the existing lattice screen. This condition is imposed to protect the privacy of the adjoining property to the rear. Details shall be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate.

6. Glazing to at first floor level

North elevation: The western half of the length of the window to the north elevation, first floor level to the master bedroom shall be fixed and glazed with translucent glass. East elevation: The glazing to the east elevation, first floor level to the master bedroom shall have a sill height of 1.7m or be translucent glass. The glazing enclosing the void at first floor level shall be translucent glass. This condition is imposed to protect the privacy of the properties adjoining to the north and east. Details shall be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate.




Certificate by:







8. Drawings to show levels and heights

The reduced levels of the ground floor, first floor and the overall height of the roof in relation to Australian Height Datum must be shown on the drawings submitted with the Construction Certificate Application to ensure that building construction complies with the development consent.










13. Levels

For the purpose of indicating relative levels in terms of Australian Height Datum and boundary clearances, and to ensure that building construction complies with the development consent, survey certificates must be provided to the PCA in respect of the building/s layout and ground floor level/s prior to pouring of concrete or laying of timber floor boards.







16. BASIX Commitments

The development must be implemented and all BASIX commitments thereafter maintained in accordance with BASIX Certificate No. 67584S other than superseded by any further amended consent and BASIX certificate. Note: Clause 145(1)(a1) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 provides: "A certifying authority must not issue a construction certificate for building work unless it is satisfied of the following matters: (a1) that the plans and specifications for the building include such matters as each relevant BASIX certificate requires," Note: Clause 154B(2) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 provides: "A certifying authority must not issue a final occupation certificate for a BASIX affected building to which this clause applies unless it is satisfied that each of the commitments whose fulfilment it is required to monitor has been fulfilled." Note: For further information please see http://www.basix.nsw.gov.au



17. Landscaping Plan - Class 1 Buildings

A landscape plan, prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect or Landscape Consultant, to a scale of 1:100 or 1:200, conforming to Council's Landscaping Code and all other relevant conditions of this Consent, must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier for approval with or before the application for a Construction Certificate. If submitted to Council, four weeks should be allowed for this assessment. The Plan must include the location of all proposed and existing planting delineating existing trees to be retained, removed or transplanted. The Plan must include a detailed planting schedule, which includes species listed by botanical and common names, quantities of each species, pot sizes, and the estimated size of the plant at maturity. The landscape plan shall include for retention of the existing paperbark tree within the rear of the property close to the eastern boundary and a 300mm wide planting strip across the full length of the rear dogleg boundary. This planting strip shall accommodate evergreen screen planting with a height at maturity equivalent to the height of the existing lattice screen on top of the masonry boundary wall.



Trees on Private Property

Council Reference No: Species Location Dimension (Metres)

1 Paperbark Close to the eastern boundary at the rear of the proposed dwelling

Not known


19. Hand excavation within tree root zones

To prevent damage to roots and compaction within the root zone, excavation undertaken within the specified radius from the trunks of the following trees must be hand dug. Small hand tools only are to be utilised, mattocks and similar digging tools are not be used within these areas. No root with a diameter equal to or in excess of 30mm is to be cut unless approved, in writing, by a qualified Arborist (minimum qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent). All root pruning must be undertaken in accordance with the Australian Standard 4373 Pruning of amenity trees and carried out by a qualified Arborist (minimum qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent) Beyond this radius, mechanical excavation is permitted, when root pruning by hand along the perimeter line of such works is completed.



Council Reference No:

Species Location Radius from Trunk (Metres)

1 Paperbark Near the eastern boundary at the rear of the proposed dwelling

3 metres

20. Footings in the vicinity of trees

Footings for any structure constructed within the specified radius from the trunks of the following trees, is to be constructed using an isolated pier and beam construction method. Excavations for installation of piers is to be located so that no tree root with a diameter equal to or in excess of 30mm is to be severed. The smallest possible area is to be excavated which allows construction of the pier. The beam is to be placed a minimum of 300mm above ground level and is to be designed to bridge all tree roots with a diameter equal to or in excess of 30mm.



1 Paperbark Near the eastern boundary at the rear of the proposed dwelling

3 metres

21. Preservation of protected trees

Trees required to be protected by Conditions of this Consent must be certified by a suitably qualified arborist as being in a satisfactory condition at completion of the works.

22. Amenity Landscaping The owner or principal contractor must install all approved amenity landscaping (screen planting, soil stabilisation planting, etc.) prior to any occupation or use of the site.

23. Landscaping All landscape work including all planting must be completed by the principal contractor or owner in compliance with the approved landscape plan, arborist report, transplant method statement and tree management plan. The principal contractor or owner must provide to PCA a works-as-executed landscape plan and certification from a qualified landscape architect/designer, horticulturist and/or arborist as applicable that the works as completed comply with this consent.



25. Stormwater Management Plan

A Stormwater Management Plan for the site must be submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate. This Condition is imposed to ensure site stormwater is disposed in a controlled and sustainable manner.



The Stormwater Management Plan must be in accordance with Council’s Draft Stormwater Drainage Management DCP (Draft Version 1, Public Exhibition Copy dated 23/08/2004). This is available from Council's website http://www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au. The plan must generally be in accordance with the drainage plans and documentation prepared by Northrop Consulting Engineers Dwg No. C01 Rev 2 dated 16.11.05 Stormwater run-off from the proposed development must drain to Pickering Lane. New drainage systems must be designed in accordance with Section 6 - “Connection to drainage system” of Council’s Draft Stormwater Drainage Management DCP. A detailed Stormwater Management Plan must be produced by a suitably qualified civil or hydraulic engineer. The plan must be at a scale of 1:100 and based on drainage calculations prepared in accordance with the Institute of Engineers Australia publication, Australian Rainfall and Run-off, 1987 edition or most current version thereof. It must include (as appropriate for the site and determined by the Hydraulic Consultant):

All pipe layouts, dimensions, grades, lengths and material specifications All invert levels reduced to Australian Height Datum (AHD) Location and dimensions and of all drainage pits Point of connection to Councils drainage infrastructure Overland flow paths over impervious areas. Copies of certificates of title, showing the creation or existence of private easements to

drain water by gravity, if required. Subsoil drainage details (layout, grades, material), clean out points and discharge point.

26. Stormwater Certification and Work-As-Executed (WAE) Plans

Prior to the issue of the final Occupation Certificate, Certification and Work-As-Executed (WAE) plans must be submitted and approved by the Accredited Certifier demonstrating that the site drainage system has been provided according to the submitted calculations and/or approved plans.

Certifications must be provided by a suitably qualified engineer. WAE plans must be prepared and certified by a Registered Surveyor. The following must be provided:

a) Certification that:

The drainage system has been installed in accordance with the drainage Conditions of Development Consent and relevant Australian Standards.

That all drainage components are structurally adequate and have been installed in accordance with the relevant Codes and Standards and/or specifications.

b) Work-As-Executed (WAE) plans showing:

Pipe and drainage system layout, including all pits, pipe diameters, grades, materials, invert levels and surface levels. Details (exact point and method) of connection to Council system.




Erosion and sediment controls, designed in accordance with the SSROC Soil and Water Management Brochure and the NSW Environmental Protection Authority’s Managing Urban Stormwater: Construction Activities, must be implemented during demolition, excavation and construction of the development. All controls must be maintained at all times.

28. Stockpiles









a. describe the anticipated impact of the construction works on: local traffic routes pedestrian circulation adjacent to the building site and on-street parking in the local area, and; b. describe the means proposed to: manage construction works to minimise such impacts, provide for the standing of vehicles during construction, provide for the movement of trucks to and from the site, and deliveries to the site, and; c. show the location of: any site sheds and any anticipated use of cranes and concrete pumps, any areas of Council property on which it is proposed to install a Works Zone


The Plan must make provision for all materials, plant, etc. to be stored within the development site at all times during construction. Structures or works on Council property such as hoardings, scaffolding, shoring or excavation need separate approval from Council.



Standing of cranes and concrete pumps on Council property will need approval on each occasion. Note: A minimum of eight weeks will be required for assessment. Work must not commence until the Construction Management Plan is approved. Failure to comply with this condition may result in fines and proceedings to stop work.



33. Site fencing


34. Works Zone

A Work Zone (Construction Zone) is required for this development. Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate an application for the required Works Zone must be submitted to Woollahra Council, for consideration by the Woollahra Local Traffic Committee. Prior to commencement of any demolition, land clearing, piling, piering, excavation, construction or like work or the issue of a Notice of Commencement of building works, any Works Zone approval by the Woollahra Local Traffic Committee shall be implemented strictly in accordance with the Committee’s terms and conditions. Note: The Woollahra Local Traffic Committee meets monthly. A minimum of eight weeks is required for assessment and determination of a Works

Zone application. Failure to comply with this condition may result in fines and proceedings pursuant to

Part 6 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. 35. Damage security deposit

A security deposit of $9,580 (Nine thousand five hundred and eighty dollars) for the cost of making good any damage to Council property caused as a consequence of the construction work, plus an administration fee of $158.00, must be paid to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The security deposit, which may be in the form of a bank guarantee, has been calculated in accordance with the following schedule.






36. Footpath levels










41. Vehicular access and garaging

Driveways and access ramps must be designed not to scrape the underside of cars.



In all other respects, proposed garage/car park/basement car park, driveways and access ramps must be designed to comply with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – “Off-Street car parking.”



43. Payment of Long Service Levy, Security, Development Levy and Fees (G.1)

The person(s) with the benefit of this consent must pay the following long service levy, security, development levy, and fees prior to the issue of any construction certificate, subdivision certificate or occupation certificate, as will apply. The certifying authority must not issue any Part 4A Certificate until provided with the original receipt(s) for the payment of all of the following levy, security, contributions, and fees. Specifically a. prior to the issue of a construction certificate, where a construction certificate is

required; or b. prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate, where only a subdivision certificate is

required; or c. prior to the issue of an occupation certificate in any other instance.







$9,580 Yes, yearly T600



Development Levy $3,790 Yes, quarterly T94 TOTAL SECURITY, CONTRIBUTIONS,

LEVIES AND FEES $13,528


How must the payments be made?



Payments must be made by: 1. Cash deposit with Council, 2. Credit card payment with Council, or 3. Bank cheque made payable to Woollahra Municipal Council. The payment of a security may be made by a bank guarantee where:

a. the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b. the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council


c. the bank agrees to pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other person who provided the guarantee and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development in accordance with the development consent; and

d. the bank’s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with the guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required.

How will a security and a section 94A levy be indexed? To ensure that the value of a security and development levy are not eroded over time by increases in costs, the security and proposed cost of carrying out development (from which the development levy is calculated) will be indexed either annually or quarterly (see table above). Clause 3.13 of the Woollahra Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2005 sets out the formula and index to be used in adjusting the s.94A levy. Do you need HELP indexing the security, bond or levy? Please contact our customer service officers. Failure to correctly calculate the adjusted security, bond or development levy will delay the issue of any Part 4A Certificate and could void any Part 4A Certificate (construction certificate, subdivision certificate, or occupation certificate).

44. Details of External structures

Details of any external vents or structures on the roof or above the eaves must be submitted to Council for approval with or before the application for a Construction Certificate.

45. Downpipes



The Long Service Levy under Section 34 of the Building & Construction Industry Long Service Payment Act, 1986, must be paid and proof of payment provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate. Note: The Levy can be paid directly to the Long Services Payments Corporation or to Council. Note: Further information can be obtained from the Long Service Payments Corporation’s website http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/ or by telephoning the Long Service Payments Corporation on 13 14 41.

47. Photographic archival recording of buildings with little or no heritage significance that are to be demolished:

A photographic archival record of the building and landscape elements to be demolished is to be submitted, to the satisfaction of Council’s heritage officer, prior to the commencement of demolition work and prior to the issue of a Construction certificate. The photographic archival recording is to be bound in an A4 format and is to include the following:



Site plan at a scale of 1:200 (or 1:500) if appropriate of all structures and major

landscape elements including their relationship to the street and adjoining properties. Postcard sized photographs of:

(i) each elevation, (ii) each structure and landscape feature; (iii) internal or external details if nominated in Council’s heritage officer’s assessment

report; and (iv) views to the subject property from each street and laneway or public space.

Each photograph to be mounted, labelled and cross-referenced in accordance with recognised archival recording practice. One original coloured photographic set and a coloured photocopy are to be submitted to the satisfaction of Council s heritage officer prior to the commencement of demolition work and prior to the issue of a construction certificate. The original will be retained by Council and the coloured photocopy will be provided to the Woollahra Local History Library.



49. Dilapidation reports

A dilapidation report on the current structural condition of the existing buildings at 11 Pickering Lane must be prepared by a practicing structural engineer. The Report must be completed and submitted to Council prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or construction works. A second dilapidation report recording structural condition must be carried out on 11 Pickering Lane at the completion of the works and be submitted to Council.

50. The proposed fireplace The proposed fireplace shall not be used for burning solid fuel.

51. Air emissions or odours

The use of the premises must not give rise to air pollution, including odours, as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997. Waste gases released from the premises must not cause a public nuisance, be hazardous or harmful to human health or to the environment.

52. 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.



(b) 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.






























public sewer has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993. sewage management facility has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.




Building Act 1989.

60. Traffic signs

Traffic signage is located in the region of the proposed works. The removal of the signs will be subject to the approval of Woollahra Traffic Committee. The applicant is to liaise with Council’s Traffic Engineer regarding the removal of the signage prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

The cost of removal of the signage is to be born by the applicant and must be paid to Council prior to issuing the Occupation Certificate.

Roger Hedstrom Mark Schofield ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER



ADVISINGS 1. Other approvals

This development consent does not remove the need to obtain any other statutory consent or approval necessary under any other Act, including: an application for an Occupation Certificate under Section 109(C)(2) of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. An application for an Occupation Certificate may be lodged with Council if the

applicant has nominated Council as the Principal Certifying Authority.




Australia Post has requirements for the positioning and dimensions of mail boxes in










5. Relocation of stormwater drainage

Council is not responsible for the cost of relocating Council’s stormwater drainage pipes through the subject property.


Hazardous or intractable wastes arising from the demolition process must be removed and disposed of in accordance with the requirements of WorkCover and the EPA, and in accordance with the provisions of:

New South Wales Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1983; New South Wales Construction Safety Act, 1912; Regulation 84A-J Construction Work

Involving Asbestos or Asbestos Cement 1983; The Occupational Health and Safety (Hazardous Substances) Regulation 1996; The Occupational Health and Safety (Asbestos Removal Work) Regulation 1996; and The Waste Minimisation and Management Act and Regulations.











11. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr R Hedstrom. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

ANNEXURES 1. Plans and elevations and section



SECTION 96 APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT ITEM No. D6

FILE No. DA 496/2002/3

ADDRESS: 33 Streatfield Road BELLEVUE HILL 2023

EXISTING CONSENT:

Demolition of existing residence and construction of a new three storey residence and swimming pool.

TYPE OF CONSENT: Local development DATE OF CONSENT: 11 March 2003

ZONING: Residential 2(a)

PROPOSED MODIFICATION:

Modifications to dwelling and landscaping

DATE S96 LODGED:

15/08/2005 (Amended Landscape Plan lodged 30/1/06)

CONSENT AUTHORITY:

Council

APPLICANT:

Mr M Banks

OWNER: Mr M S & Mrs M J Banks AUTHOR: Ms F Stewart LOCALITY PLAN


North

Locality Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report The application is submitted to the Application Assessment Panel for determination as it is the subject of objections that cannot be comprehensively satisfied by the conditions of consent. Issues

Tree removal contrary to development consent Tree species Visual privacy

Objections Two objections have been received. Recommendation The application is recommended for conditional approval.

2. DESCRIPTION OF APPROVED PROPOSAL The approved development involved the demolition of an existing dwelling house and the construction of a new three storey dwelling house. The approved development included the replacement of existing landscaping to the site with a new landscape scheme and a new swimming pool to the rear of the subject site.

3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED MODIFICATION The application seeks to modify the approved development in the following manner: Unauthorised Works (Work as Executed): New skylight to laundry on Level 1; Reconfiguration of internal walls on Level 2; New Flush mounted aluminium louvre grilles to northern and western elevations; New structural column with frameless glass panel and aluminium framed hinged doors

to eastern elevation of Level 2; and Amended landscape scheme, including removal of 13 trees, required to be retained by Condition

No.7 to original consent. As stated in the Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with the application and confirmed by site inspection, the works have already been undertaken on site prior to obtaining Council approval. An amended landscape plan was lodged 31/1/06 which is discussed later in this report, under Referral – Landscaping/Trees Management and open space and landscaping performance criteria.



A recent site inspection carried out revealed that the modified landscaping works proposed by this application had been carried out and therefore constitute works contrary to the development consent.

4. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The site is located on the western side of Streatfield Road and has a site area of 980m² with a frontage of approximately 12 metres to Streatfield Road. The site falls significantly to the rear (west) and is located higher than adjoining properties at the northern and western boundaries. Existing on site is a new three storey dwelling house, with an in-ground swimming pool at the rear and a new double garage with entry portico at the front boundary. There are dwelling houses located on either side of the subject site. This section of Streatfield Road is characterised by large dwelling houses on hilly leafy sites.

5. PROPERTY HISTORY DA496/02 for the demolition of existing residence and construction of a new three storey residence and pool was approved 11 March 2003. A Section 96 Application to modify development consent (DA496/02/2), proposing to amend Condition No.2 in regard to building height, was refused 28 July 2003. A Section 82A Review of S96 determination was approved 18 May 2004. DA595/04 for the construction of a new double garage to replace two existing single garages was approved on 12 December 2004. A Section 96 Application to modify development consent (DA595/04/2) was approved on 11 April 2005.

6. REFERRALS 6.1 Comments from external approval bodies No comment from external approval bodies required. 6.2 Building No comment required. 6.3 Health No comment required. 6.4 Heritage No comment required.



6.5 Urban Design No comment required. 6.6 Technical Services No comment required. 6.7 Landscaping/Trees Management The proposal was referred to Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer, Mr David Grey, who provided the following comment:-

“I refer to the following documents received for this report: Peter Glass landscape plan 2021-02 issue C dated 21 June 2002 (amended 16 July 2003) Burley Katon Halliday statement of environmental effects dated August 2005. A site inspection was carried out on the following day: 29 September 2005 Comments have been prepared on the following. Where Approval is recommended, Conditions of Consent follow at the end of the comments. Proposed landscaping During my site inspection, I met with the Project Manager, Mr Paul Curran. Mr Curran explained that all the trees listed for retention were removed to permit access for a contiguous pier boring machine. Basically, the area of deep soil planting has not altered from the original plan. I have recommended conditions for replanting that will basically restore the originally proposed and approved landscape. RECOMMENDATION Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer has determined that the development proposal is satisfactory in terms of tree preservation and landscaping, subject to conditions. Accordingly, the following conditions are recommended…”

The condition of consent recommended by Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer required replacement of the trees which have been removed contrary to consent (which were determined to be significant landscape elements and worthy of retention), with the same number and tree species as required by Condition No.7 of the original consent. The intent of this recommended condition was to restore the originally approved landscape scheme and to reinstate mature trees and the landscaped character of the subject site. Discussions were subsequently held with the applicant in regards to this requirement and a meeting held at Council on 20 January 2006, as the applicant, whilst in agreement with the number of replacement trees to be planted, wished to propose alternative species for planting at the subject site. Present at the meeting were: Mr Matthew Banks (Applicant); Mr Thomas Spangenberg (Architect); Mr Hugh Maine (Landscape Designer); Fiona Stewart (Assessment Officer) and David Grey (Tree & Landscape Officer).



Alternative tree species were discussed and an agreement reached that Council would accept the submission of a revised landscaping scheme for comment. Amended plans were lodged 31 January 2006 which proposed changes in planting species and tree locations. The amended proposal was referred to Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer, Mr David Grey, who provided additional comments as follows:-

“I refer to the following documents received for this report:

Landscape Proposal Statement, prepared by Spirit Level Design, dated 30 January 2006

Landscape Plan LP01, prepared by Spirit Level Design, revised 17 January 2006

Supplied material reviewed 27 March 2006. COMMENTS The proposed use of Murraya paniculata as a screening hedge adjacent to the swimming pool is acceptable. This species is reliable under local conditions and is capable of providing the proposed screen. The applicant has nominated two species of tree for planting within the rear yard, Corymbia citridora Lemon-scented Gum Tree or Angophora costata Sydney Red Gum. Of these species, only Angophora costata is acceptable to Tree Management section. Corymbia citridora is susceptible to branch drop as a mature tree and can represent a hazard in amenity areas. RECOMMENDATIONS

Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer has determined that the development proposal is satisfactory in terms of tree preservation and landscaping, subject to compliance with the following Conditions of Consent…”

The condition of consent recommended by Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer requires the three trees proposed to the rear of the site to be Sydney Red Gums, 75L container size. Although this particular tree species has now been planted at the rear of the site, it is considered that the condition of consent should be included in the recommendation for reasons of clarity (see Condition No.50). ASSESSMENT UNDER S96 7.1 S96 (1) Correction of minor error, misdescription or miscalculation Not applicable to this assessment. 7.2 S96 (1A) Modification involving minimal environmental impact Not applicable to this assessment. 7.3 S96 (2) Other modifications The proposal is assessed under Section 96(2) of the Act as the potential environmental impact must be assessed.



7.4 S96AA Modification of a consent granted by the Court Not applicable to this assessment. 7.5 Substantially the same development The provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, requires Council to be satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development for which consent was originally granted. The modifications proposed comprise minor changes to the approved dwelling house and changes to the landscaping proposed by the original application, and in this regard, would satisfy the criteria of Section 96 for works which constitute substantially the same development. Approval of this modification would result in substantially the same development as that assessed under the original development application. 7.6 S96 (2) (b) Consultation with Minister, public authority or approval body Not applicable to this assessment. 7.7 Threatened species Not applicable to this assessment. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

8. RELEVANT STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION 8.1 SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 – Remediation of Land - Under clause 7 (1) (a) of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether the land is contaminated. An assessment of the Initial site evaluation provided by the applicant indicates the land does not require further consideration under clause 7 (1) (b) and (c) of SEPP 55. 8.2 REPs SREP: Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005 – applies to the site which is set well back from the Harbour. The proposed works are relatively minor in nature and would not be visible from the Harbour. Subsequently the proposal is considered acceptable with regards to the relevant clauses of the SREP. 8.3 Section 94 contribution Not applicable to this assessment.



8.4 Other relevant legislation None applicable to this assessment.

9. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 9.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5)) The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2(a) zone

9.2 Statutory compliance table Site Area (980m²) Approved Proposed Control Complies

Overall Height (metres) 10m* Works to 10m 9.5m no

*Overall height approved under S82A 9.3 Site area requirements Not applicable to this assessment. 9.4 Height There would be no change to the approved height of the dwelling as a result of the modifications proposed. The aluminium louvre grilles proposed to the northern and western elevations would reach a height above the 9.5m maximum height control applicable to site. Whilst an objection to Council’s height development standard under the provisions of SEPP 1 – Development Standards is not required for Section 96 Applications, the objectives of the standard are relevant. The objectives of Council’s height standard contained under Woollahra LEP 1995 relate to the maintenance of the amenity of adjoining properties in terms of views, solar access and privacy, ensuring that the building form is compatible with the adjoining neighbourhood, that views from Sydney Harbour are protected and that the amenity of the public domain is protected in terms of views and streetscape qualities. The amended proposal and abovementioned non-compliance would not result in any impact upon existing views, privacy or solar access of adjoining properties. The approved dwelling is largely set below street level, is compatible in height with adjacent development and the modifications proposed would not impart any excessive visual bulk and scale to Streatfield Road. It is considered that the non-complying elements, being the louver grilles, are consistent with the objectives of Council’s height standard and, accordingly, no objection is raised in relation to the issue. 9.5 Floor space ratio There is no statutory floor space ratio control for the subject site. Refer to discussion under Woollahra Residential Development Control Plan 2003.



9.6 FSBL Not applicable to this assessment. 9.7 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 18 Excavation: The proposed excavation is acceptable in terms of Clause 18. Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 25(1) and (2). Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils: The proposed works do not require the need for an assessment of acid sulfate soils under clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995.

9. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS None applicable to this assessment.

10. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 10.1 Numeric Compliance table - Woollahra Residential Development Control Plan 2003 Site Area (980m²) Approved

Development Proposed

Modification Control Complies

Deep Soil Landscaping – Dwelling

75% of unbuilt upon area

(490m²)

75% of unbuilt upon area (490m²)

50% of unbuilt upon area (324m²)

YES

Site analysis performance criteria (Part 3) A site analysis plan was submitted with the original proposal which was considered to be acceptable with regard to the site analysis objectives and specific performance criteria. Desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria (Part 4) The modified proposal would comply with the future character objectives for the Bellevue Hill North Precinct in the following manner: The modifications proposed respond in form and siting to the street and subdivision pattern; The modifications would reinstate the previously existing tree canopy; There would be no loss of street trees as a result of the modifications proposed; and Precinct views and views to the surrounding district from the public domain would not be

impacted upon. Streetscape performance criteria (Section 5.1) The bulk, scale and envelope of the newly constructed dwelling house on site would not change as a result of the modifications proposed. There are however, changes proposed to the landscaping in the front setback and along the side boundaries that would alter the appearance of the site to a minor degree from the approved proposal when viewed from Streatfield Road. The minor changes to the eastern elevation of the dwelling would be not be visible from the street as they would be obscured by the new garage on the front boundary of the subject site.



It is considered that the modifications proposed would be compatible with surrounding development and contribute to a cohesive streetscape. It is also considered that the streetscape quality of the proposal would be compatible with the desired future character of the Point Piper Precinct. Building size and location performance criteria (Section 5.2) The proposed modifications would not result in any change to the building height, envelope, footprint or location. Open space and landscaping performance criteria (Section 5.3) There would be no change to the amount of private open space on the site, however the amount of deep soil landscaped area would be reduced from the original application as a result of the modified landscape design (the amount is the same as approved under DA595/05). The modified proposal (providing for 490m² of landscaping) would be compliant with the Performance Criteria C5.3.2 which stipulates that 50% of the unbuilt upon area is to comprise deep soil landscaping. Although Council’s Landscape and Trees Officer was of the opinion that the previously approved landscape scheme should be complied with (ie. The exact trees that were removed to be reinstated), it was agreed after negotiations with the applicant that different species and/or tree locations would be acceptable as long as the same number of mature trees that were removed were replaced with trees of a certain pot size and height at maturity. The amended landscape plan (submitted 30/1/06) reflected these negotiations and is considered acceptable. See further comments previously under Referrals – Landscaping/Trees Management. The proposed modifications are considered to be acceptable with regards to the open space and landscaping objectives and relevant specific performance criteria. Fences and walls performance criteria (Section 5.4) There would be no change to fences or walls on the subject site as a result of the modifications proposed. Views performance criteria (Section 5.5) There would be no impact on existing district views from the public domain or surrounding properties as a result of the modifications proposed. Energy efficiency performance criteria (Section 5.6) The energy efficiency of the development would not be impacted upon as a result of the modifications proposed. Stormwater management performance criteria (Section 5.7) There would be no change to stormwater management on the site as a result of the modifications proposed.



Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria (Section 5.8) There was some concern raised by the adjoining neighbour to the rear at No.10 Holland Road that the removal of trees at the rear boundary of the site would result in visual privacy impacts as the previously existing trees provided a screen between the two properties. The modified landscape design proposed by this application would result in two Sydney Red Gum trees being planted at the rear boundary. In response to the privacy concerns raised, the applicant has submitted a statement from the Landscape Designer pertaining to the privacy hedge planted along the rear boundaries to provide a visual screen around the swimming pool (to compensate for the open style of fencing erected in this area of the site). According to the statement, the hedge of Murraya Paniculata (which is rapid growing) has been planted in a dense manner, with the intention of growing it to a height of two metres and keeping it clipped to retain it’s density and form. The Murraya Paniculata is notated on the Landscape Plan (LP01) as being “clipped to 2m above level of pool paving”. It is considered that the hedge proposed along the rear boundary would provide sufficient screening and address the privacy concerns raised. Car parking and driveways performance criteria (Section 5.9) There would be no change to car parking and driveways on the site as a result of the modifications proposed. Site facilities performance criteria (Section 5.10) There would be no change to site facilities at the site as a result of the modifications proposed. Harbour foreshore development performance criteria (Section 5.11) Not applicable to this assessment. Mixed development in business zones performance criteria (Section 5.12) Not applicable to this assessment. Access and mobility performance criteria (Section 5.13) There would be no change in access or mobility arrangements to or within the site as a result of the modifications proposed. 10.2 DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities Not applicable to this assessment. 10.3 Woollahra Access DCP Woollahra Access DCP encourages, rather than requires, visitor access for older people or people with a disability for or class 1a buildings.



There is no change proposed to levels of access to or within the subject site which are considered adequate, therefore the proposed modifications are acceptable in regard to the provisions of the DCP.

10.4 Other DCPs, codes and policies Policy on Unauthorised Works As noted previously within this report, the proposed works to the dwelling proposed by this application have been executed without the prior consent of Council, resulting in unauthorized works. Furthermore, the proposed landscaping works have been executed without the prior consent of Council, resulting in works contrary to the development consent. Policy on Unauthorised Uses, Buildings and Works Council has three courses of action available to it in respect of unauthorised works:- Demolition. Prosecution. No further action, subject to certain terms being met. Council may take enforcement action or prosecute following consideration of the following issues: The nature and seriousness of the breach; Balancing the public interest and cost to Council; Available methods of enforcement; and Circumstances of the case. The nature and seriousness of the breach The unauthorised building works are not considered to be a serious breach and the owner has submitted the S96 application to Council which includes all the unauthorised works carried out. The removal of the trees from the site is considered serious, however this aspect of the application does not constitute unauthorised “works” which relates only to the building components. Available methods of enforcement Given the minor nature of the unauthorised works, it is recommended that Council not take any further action in respect of the unauthorised building (illegal) works. The circumstances of the case It is considered that subject to compliance with the conditions of consent recommended (see modified Condition No.9 regarding replacement trees), the works undertaken would not result in unreasonable consequences upon the locality to such a degree to justify Council taking further action requiring their removal. As these works are proposed under Section 96 of the EP&A Act, Council is able to grant retrospective approval. In addition, Resolution B requires the matter be referred to Council’s Manager Compliance to ascertain whether further action be undertaken with respect to the works carried out contrary to the development consent.

11. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS None applicable to this assessment.



12. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT All the likely impacts of the modified development have been considered elsewhere in this report.

13. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. Submissions were received from: Carol & Victor Grynberg – 37 Streatfield Road, Bellevue Hill Eric & Antoinette Doctor – 10 Holland Road, Bellevue Hill The objectors raised the following issues: There is a request for additional work on the roof area. The solid wall on the southern side does not belong in a residential area and if further roof work exacerbates this overdevelopment and is more of a visual eyesore then we would request Council not approve the work. There are two louvre grilles proposed by this application to the western and northern elevations which do not result in any increase in the overall approved height of the dwelling house. There are no works proposed to the southern elevation or any works that would add to the bulk or scale of the approved dwelling house on the site. We are most disappointed to see that trees that were specifically preserved in Council’s permission for this development have been destroyed. We request that Council use all powers available to have the destroyed trees replaced by trees of as large a size as possible to most closely replace what has been destroyed. The trees proposed for removal by this application have been removed prior to Council consent and contrary to the conditions of consent to the original development application which required their retention. Council has held various discussions with the applicant, architect and garden designer in an attempt to have mature replacement trees planted on the site which would replicate the number and size at maturity of the significant mature trees that have been removed. See further discussion under Referrals – Landscaping/Trees Management and open space and landscaping performance criteria. The applicant is seeking approval for the removal of trees which he has already cut down. One large palm in particular located on the rear boundary provided considerable privacy between the two properties (No.10 Holland Rd). Council’s Tree and Landscape officer has specifically requested that three Sydney Red Gum trees (75L pot size) be planted in the rear yard of the subject site with two at the rear boundary to reinstate the level of privacy previously provided by the trees which have been removed. The Sydney Red Gums are notated on the amended landscape plans submitted by the applicant, as requested, and have now been planted at the subject site. The new swimming pool is elevated above ground level and the rear boundary fence is not effective as a privacy screen. One of the conditions of the original development application was the installation of a 1.8m brushwood fence to provide privacy between the two properties (No.10 Holland Rd).



The new swimming pool is elevated above ground level and previously existing trees at the rear boundary have been removed. Coupled with the new open style fence erected along the rear boundary, there is a resultant reduction in levels of privacy that were previously existing between the subject site and properties to the rear, fronting Holland Road. However, with the two Sydney Red Gum trees and Murraya Paniculata hedge (2m in height at maturity) proposed to the rear boundary by this application, it is considered that the previous levels of privacy between the adjoining properties would be reinstated. AND The replacement application (as defined by Clause 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000) was not renotified under clause 5.1 of the DCP because, having considered clause 9 of the DCP, the replacement application is substantially the same development as the original proposal and considered to have no greater environmental impact upon neighbours.

14. CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under s79C and would be in the public interest.

15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 A. THAT Council, as the consent authority, modify development consent to Development

Application No. 496/2002/3 for modifications to dwelling and landscaping on land at 33 Streatfield Road Bellevue Hill, in the following manner:

Condition No. 1 be deleted and replaced with the following: 1. Approved S96 Plans

The development must be carried out in accordance with plans numbered DA - 00E, 01E, 02E, 03D, 04E, 05E, and 06E, dated 30/10/02, drawn by BKH Architects, including landscape plans numbered 2021-01A and 02A, dated 6/6/02, drawn by Peter Glass and Associates, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, as amended by the works shown in colour on plans numbered S96(3)1.0, S96(3)1.1, S96(2)1.3, S96(3)3.0, S96(2)3.1 & S96(3)3.2 all Issue A, dated 12/8/05, drawn by BKH Architects, including landscape plan numbered LP01 (Revision C), dated 17/1/06, drawn by Spirit Level Designs, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved S96 Plans” and the signature of a Council officer on the plans, except where amended by the following conditions.

Condition No. 7 be deleted.

Condition No. 9 be modified as follows: 9. Replacement trees which must be planted

The following replacement tree species must be planted to ensure the preservation of the landscape character of the area. Details in compliance with the following criteria specifying the species and planting locations of the replacement plants must be included on the Landscape Plan for approval by Council or the accredited certifier with or before the application for a Construction Certificate.



Species/Type Planting Location Container Size

or Size of Tree Minimum Dimensions at Maturity

1 x Prunus cerasifera ‘Nigra’- Purple-leafed Cherry

street tree adjoining site 75 litre natural

Additionally, the following compensatory replacement plantings must be planted to ensure the preservation of the landscape character of the area.

Species/Type Planting Location Container Size or Size of

Tree (@ time of planting) Minimum Dimensions at Maturity

3 x Angophora costata Sydney Red Gum

Rear 75 litre 10 x 8

B. THAT the determination be referred to Council’s Manager Compliance to further determine

whether action is required under Section 125, 126 or 127A of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979.

Ms F Stewart Mr M Schofield ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ANNEXURES 1. Plans and elevation



SECTION 82A REVIEW OF DETERMINATION REPORT

ITEM No. D7

FILE No. DA 587/2005

ADDRESS: 45A Bay Street DOUBLE BAY 2028

PROPOSAL:

Outdoor seating, including 4 tables and 8 chairs.

DATE DA DETERMINED: 16 November 2005

SUBJECT OF REVIEW: Review of a development application proposing outdoor seating.

DATE S82A REVIEW APPLICATION LODGED:

30/11/2005

APPLICANT: The Ritebite At Double Bay Cafe

OWNER: In Shoppe Pty. Ltd

REVIEW OFFICER: Ms F Stewart LOCALITY PLAN


North

Locality

Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report The application for review of determination is referred to the Application Assessment Panel in accordance with the requirements of Section 82A of the EP&A Act and Council’s delegations. The original development application was determined under delegation. Issues

Location and intensity of proposed seating. Objections No objections have been received. Recommendation The application for review of determination is recommended for conditional approval.

2. BACKGROUND The original development application (DA587/05) proposed outdoor seating, including 4 tables and 8 chairs to be provided on the footpath, adjacent to the kerb, at the corner of Bay Street and Knox Lane, Double Bay. The application was refused on 16 November 2005.

3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL SUBJECT OF REVIEW The subject of this review comprises the refusal of a development application proposing outdoor seating, including 4 tables and 8 chairs.

4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED REVIEW The applicant seeks review of the refusal of the development application. The applicant is proposing the same amount and location of outdoor seating as the original proposal and has submitted supporting documentation in the form of an assessment schedule by Bossley Howe Architects Pty Ltd which assesses the development proposal against the Double Bay DCP and Woollahra Code for Footway Licence Policy and Procedures. This report reviews all aspects of the determination including any cumulative impacts of the changes requested by the applicant.

5. COUNCIL’S STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER S82A Under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, an applicant may request Council to review a determination of a development application, other than for:



(a) designated development, (b) integrated development; or (c) state significant development The request for review must be made within 12 months after the date of determination and the review must occur in the following way: (a) If the determination was made by a delegate of Council – the review must be undertaken by

Council or another delegate of Council that is not subordinate to the delegate who made the determination, or

(b) If the determination was made by full Council the review must also be undertaken by full

Council. Upon making a determination of the review application, the following must be undertaken: If upon review, Council grants development consent, or varies the conditions of a

development consent, it must endorse on the notice of determination the date from which the consent, or the consent as varied by the review, operates.

If upon review, Council changes a determination in any way, the changed determination

replaces the earlier determination as from the date of the review. Council’s decision on a review may not be further reviewed under section 82A.

6. CONSIDERATION OF REVIEW The proposal seeks review of the refusal of the development application, which is considered as follows: 6.1 REFERRALS There was no referral of the S82A Review application. However, the original application was referred internally to Council’s Fire Safety, Property, Environmental Health and Urban Design sections for comment. Council’s Fire Safety Officer had no objections to the proposal. Council’s Property Officer provided comments as follows: “Council’s Property Officer has determined that the proposal regarding the establishment of a footway seating area for 4 Tables and 8 chairs generally satisfies Property & Projects concerns. However, I recommend that DA consent be subject to the following conditions:

Development consent only gives approval to the use. Prior to any footpath seating or tables

being installed, the Applicant must first complete a S125 Roads Act approval form (available from customer services). A fee is payable as prescribed by Council’s adopted fees and charges.

The Applicant must then arrange to enter into a license agreement with Council to use the footpath area. A maximum term of 7 years is available. Approvals under S125 may be subject to conditions.



An Application to enter into a licence agreement will be considered only if Development Consent has been obtained for the use. Council reserves the right as Road Authority to not enter into a licence agreement even where Development Consent for the use has been obtained.

The proposed footpath dining must at all times comply with the standards contained in Woollahra Municipal Council Footpath Restaurant Code as amended. This condition has been imposed to ensure the objectives of this code are maintained at all times.

The licence agreement sets out the terms and conditions under which that use may be carried out. As well as those terms and conditions the following is also included:

(i) At all times, the tables and chairs must be arranged strictly in accordance with any DA

‘approved’ plan. (ii) The dimensions of the tables and seating installed in the footpath area must be in

accordance with the dimensions shown on the approved plan. (iii) Proposed tables and seating are to be fully removable and must not encroach onto

neighbouring property frontages. (iv) The additional tables and chairs must be identical in style and colour to that approved in

the DA consent.

The licence will be subject to rent for use of the public footway, which will be calculated having regard to the proposed commercial activity and will be based on a valuations obtained by Council from an independent Valuer. Failure to pay the rent established by Council may result in termination of the licence.

The area to be occupied under the licence, and the dimensions of the tables and chairs on the

footpath, must be strictly in accordance with the development consent and the dimensions shown on the approved plan. Occupation of areas outside the licence area or installation of more than the approved number of seats and tables may result in fines and or termination of the licence.”

The conditions of consent recommended by Council’s Property Officer have been included in the recommendation at the end of this report (see Condition No.6). Council’s Environmental Health Officer provided comments as follows:

“Reference is made to the abovementioned referral please be advised the following development conditions apply to the Rite Bite cafe: The occupant must adhere to the “Footway Licence Policy and Procedures” of Woollahra

Municipal Council April 2004. The area must be provided with barricades surrounding outdoor seating area on the

roadside. Approval is granted for 4 tables and eight chairs, no additional tables or chairs are to be

added without Councils prior written consent.” The requirement for adherence to Council’s Footway Licence Policy and Procedures has been included in Condition No.6. The number of tables and chairs is limited by Condition No.2. There are existing barricades bordering the outdoor seating area on the roadside in the form of planter boxes. Council’s Urban Design Officer provided comments as follows:



“The proposal raises concerns in relation to surveillance by proprietors in terms of safety, management issues and pedestrian access.”

The proposal is considered to be acceptable with regards to these issues. See further discussion under Codes and Policies – Code for Footpath Restaurants later in this report.

6.2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Under clause 7 (1) (a) of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether the land is contaminated. The proposal would not result in any excavation at all. The proposal does not require further consideration under clause 7 (1) (b) and (c) of SEPP 55. REPs SREP: Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005 – applies to the site which is set well back from the Harbour. The proposed works are minor in nature and would not be visible from the Harbour. Subsequently the proposal is considered acceptable with regards to the relevant clauses of the SREP. 6.3 Section 94 contribution Not applicable to this assessment. 6.4 Other legislation None relevant to this assessment.

6.5 WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the Business General 3(a) zone. Other special clauses/development standards Clause 16 Development of land uncoloured on the land use map: The proposal involves utilisation of an area of Council’s footpath which is uncoloured on the land use map. The proposal would be compatible with the nature of development permissible on neighbouring land and the development standards applicable as well as consistent with the objectives of both the zoning and the Woollahra LEP 1995.



Clause 24 Land adjoining public open space: Guilfoyle Park, while not immediately adjoining the subject site, is directly across from the cafe on Bay Street. The proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon the present or future amenity of the park. Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils: The proposed works require the need for an assessment of acid sulfate soils under clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995. The site is identified as Class 2 land (probable acid sulfate soils risk) on Council's Acid Sulfate Soils planning map. Proposed works below existing ground level or by which the watertable is likely to be lowered are considered to be likely to present an environmental risk and therefore require submission of a "Preliminary Soil Assessment." prepared by a suitably qualified consultant. There are no works proposed by this application below ground level. Therefore it is considered that submission of a preliminary soil assessment is not required in this instance.

6.6 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS Double Bay Centre DCP 2002 Urban structure – key objectives and strategies The proposal is considered acceptable with regards to the key strategies and objectives for the urban structure of Double Bay. It would be compatible with the existing urban fabric, reinforce the continuous active retail frontages along Bay Street and enhance Double Bay’s cosmopolitan image. Street character – Bay Street The proposal would not result in a negative impact on the existing character of Bay Street. The proposal would enhance the existing active retail frontage at ground level and provide “interest” at the existing open space opposite Guilfoyle Park. The proposal would be compatible with the existing built environment and the streetscape of Bay Street. In this regard, the proposal would be satisfactory. Built form envelopes There would be no change to the existing built form envelope of the site as a result of this proposal. Development controls Signage and advertising There is no business signage proposed by the application. Pedestrian access and mobility The proposal involves the provision of tables and chairs for footpath dining located in a paved area on the corner of Bay Street and Knox Lane adjacent to the existing “Rite Bite” café. Pedestrian access to Guilfoyle Park (on the opposite side of Bay Street is provided by a pedestrian crossing to the north of the subject site that would not be obstructed by the proposed seating. Although the location of the tables and chairs would necessitate staff having to cross over the footpath to serve patrons, it is considered that this could be done safely as the area is open and clear of building elements that may obstruct vision of staff and/or pedestrians. The proposal is considered acceptable in regards to pedestrian access and mobility.



Corner buildings The proposed works to the shop would not alter the building massing and articulation of the corner building. Outdoor eating The proposal includes the provision of footpath seating adjacent to the existing café on the subject site. Outdoor eating is encouraged where the establishment provides a pleasant outdoor eating environment with minimal disturbance to pedestrian circulation and where they comply with Council’s associated codes and policies. See further discussion under other codes and policies –Code for Footpath Restaurant. Acoustic privacy The approved hours of operation of the existing café are from 6am to 9pm, 7 days a week. The building on the subject site is a commercial/retail building, although there are residential uses surrounding the site. It is not envisaged that the proposal would result in any unacceptable impacts in regards to acoustic privacy. On-site parking There would be no change to parking arrangements or demand as a result of the proposal. See further discussion later in this report under DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities.

6.7 Applicable Regulations None applicable to this assessment. 6.8 Footway Licence Policy and Procedures This policy is applicable to the application as it relates to footpath licences issued by Council for the purposes of outdoor dining and the limited display of shop goods. The proposal would be consistent with the policy statement and objectives in the following manner:

The area proposed for the footpath seating is adjacent to the approved café, although separated by the pedestrian access route;

The requirements for the applicant to enter into a Licence Agreement with Council and acquire Approval under Section 125 of the Roads Act 1993 are specified in the recommended conditions of consent (see Condition No.6).

The proposal would contribute to the improvement of the streetscape; Pedestrian traffic would not be obstructed and surrounding properties would not be

adversely affected by the proposal; The proposal would provide for attractive and safe surroundings in which people may enjoy

food and refreshments. Visual Quality The proposal would be consistent with the visual quality objectives of the code in the following manner:



The tables and chairs proposed are the same design and colour of those within the boundaries of the subject site and coupled with the planter boxes which create a border, would result in an attractive area when viewed in conjunction with the streetscape; and

The planting is existing, suitable to the area and provides consistency with the Knox Lane frontage of the subject site.

The proposal would ensure that the area adjacent to the subject site is attractive when viewed in conjunction with the streetscape. The planter boxes are an existing permanent fixture, are compatible with the streetscape character. The proposed tables and chairs are consistent with those of nearby food outlets, where there are tables and chairs located at the kerbside and not directly adjacent to the front façade of the premises. Location and Access The tables and chairs proposed would be located on an existing paved area at the corner of Bay Street and Knox Lane. Although the area is not completely level (owing to the gradient and existing street tree), it is considered to be satisfactory in regard to health and safety issues. The existing development immediately adjacent to the subject site is predominantly retail/commercial. These premises would not be impacted upon as the location of the tables is not near any existing access points or windows. The footpath has a sufficient width and length to accommodate outdoor seating for these premises, should they require it. It is noted that No. 45A Bay St is owned by a single company. The tables and chairs would be contained within an area of approximately 5m x 2m which is currently bounded by existing planters which act as traffic bollards, a street lamp, and a street tree. The footpath is over 5 metres in width in this area and there would be an unobstructed 3 metre wide pedestrian access route retained along the Bay street frontage of the subject site which would be acceptable (having regard to the numeric requirements of the code as illustrated in the table below). The footpath adjacent to the site along Bay Street is considered to be of an adequate width and suitable for the proposed use in conjunction with the café without detrimentally affecting the movement of pedestrian traffic or existing pedestrian linkages. Site Area (375.8m²) Approved Proposed Control Complies

Footpath Restaurant N/A 8 seats/10m² 3m footpath width

1 seat/m² Min 1.8m footpath

width YES

The policy states that “It is preferred that the footway restaurants occupy the inner footpath area adjoining the associated premises and that the outer area towards the roadway, is reserved for pedestrian circulation…”. The application proposes to locate the footpath seating on the outer footpath, adjacent to the kerb, with the inner area reserved for pedestrian circulation. The tables and chairs would be set back over 600mm from the kerb and would be demarcated by the existing planters. Taking these circumstances into consideration, the proposed footpath seating, although not strictly immediately adjoining the subject site, would be acceptable.



Parking There would be minimal additional parking demand resulting from the proposal as a café already exists at the subject site and a majority patronage is “passing trade” with patrons attracted to Double Bay for shopping/business and not specifically to frequent the café. The proposal would be both visually attractive and functional and would not result in detrimental impacts upon the surrounding road network. Pedestrian access It is not envisaged that the proposal would result in any adverse impacts on surrounding properties or impede existing pedestrian flows (subject to Condition No.2). The tables and chairs would be contained within an area of approximately 5m x 2m which is currently bounded by existing planters which act as traffic bollards, a street lamp, and a street tree. The footpath is over 5 metres in width in this area and there would be an unobstructed 3 metre wide pedestrian access route retained along the Bay street frontage of the subject site which would be consistent with the requirements of the policy that the total available footway width be not less than 3.6m and that a minimum width of 1.8m of unobstructed passage of pedestrian traffic be maintained. Seating Seating requirements under the code are calculated on the basis of one person or seat for each square metre of leased area. The area in question for this application is a total of 10m² which would allow for 10 chairs. There are 4 tables and 8 chairs proposed by the application, however taking into consideration existing obstructions (tree, street sign, light pole), three tables and 8 chairs would be the maximum allowable to ensure their efficient functioning and the minimisation of potential pedestrian impacts that may arise from patrons moving tables to allow for more space to site etc. Therefore a condition of consent is recommended, restricting the maximum number of tables to three and chairs to eight (see Condition No.2). 6.9 DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities The proposed works would not result in an increase in the gross floor area of the site, the use of the premises would not change and nor would the current off-street parking arrangements which are considered to be acceptable. Additionally, Clause 6.13 of the plan stipulates that Council will not require additional off-street car parking or require a Section 94 Contribution for proposed outdoor eating areas on public footpaths subject to compliance with the requirements of the Council’s Footway Licence Policy and Procedures. 7. CONSIDERATION AGAINST REASONS FOR REFUSAL The applicant seeks review of the original determination and has submitted supporting documentation in the form of an assessment schedule by Bossley Howe Architects Pty Ltd. The reasons for refusal of the original development application are as follows:

“1. The proposed location of the outdoor seating is contrary to the provisions of Council’s Footpath Restaurant Code and Council’s Footpath Licence Policy and Procedures in that it is not located on the footpath immediately adjacent to the subject premises and there are no exceptional circumstances in relation to the application which could be taken into consideration in this instance for a variation to this provision.



2. The proposal is contrary to the public interest.” The original proposal was considered to be inconsistent with Council’s Footpath Restaurant Code and Council’s Footpath Licence Policy and Procedures in that the location of the footpath seating proposed was not immediately adjacent to the subject premises. It is considered that in the particular circumstances of the case that the location of the seating would be acceptable as it would meet the objectives of both policy documents and would not result in a detrimental impact upon the existing character of the Double Bay Centre. 7.1 Substantially the same development The proposal involves the review of refusal of the original development application for outdoor seating, including 4 tables and 8 chairs. The plans have not been amended from the original application and therefore, the proposal is considered substantially the same as the original proposal and meets the requirements of S.82A (4) (c).

8. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL The likely impacts of the proposal have been considered elsewhere in this report. The additional seating proposed was assessed with regard to the requirements for sanitary facilities under the Building Code of Australia (BCA). The proposal would be compliant in this regard.

10. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. No submissions were received. 10.CONCLUSION The original application was considered inconsistent with the provisions of Council’s Footpath Restaurant Code and Council’s Footpath Licence Policy and Procedures in that the footpath seating would not be located immediately adjacent to the subject premises, the proposal was considered to not be in the public interest. Upon review, it is considered that in the particular circumstances of the case the location of the footpath seating would be acceptable and in the public interest. The emphasis of the Double Bay Centre DCP 2002 is about establishing a vibrant centre within a pedestrian environment. The appearance of the area would be improved by the continuation of ground floor retail and associated street furniture and the establishment of outdoor seating along Bay Street proposed by this application, without detrimental impacts on surrounding properties. Therefore, it is recommended that Council grant approval to the review of determination subject to condition.

11. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development Application No. 587/2005 for outdoor seating on land at 45A Bay Street Double Bay, subject to the following conditions:



1. Approved Plans

This consent relates to Drawing No.3039_302, dated 15 September 2005 which carries a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.

2. Number of tables and chairs

The number of tables and chairs subject of this consent shall be reduced to a maximum of three tables and eight chairs in order to ensure minimal potential obstruction to pedestrians using the footpath on Bay Street.

3. Hours of trading for the footway restaurant

The hours of trading for the footway restaurant are limited to 6 am-9 pm, 7 days a week. The tables and chairs are to be removed from the footway outside these hours.

4. Conduct of business

The Licensee is to be responsible for the orderly conduct of the business and ensure that the requirements of the Food Act and any other applicable legislation are fully met in the serving of food to the outdoor tables. The Licensee will also be held responsible to ensure good conduct of patrons, the timely removal of waste to prevent littering and that noise is kept to a minimum. No music is permitted. Lighting for evening use is to be erected only with development consent and is to be so installed as to avoid nuisance to neighbouring premises. Failure to meet these conditions may result in fines and/or termination of the Licence.

5. Liquor licence

No application is to be made for the issue of an On Licence/Restaurant Permit (under the Liquor Act) without prior written consent of Council.

6. Council property requirements

Development consent only gives approval to the use. Prior to any footpath seating or tables being installed, the Applicant must first complete a S125 Roads Act approval form (available from customer services). A fee is payable as prescribed by Council’s adopted fees and charges.

The Applicant must then arrange to enter into a license agreement with Council to use the footpath area. A maximum term of 7 years is available. Approvals under S125 may be subject to conditions.

An Application to enter into a licence agreement will be considered only if Development Consent has been obtained for the use. Council reserves the right as Road Authority to not enter into a licence agreement even where Development Consent for the use has been obtained.

The proposed footpath dining must at all times comply with the standards contained in Woollahra Municipal Council Footpath Restaurant Code as amended. This condition has been imposed to ensure the objectives of this code are maintained at all times.

The licence agreement sets out the terms and conditions under which that use may be carried out. As well as those terms and conditions the following is also included:



(i) At all times, the tables and chairs must be arranged strictly in accordance with any DA ‘approved’ plan.

(ii) The dimensions of the tables and seating installed in the footpath area must be in accordance with the dimensions shown on the approved plan.

(iii) Proposed tables and seating are to be fully removable and must not encroach onto neighbouring property frontages.

(iv) The additional tables and chairs must be identical in style and colour to that

approved in the DA consent.

The licence will be subject to rent for use of the public footway, which will be calculated having regard to the proposed commercial activity and will be based on a valuations obtained by Council from an Independent Valuer. Failure to pay the rent established by Council may result in termination of the licence.

The area to be occupied under the licence, and the dimensions of the tables and chairs on the footpath, must be strictly in accordance with the development consent and the dimensions shown on the approved plan. Occupation of areas outside the licence area or installation of more than the approved number of seats and tables may result in fines and or termination of the licence.

7. Compliance with Disability Discrimination Act

The development must be designed to comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act and AS 1428 – “Design for Access and Mobility”, Parts 1, 2, 3 and 4.

Ms F Stewart Mr M Schofield REVIEW OFFICER TEAM LEADER ADVISINGS 1. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Ms F Stewart. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.







ANNEXURES

1. Original assessment Report 2. Seating Plan




FILE No. DA 68/2006/1

ADDRESS:

3 & 4/96 Bellevue Road BELLEVUE HILL 2023

PROPOSAL:

Demolition of internal wall allowing the consolidations of 3 and 4

ZONING:

2(b)

TYPE OF CONSENT:

Local

APPLICANT:

Mr A Lane

OWNER:

Mr A Lane & Ms G E Miller

DATE LODGED: 10/02/2006 AUTHOR: Mr J Lukas LOCALITY PLAN


North

Locality Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report The notification/advertising of the application resulted in the submission of an objection. In accordance with Council's delegations, the application is presented to the Application Assessment Panel for determination. Issues Owners Consent Privacy Unauthorised works Objections One submission was received. Cost of works The stated cost of the proposed work of $1250.00 has been checked using the standard criteria specified in the Cordell Building Guide and is considered to be accurate. Recommendation Approval.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL Removal of internal wall to allow for consolidation of Units 3 and 4.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The site is located on the south west side of Bellevue Road, immediately opposite the March Street intersection, Bellevue Hill. The site falls steeply down from Bellevue Road to its rear boundary and is bounded to its north western side by a public footway. On the site is an existing part two/part three storey residential flat building containing 4 strata apartments. The area is characterised by low and medium density development on hilly sites in a leafy section of Bellevue Hill with occasional vistas afforded towards Cooper Park Valley.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY The body corporate consent for the works proposed and the development application was challenged in the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal by another unit owner within the strata building (also objector to this application). The Tribunal had dismissed the claim and validated the lodgement of the development application.



As part of the tribunal hearing, an issue was raised with respect to the intensification of the use resulting from the consolidated apartments and the subsequent loss of aural privacy from the removal of the internal wall, which was undertaken without Council approval. The Strata Scheme Adjudicator at the Tribunal indicated, after considering specialist acoustic reports, that the existing concrete flooring would provide sufficient sound insulation to the area where the wall was removed. There is no other relevant history pertaining to this application.

5. REFERRALS 5.1 Comments from external approval bodies No comment required. 5.2 Building The proposal would comply with the relevant criteria prescribed by the Building Code of Australia. 5.3 Health No comment required. 5.4 Heritage No comment required. 5.5 Urban Design No comment required. 5.6 Technical Services No comment required. 5.7 Landscaping/Trees Management No comment required. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

6. RELEVANT STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION



6.1 SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 ("BASIX") does not apply to the proposed development. State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land Not applicable as no works are proposed to the existing ground level. 6.2 REPs Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2004 The subject site is within the area to which the SREP applies. The objectives of the Plan are established at Clause 2 and include the following: (a) To ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are

recognised, protected and maintained; (b) As an outstanding natural asset, and (c) As a public asset of national and heritage significance, for existing and future generations. (d) To ensure a healthy, sustainable environment on land and water (e) To achieve a high quality urban environment, (f) To ensure a prosperous working waterfront and an effective transport corridor, (g) To ensure accessibility to and along Sydney Harbour and its foreshores, (h) To provide a consolidated, simplified and updated legislative framework for future

planning. The proposal will not have an adverse visual impact on the Harbour foreshore and the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the SREP. It is therefore considered that the proposal meets the relevant requirements of the SREP and is acceptable in this regard. 6.3 Section 94A contribution Applicable, condition applied. 6.4 Other relevant legislation None relevant.

7. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 7.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5)) The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the 2(b) zone.



7.2 Statutory compliance table The proposed works would not alter any statutory control and would involve an internal wall removal only. 7.3 Site area requirements N/A 7.4 Height N/A 7.5 Floor space ratio N/A 7.6 FSBL N/A 7.7 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 18 Excavation: The proposed excavation is acceptable in terms of Clause 18. Clause 19 HFSPA: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 19(2). Clause 24 Land adjoining public open space: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 24(2). Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 25(1) and (2). Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils: The proposed works do not require the need for an assessment of acid sulfate soils under clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995.

8. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS N/A

9. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 9.1 Numeric Compliance table - Woollahra Residential Development Control Plan 2003 The proposal would not alter any numerical control prescribed by the RDCP. Desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria (Part 4) The proposal would satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP.



Building size and location performance criteria (Section 5.2) The proposal would satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP. Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria (Section 5.8) There would be no additional noise generated by the removal of the internal wall and subsequent consolidation of the units. The internal wall removed would be above living and non-habitable areas of the bottom units, thus not impacting on their bedroom area. Any noise transmission between levels associated with removal of floor coverings is a body corporate issue. The proposal would therefore satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP. Car parking and driveways performance criteria (Section 5.9) The proposal would reduce the off street parking demand by 1 space as 2x2bedrooom units requires 3 off street parking spaces and the consolidation of the 2 units into 1x 4 bedroom unit would require only 2 parking spaces. Accordingly, the proposal would reduce the demand for off and on street car parking. Access and mobility performance criteria (Section 5.13) The proposal would satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP. 9.2 DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities The proposal would satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP. 9.3 Woollahra Access The proposal would satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP. 9.4 Other DCPs, codes and policies Council’s Policy on Unauthorised Uses and Building Works The scope of unauthorised works is limited to the removal of an internal wall between the two units. Council’s Policy on Unauthorised Uses and Building Works sets criteria on whether to prosecute or take enforcement action on unauthorised work. There are four (4) considerations that Council must have regard to. They are:- “The nature and seriousness of the breach” The unauthorised work would have little environmental impact or amenity impact upon adjoining property owners.



“Balancing of public interests and cost to Council” On the basis that there is no environmental impact on any adjoining property owners, it is recommended that the works be retained, notwithstanding any enforcement action deemed to be appropriate by the Building and Compliance Section of Council. “The available methods of enforcement” Council can pursue action in the Local Court to seek prosecution of the owner and builder for the unauthorised work. Another available option, under Section 127A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 allows Council to issue a Penalty Infringement Notice for unauthorised work. Schedule 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 determines the monetary penalty involved with the infringement notices. “The circumstances of each case” The work proposed would have no environmental impact, nor would it impact on the amenity of adjoining property owners. The works would comply with the relevant considerations under WLEP 1995 and WRDCP 2003. In this regard, it is not considered appropriate to seek the removal or demolition of the works.

10. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The proposal would comply by condition with Australian Standard AS 2601-1991: The demolition of structures.

11. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL All likely impacts of the proposal have been assessed elsewhere in this report.


13. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. A submission was received from: Elizabeth Kelly - 2/96 Bellevue Rd, Bellevue Hill The objections raised the following issues: “I do not consent to the works even though body corporate has” The objector has refuted the body corporate consent and has taken the matter to the Consumer Trader & Tenancy Tribunal. The Tribunal has dismissed her claim and the body corporate consent, being the owner of the strata building, is validated as the owner and validates the lodgement of the development application.



"Loss of privacy" (relayed in a phone conversation to the Team Leader) Considered above, see Section 9 - Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria

14. CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under s79C and would be in the public interest. 15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 A. THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development

Application No. 68/2006 for demolition of internal wall allowing the consolidations of 3 and 4 on land at 96 Bellevue Road Bellevue Hill, subject to the following conditions:

1. Approved Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on plans marked WD1A to 4A inclusive, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.

2. Payment of Long Service Levy, Security, Development Levy and Fees (G.1)







Development Levy $12.50 + Index Amount Yes, quarterly T94

INSPECTION FEES under section 608 of the Local Government Act 1993

Security Administration Fee $158.00 No T16 TOTAL SECURITY, CONTRIBUTIONS,

LEVIES AND FEES $170.50




How must the payments be made? Payments must be made by: 1. Cash deposit with Council, 2. Credit card payment with Council, or 3. Bank cheque made payable to Woollahra Municipal Council. The payment of a security may be made by a bank guarantee where: a. the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b. the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council




How will a security and a section 94A levy be indexed? To ensure that the value of a security and development levy are not eroded over time by increases in costs, the security and proposed cost of carrying out development (from which the development levy is calculated) will be indexed either annually or quarterly (see table above). Clause 3.13 of the Woollahra Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2005 sets out the formula and index to be used in adjusting the s.94A levy. Do you need HELP indexing the security, bond or levy? Please contact our customer service officers. Failure to correctly calculate the adjusted security, bond or development levy will delay the issue of any Part 4A Certificate and could void any Part 4A Certificate (construction certificate, subdivision certificate, or occupation certificate). Deferred periodic payment of section 94A levy under the Woollahra Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2005


a. the reasons given; b. whether any prejudice will be caused to the community deriving benefit from the public facilities; c. whether any prejudice will be caused to the efficacy and operation of this plan; and d. whether the provision of public facilities in accordance with the adopted works schedule will be adversely affected. Council may, as a condition of accepting deferred or periodic payment, require the provision of a bank guarantee where:












4. Change of building use

(a) A building in respect of which there is a change of building use must comply with the Category 1 fire safety provisions applicable to the proposed new use.

Note. The obligation under this condition to comply with the Category 1 fire safety provisions may require building work to be carried out even though none is proposed or required in the relevant development consent.


Clause 187 or 188 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, subject to the terms of any condition or requirement referred to in Clause 187 (6) or 188 (4).















B. That the unlawful works, being the removal of the internal wall be permitted to remain.

Having regard to the unlawful works and the structural stability of the building, this matter shall be referred to the Manager Building & Compliance to take appropriate action under Part 6 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 in accordance with Council's Policy on Unauthorised Uses, Buildings & Works for failure to obtain Council's prior development consent.

Mr J Lukas Mr M Schofield SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ADVISINGS 1. Other approvals

An Application for Strata Title Subdivision under the Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Act 1973, if strata title subdivision of the development is proposed.

2. Works and requirements of other authorities Australia Post has requirements for the positioning and dimensions of mail boxes in new commercial and residential developments. A brochure is available from your nearest Australia Post Office.





4. Appeal Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr Jim Lukas. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

ANNEXURES 1. Plans and elevation




FILE No. DA 56/2005/1

ADDRESS:

2E Greenoaks Avenue DARLING POINT 2027

PROPOSAL:

Alterations & additions to existing RFB to create two strata apartments.

ZONING:

Residential 2(b)

TYPE OF CONSENT:

Local

APPLICANT:

Desmond Consolidated Pty Ltd

OWNER:

Desmond Consolidated Pty Ltd

DATE LODGED: AMENDED:

08/02/2005 11/7/2005, 24/8/2005 and 27/2/2006

AUTHOR:

Mr T Wong

1. PREAMBLE The Development Application (DA56/2005/1) for alterations & additions to existing RFB to create two strata apartments was considered by the Application Assessment Panel on 10 January 2006. The matter was deferred to a future meeting of the Application Assessment Panel, at the request of the applicant and objectors.

2. AMENDED PLANS Following the AAP meeting on 10/1/2006, further submissions were received from NEXUS Environmental Planning Pty Ltd on behalf of Strata Plan 12994 (Nos. 3-5 Marathon Road, Darling Point) and Townhouse Nos. 1 to 5 under the same Strata Plan in a separate letter. These further submissions mainly reiterated concerns regarding the lower pool house located to the south eastern corner. In response to the objectors’ concerns, the applicant provided amended plan with regard to the lower pool house, the height of which would be reduced by 200mm. In addition, a glazed panel has been added to the eastern wall of the lower pool house in an attempt to address the objectors concerns which entails loss of daylight and the perceived visual bulk of the wall. The applicant also requested Council Engineer and Tree Officer to review a number of conditions which were recommended in the original assessment report dated 10/1/2006. In support of the above, the following plans were submitted by the applicant:



Revision of driveway gradients pedestrian ramp and entry steps Garage & driveway ramp revisions – section Basement layout revisions Concept landscape plan revisions – east yard Lower pool house revisions 3. FURTHER CONSIDERATION Landscaping Council’s Tree Officer, David Grey, provided the following comments:

“COMMENTS The alterations to the original submission as per points 39 42 & 44, are acceptable to Tree Management section. The plant materials proposed in the supplied landscape plan are acceptable to Tree Management section.

RECOMMENDATIONS Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer has determined that the development proposal is satisfactory in terms of tree preservation and landscaping, subject to compliance with the following Conditions of Consent.”

Condition Nos. 34 to 45 are recommended accordingly. Vehicular access Council’s Development Engineer, Daniel Prease, provided the following comments:-

“The revised plans are noted to have addressed the issues raised within condition 34 of the DA report. Turntable having a 3 metre radius – This is noted upon the revised plans and reference to

this in the condition may be deleted. Removal of internal roller doors – The clearance from the rear of Unit 2 garage the turn

table is noted to be 5.5 metres and therefore it is physically possible that a roller door may be installed in this location. Unit 1 garage has adequate clearance as well. As such there are no objections to removal of this requirement however compliance with AS 2890.1 – 2004 Offstreet parking will still apply.

Reduction of ramp length – Revised ramp gradients appear satisfactory and comply with

the Standard. The level of excavation within the 6 metre radius would also appear to be correct given the proposed ramp gradient and existing ground levels. There are no objections to the removal of this requirement.

It is advised condition 34 be replaced with Councils standard condition of consent as stated following;



Vehicular access and garaging

Driveways and access ramps must be designed and constructed not to scrape the underside of cars. In all other respects the proposed basement garage, driveway and access ramp must be designed to comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 – “Off-Street car parking”.”

This condition is replaced and renumbered as Condition No. 29 accordingly. Lower pool house With respect to the objection raised by the residents from Townhouse Nos 1 to 5 at No. 2 Greenoaks Avenue, a site inspection was carried out on 10th May 2006 at these properties (Nos. 2, 3 and 4) with Mrs. Pratten (of Townhouse No. 2). It is revealed that the proposed changes to the lower pool house are considered satisfactory with regard to the concern raised by the objectors. Condition No. 1 is therefore recommended to include the amended plans forming part of the approved plans of the consent.


15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT the Council, as the consent authority, is of the opinion that the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to the 9.5 metres maximum building height development standard under the Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995 is well founded. The Council is also of the opinion that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of this case as the development will achieve the objectives of the height standard under Clause 12AA.

AND

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, being satisfied that the objection under SEPP No. 1 is well founded and also being of the opinion that the granting of consent to Development Application No. 56/2005 is consistent with the aims of the Policy, grant development consent to DA No. 56/2005 for residential flat building 1 or 2 storeys on land at 2E Greenoaks Avenue Darling Point, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved Plans

The development must be carried out in accordance with amended plans numbered 205 DA00 - 205 DA09 Issue C, dated 2 August, 2005, drawn by Morgan Dickson Architecture, and strata subdivision plans numbered 205 DA15 - 205 DA 17, dated 10/08/04, drawn by Morgan Dickson Architecture, including the amendment as shown on plans numbered 205 cnl 09 to 205 cnl 13 inclusive dated 22/2/2006, drawn by Morgan Dickson Architecture, and landscape plan numbered 03.580-DWG 001 Rev. E, dated November 2004, drawn by Context Landscape Design, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.



2. Modification of details of the development (s80A(1)(g) of the Act)

The approved plans must be amended and the Construction Certificate plans and specification, required to be submitted to the Certifying Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail that: (a) the proposed pool houses are not to be occupied as separate domiciles. (b) the solar tubes proposed for the metal roof shown on the East Elevation shall be

replaced with skylights that are flush with the metal deck roof. (c) the proposed rendered masonry wall (part of the pool fence) to the lower pool house

should only act as a retaining wall and above ground be a glazed fence to match the glazed pool fence

(d) the new fence along the northern boundary (maximum height of 1.8m) is to be of a light weight and transparent structure

Note: The effect of this condition is that it requires design changes and/or further information to be provided with the Construction Certificate drawings and specifications to address specific issues identified during assessment under section 79C of the Act. Note: Clause 146 of the Regulation prohibits the issue of any Construction Certificate subject to this condition unless the Certifying Authority is satisfied that the condition has been complied with. Note: Clause 145 of the Regulation prohibits the issue of any Construction Certificate that is inconsistent with this consent.




Certificate by:





4. Materials

Details of the colour, texture and substance of all external materials must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate and are to be to the satisfaction of an authorised Council assessment officer or the accredited certifier. For properties that are located in a Conservation Area or that are Heritage Items, the proposed materials must be to the satisfaction of Council's Heritage Officer.



5. Drawings to show levels and heights

The reduced levels of the floors and the overall height of the roofs of the proposed pool house structures in relation to Australian Height Datum must be shown on the drawings submitted with the Construction Certificate Application to ensure that building construction complies with the development consent.











The Applicant, Owner and Builder, jointly and severally, must ensure that they call their Principal Certifying Authority ("the PCA") to carry out such critical phase building inspections required by the PCA, the PCA Service Agreement and that the PCA is satisfied with the level of compliance achieved before the Builder proceeds to the next phase of construction. Ample notice of required inspections must be given to the PCA in accordance with the PCA Service Agreement. The Applicant, Owner and Builder must comply with the PCA Service Agreement (Service Contract) and any lawful direction given by the Principal Certifying Authority.



Note: It is the responsibility of the PCA to ensure that critical phase building inspections are undertaken in accordance with a PCA Service Agreement and issue to the Applicant, Owner and Builder appropriate Notice under Section 109L of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 ("the Act") where any breach of this consent occurs. Failure of the PCA to issue such notice may result in Council taking action under Section 109V of the Act. Failure of the Applicant, Owner and Builder to comply with a PCA Service Agreement and comply with lawful directions of the PCA under this condition may result in Council issuing fines, notices, orders and commencing legal proceedings. Council will only enter into PCA Agreements with the Owner of the land being developed. Council, if appointed as the PCA, will report to the owner of the land being developed.




Stormwater run-off from the proposed alterations and additions must drain to the existing stormwater drainage system. The existing stormwater drainage pipes on the property must be checked and certified by a practising hydraulic engineer to ensure that all existing stormwater pipes are in good condition and are operating satisfactorily. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Note: connection of stormwater run-off to the Sydney Water sewer system is not permitted. If the existing stormwater pipes are not in good condition and/or not operating satisfactorily, the existing drainage system must be upgraded. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters of the upgraded system must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Stormwater disposal is to comply with the requirements and conditions as set out in Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control and Local Approvals Policy.


An erosion and sediment control plan, designed in accordance with the SSROC Soil and Water Management Brochures titled “Do it Right on Site” and the current version of the NSW Landcom publication “Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction” (The Blue Book), must be prepared to show erosion and sediment control measures which are to be installed. The Plan must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier for approval before commencement of excavation or construction work.



14. Compliance with erosion and sediment control plan

The erosion and sediment control plan must be implemented during site works and construction activities. All controls in the Plan must be maintained at all times. A copy of the Plan must be kept on-site at all times and made available to the accredited certifier and Council officers on request.

15. Sediment removal from vehicle wheels

A vehicle wheel wash, cattle grid, wheel shaker or other appropriate device, must be installed to prevent mud and dirt leaving the site and being deposited on the street.

16. Display of Council’s warning sign for soil and water management

Throughout the excavation and construction period, Council’s warning sign for soil and water management must be displayed on the most prominent point of the building site, visible both from the street and site. A copy of the sign is available from Council.

17. Stockpiles









a. describe the anticipated impact of the construction works on: local traffic routes pedestrian circulation adjacent to the building site and on-street parking in the local area, and;



b. describe the means proposed to: manage construction works to minimise such impacts, provide for the standing of vehicles during construction, provide for the movement of trucks to and from the site, and deliveries to the site, and; c. show the location of: any site sheds and any anticipated use of cranes and concrete pumps, any areas of Council property on which it is proposed to install a Works Zone





22. Driveways and associated works

The following works must be undertaken at the applicant’s expense prior to the final building inspection and the issue of the Occupation Certificate. Full reconstruction of the existing driveway crossing and kerb laybacks, fronting the

vehicle entry to the site. The design and construction of the driveway must be in accordance with Council’s Standard Drawing RF2. Levels in the footpath area must match existing.

Full reconstruction of the existing footpath, fronting the site. All surface levels must match existing, being flush and consistent with the adjoining

sections.

An “Application to carry out works in a public road” must be completed and submitted to Council’s Customer Service Centre and approved by Council prior to commencement of construction of a new driveway. For any technical enquiries regarding alteration to existing footpath levels, alignments or inspections, please contact Council’s Works Supervisor on 9391 7982.







25. Footpath levels










29. Vehicular access and garaging

Driveways and access ramps must be designed and constructed not to scrape the underside of cars.

In all other respects the proposed basement garage, driveway and access ramp must be designed to comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 – “Off-Street car parking”

30. Vehicle Turntable

The proposed vehicle turn table must be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s standards and guidelines.

Upon completion of its installation, a suitably qualified traffic engineer must certify that the device is structurally sound and operating as intended. This certification must be provided to the Accredited Certifier prior to the issue of the Final Occupation Certificate.

31. Dilapidation survey

A dilapidation survey of the following property and infrastructure must be conducted prior to any site work. The extent of the survey must cover the likely “zone of influence” that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. A practising structural engineer must prepare a full dilapidation report on the structural condition of all existing structures at the following locations:

5 Marathon Ave 2D Greenoaks Avenue 2F Greenoaks Avenue

The Report must be completed and submitted to Council prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or construction works. A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed prior to the commencement of works, must be carried out at the completion of the works and be submitted to Council.

32. Compliance with the recommendations of the geotechnical and hydrogeological reports

The development works are to be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical and Hydrogeological reports prepared by Geotechnique P/L (Refer to Report No. 10500 /1-AA dated 18th August 2004 and Report No. 10500 /2-AA dated 25th November 2005).

33. Structural Certification of excavation works and associated structures.

The following development works have been identified as possibly effecting the stability of surrounding property and structures during their construction; Basement garage Swimming pool



Due to this, the excavation and construction of these development works must be overseen by an engineer. This is to ensure the stability of surrounding property / infrastructure is not adversely affected by such works. Excavation, retention, underpinning and construction must be undertaken on-site by an excavation contractor with specialist excavation experience. A suitably qualified geotechnical or structural engineer, specialising in excavation, must supervise the excavation procedure. This engineer is to provide certification to the Accredited Certifier, prior to issue of the final Occupation Certificate, that excavation, retention, underpinning and construction of all the excavation works stated above has been conducted:

a. According to the relevant Australian Standards and Codes of Practice, and b. In a manner that does not compromise the structural integrity of all adjacent structures

and property. 34. Existing trees which must be retained

The following trees are to be retained on the site and protected during all works. Trees on Council Land



25 Ficus rubiginosa Port Jackson Fig

Front – Council verge 10 x 12

26 Unknown species Front – Council verge – East of driveway 14 x 8 Trees on Private Property



1 Araucaria bidwillii Bunya Pine Front – Driveway 20 x 8 3,4,5,6 & 7 5 x Cyathea australis Rough tree

fern Front – East of driveway 6 x 2

14,15,16 & 17 4 x Archontophoenix cunninghamiana Bangalow Palm

Side – South east corner (As a group planting)

12m to 16m

19 & 20 2 x Archontophoenix alexandrae Alexander Palm

Side – South east corner 12m

21 Fortunella japonica Kumquat Rear - Centre 3 x 3 22 Waterhousia floribunda Weeping

Lilly Pilly Rear – East boundary 16 x 20

23 Cinnamomum camphora Camphor Laurel

Rear – East boundary 18 x 20

24 Howea forsteriana Kentia Palm Side – South west corner (Adjacent to garden steps)

10 x 3





35. Trees which may be transplanted within the site

The following trees, which Council has requires to be retained, must be transplanted and successfully established elsewhere within the development site.


Species Present Location Required Location

6 & 7 2 x Cyathea australis Rough tree fern

Front – East of driveway Front – adjacent to tree No 4 & No5

14,15,16 & 17 4 x Archontophoenix cunninghamiana Bangalow Palm

Side – South east corner (As a group planting)

Rear – North east corner

19 & 20 2 x Archontophoenix alexandrae Alexander Palm

Side – South east corner Within site

21 Fortunella japonica Kumquat Rear - Centre Within site

The applicant is to pay for all costs associated with the transplanting of the abovementioned trees to a suitable alternate location on the subject site. The transplantation must be supervised by a qualified Arborist, Horticulturist or Landscape Technician experienced in transplantation. A Transplantation Method Statement, detailing the following points, must be submitted for approval by Council prior to issue of a Construction Certificate. (i) Pre-transplantation schedule of works. (ii) Preparation of transplantation site. (iii) Transplantation method. (iv) Post-transplantation aftercare and duration. The Statement is to be prepared by a qualified Arborist (minimum qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 5 or recognised equivalent) or Horticulturist, who is experience in transplantation.

36. Trees which may be removed

This consent includes approval under Council’s Tree Preservation Order to remove the following trees:






Front – West boundary 18 x 14

8,9,10,11 &12 5 x Cupressus spp Cypress Pine Side – South boundary Average 10m

The Construction Certificate plans must include reference to the removal of the above mentioned trees and identify the trees by Council’s reference number (Council Ref No:) and colour or shade them in the colour red.

37. No excavation within tree root zones

To allow for the preservation of a viable root zone, excavation work must not be undertaken within the specified radius of the trunks of the following trees. Beyond this radius, excavation is permissible only after root pruning by hand along the perimeter line of such works has been carried out.


Species Location Radius from Trunk(Metres)

1 Araucaria bidwillii Bunya Pine Front – Driveway 6 m – Inset of up to 1.5 metre for vehicle ramp permitted

22 Waterhousia floribunda Weeping Lilly Pilly

Rear – East boundary

4 m

38. Paving in the vicinity of trees

Paving works within the specified radius from the trunks of the following trees must be constructed in such a way as to ensure that the existing moisture infiltration and gaseous exchange to the tree root system are maintained.



1 Araucaria bidwillii Bunya Pine Front – Driveway 6m

Paving works are to be designed in consultation with a qualified Arborist (minimum qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent) and are to utilise such measures as semiporous material.

39. Level changes in the vicinity of trees

No level changes are to occur within the specified radius from the trunks of the following trees to allow for the preservation of their root zones.



1 Araucaria bidwillii Bunya Pine

Front – Driveway 6m – Inset of up to 1.5m for new steps permitted

22 Waterhousia floribunda Weeping Lilly Pilly

Rear – East boundary 4m





40. Driveway Surface

The removal of the existing driveway surface adjacent to Tree No1 Bunya Pine should not be undertaken until the final stage of works. The new crushed gravel surface should be installed within 48 hours of the existing driveway surface being removed. No level changes are to undertaken or roots cut within a radius of 6 metres from the Bunya Pine. The removal of the existing surface and the installation of the new surface are to be supervised by an Arborist with a minimum qualification of Level 5 Arboriculture. Where the construction period extends beyond 6 months, 3 monthly Level 5 arborist reports shall be submitted to Council’s Tree Management/Landscape Officer to assess whether the tree protection and mitigation measures are being implemented effectively.

Reason: To ensure protection of the trees root system throughout the construction works. 41. Tree Protection Zones


a) Tree Protection Zones are to established within the specified radius from the trunks of




1 Araucaria bidwillii Bunya Pine Front – Driveway 4m 22 Waterhousia floribunda Weeping

Lilly Pilly Rear – East boundary 4m



25 Ficus rubiginosa Port Jackson Fig Front – Council verge 3m 26 Unknown species Front – Council verge –

East of driveway 3m

b) Tree Protection Zones are to be fenced with a 1.8 meter high chainmesh or weldmesh

fence to minimise disturbance to existing ground conditions. The area within the fence must be mulched, to a depth of 75mm, irrigated and maintained for the duration of the construction works.

c) Trunk protection, to the maximum height permitted by the first branches, is to be

installed around the trunks of tress listed in the table below;

Council Reference No: Species Location

1 Araucaria bidwillii Bunya Pine Front – Driveway




d) Installation of all Tree Protection measures is to be at the direction of and overseen by a qualified Arborist (minimum Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent).

e) A sign must be erected on each side of the fence indicating the existence of a Tree

Protection Zone and providing the contact details of the site Arborist. f) Existing soil levels must be maintained within Tree Protection Zones. Where excavation

is undertaken adjacent such an area, the edge of the excavation must be stabilised, until such time as permanent measures are installed (eg. retaining wall etc) to prevent erosion within the Tree Protection Zone.

g) Sediment control measures are to be installed around all Tree Protection Zones to

protect the existing soil levels. h) The storage of materials, stockpiling, siting of works sheds, preparation of mixes,

cleaning of tools or equipment is not permitted within Tree Protection Zones.

i) Site personnel must be made aware of all Tree Protection requirements, measures and any actions that constitute a breach of the Conditions of Development Consent with regard to tree protection on site during their site induction.

42. Protective fencing mulching and irrigation around trees

To limit the potential for damage to trees to be retained, the area beneath their canopies must be fenced. The fencing must encompass the maximum possible area covered by the dripline of the canopy to allow for development and remain in place until the completion of building works. The fencing should be a minimum of a 1.8 metres high chainlink or welded mesh fencing. The fencing is to be maintained for the duration of the building works. To ensure adequate moisture levels for the growing medium, protected within the fenced areas, all areas within the perimeter of the safety fencing are to be covered with woodchip mulch to a depth of 100mm. All steep gradients unable to be effectively covered with mulch are to be protected with hessian cloth to be kept at a moisture level sufficient to ensure the preservation of tree root systems. To ensure the continued preservation of the aforementioned existing trees by providing adequate soil moisture, a irrigation program or temporary irrigation system is to be installed and an irrigation program maintained during the full course of construction works.

43. Barricading for earthworks

Earthworks shall not commence until the trunks of the following trees are protected by the placement of 2m lengths of 50 x 100 mm hardwood timbers, spaced at 150 mm centres and secured by 8 gauge wire at 300 mm spacing. The trunk protection must be maintained intact until the completion of all work on site. Any damage to the trees must be treated immediately by a experienced Horticulturist/Arborist with a minimum qualification of Horticulture Certificate/Tree Surgery Certificate.





1 Arauicaria bidwillii Bunya Pine Front - Driveway 20 x 8 25 Ficus rubiginosa Port Jackson Fig Front - Council verge 10 x 12 26 Unknown species Front - Council verge - East

of driveway 14 x 8

44. Street trees

The area beneath the canopy of any street tree adjacent to the frontage of the property, excluding vehicle crossings and footpaths, must be fenced using a minimum of 1.8 metres high chainlink or welded mesh fencing. The fencing must be maintained for the duration of the building works. Storage of materials or plant must not occur within the fenced area.



46. Payment of Long Service Levy and Security

The person(s) with the benefit of this consent must pay the following long service levy, security, and fees prior to the issue of any construction certificate, subdivision certificate or occupation certificate, as will apply. The certifying authority must not issue any Part 4A Certificate until provided with the original receipt(s) for the payment of all of the following levy, security, contributions, and fees. Specifically a. prior to the issue of a construction certificate, where a construction certificate is














Infrastructure Works Bond -Completing any public work (such as road work, kerbing and guttering, footway construction, stormwater drainage and environmental controls) required in connection with the consent.



Security Administration Fee $158 No T16 TOTAL SECURITY, CONTRIBUTIONS,



How must the payments be made? Payments must be made by: 1. Cash deposit with Council, 2. Credit card payment with Council, or 3. Bank cheque made payable to Woollahra Municipal Council. The payment of a security may be made by a bank guarantee where: a. the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b. the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council






a. the reasons given; b. whether any prejudice will be caused to the community deriving benefit from the public facilities; c. whether any prejudice will be caused to the efficacy and operation of this plan; and d. whether the provision of public facilities in accordance with the adopted works schedule will be adversely

affected.



Council may, as a condition of accepting deferred or periodic payment, require the provision of a bank guarantee where:






47. Requirement for a Subdivision Certificate

A Subdivision Certificate must be obtained pursuant to the provisions of Section 109 C (1)(d) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 prior to the commencement of subdivision works.


An erosion and sediment control plan, designed in accordance with the SSROC Soil and Water Management Brochures titled “Do it Right on Site” and the current version of the NSW Landcom publication “Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction” (The Blue Book), must be prepared to show erosion and sediment control measures which are to be installed. The Plan must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier for approval before commencement of excavation or construction work.

49. Compliance with erosion and sediment control plan

The erosion and sediment control plan must be implemented during site works and construction activities. All controls in the Plan must be maintained at all times. A copy of the Plan must be kept on-site at all times and made available to the accredited certifier and Council officers on request.

50. Swimming Pools and Spa Pools

The pools must comply with the following requirements:

All waste water must be drained into the main sewer with the permission of Sydney Water;

Filtration or other mechanically operated equipment must be operated by a time switch and must be installed set and sealed so that the operation of such equipment is limited to between the hours of 7.00 am and 7.00 p.m. daily;

Filtration or other mechanically operated equipment must be installed in a masonry housing and treated to prevent the noise level, when the equipment is in operation, from rising above the background noise level, when measured at the boundaries of the subject site;



Vertical depth markers must be permanently fitted and clearly visible at the deep and shallow ends of the pools to ensure reasonable levels of safety;

Where the pool concourse is higher than 1 metre above the adjacent ground level, a protective guard or handrail complying with the provisions of Clause D2.16 of the Building Code of Australia must be fitted;

An egress ladder or steps into the pools must be provided to ensure reasonable levels of safety;

The pools must be fenced, prior to filling the structures with water to a depth of 300 mm or more in such a manner so as to obstruct the entry to the pools in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 and Regulations and Australian Standard 1926 "Fences and Gates for Private Swimming Pools;"

All overflow and splash must be contained within the boundaries of the site, to ensure reasonable levels of amenity for neighbouring properties and the locality;

Warning notices must be provided in accordance with the provisions of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 Section 17 and Regulation 8, to ensure reasonable levels of safety;

The pools should be filled in accordance with the water restriction requirements of Sydney Water and not filled prior to obtaining a permit from Sydney Water.



52. Site fencing


53. Waste storage and collection

For development containing four dwellings or less a communal bin bay external to the building is permitted subject to it being located within the boundary within the property boundary with minimal impact on the adjoining properties. For developments containing more than 4 units a Waste Storage Room is required. The waste storage room/ bin bay must be sufficiently sized so as to accommodate: (a) 100 litres of putrescible waste per residential dwelling stored in 240 and/or 120 litre

mobile garbage bins. (b) 50 litres of recyclable per residential dwelling stored in colour coded, shared use mobile

bins and/or 50 litre crates. (c) One 240 litre mobile garbage for garden organic, per 500 square metres of landscaped

area. (d) For residential developments with three storeys or less, residents may use the central

waste storage. (e) Residents must not be required to wheel bins a distance of greater than 75m from the

waste storage area to the collection point (usually the kerb) for collection. For development applications using SEPP (State Environmental Planning Policy No. 5: Housing for Older People or People with a Disability) the maximum distance is 50m.



54. Demolition and disposal of hazardous materials

Removal, cleaning and disposal of lead-based paint must conform to the current EPA guidelines. Demolition of materials incorporating lead is to be conducted in strict accordance with sections 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 3.1 and 3.9 of the Australian Standard AS2601-1991, Demolition of Structures. Hazardous dust must not be allowed to escape from the site. The use of fine mesh dust proof screens or other measures is recommended. Any existing accumulations of dust (eg. ceiling voids and wall cavities) must be removed by the use of an industrial vacuum cleaner fitted with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. All dusty surfaces and dust created from work must be suppressed by a fine water spray. Water must not be allowed to enter the street or stormwater systems. Demolition must not be performed during high winds, which may cause dust to spread beyond the site boundaries. All contractors and employees directly involved in the removal of hazardous dusts and substances must wear protective equipment conforming to Australian Standard AS1716 Respiratory Protective Devices and must adopt work practices in accordance with the requirements of WorkSafe’s Control of Inorganic Lead At Work (NOHSC:102(1994) and NOHSC:2015(1994)). All lead-contaminated materials must be disposed of in accordance with the EPA’s requirements.

55. 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.
















Note:The amount referred to in paragraph (a) (iv) above is prescribed by regulations under the

Home Building Act 1989. As at the date on which this Regulation was Gazetted, that amount was $5,000. As those regulations are amended from time to time, so that amount may vary.




















61. Protection of public places

(a) If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building:

(i) is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic on a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or

(ii) building involves the enclosure of a public place;

a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.

(b) If necessary, an awning must be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the public place.

(c) The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous

to persons in the public place.

(d) Any such hoarding, fence or awning must be removed when the work has been completed.

Note: Prior to the erection of any hoarding, fence or the like on any footpath or other property owned or controlled by Council, permission must be sought and obtained from Council and the prescribed rental fee paid.





(b) Any such sign must be removed when the work has been completed. (c) This clause does not apply to:








Building Act 1989. 64. Fire safety

A schedule of all existing and proposed safety measures within the building must be submitted to Council with or before the application for a Construction Certificate.

Thomass Wong George Fotis SENIORASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ADVISINGS 1. Other approvals

This development consent does not remove the need to obtain any other statutory consent or approval necessary under any other Act, including: an Application for Approval under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for an

activity under that Act, including the erection of a hoarding. All such applications must comply with the Building Code of Australia.

an application for an Occupation Certificate under Section 109(C)(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

An application for an Occupation Certificate may be lodged with Council if the applicant has nominated Council as the Principal Certifying Authority.

an Application for a Subdivision Certificate under Section 109(C)(1)(d) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 if land (including stratum) subdivision of the development site is proposed;

an Application for Strata Title Subdivision under the Strata Schemes (Freehold Development) Act 1973, if strata title subdivision of the development is proposed.






Australia Post has requirements for the positioning and dimensions of mail boxes in new commercial and residential developments. A brochure is available from your nearest Australia Post Office.








"Builders are advised to obtain a copy of the EPA publication Solutions to Pollution for Builders which provides environmental information including hazardous material management. The EPA can be contacted by phone on 131 555 or at www.epa.nsw.gov.au "

6. Air Conditioning Systems Residential Premises Under Clause 52 of the Noise Control Regulation 2000 a person must not cause or permit an air conditioner to be used on residential premises in such a manner that it emits noise that can be heard within a habitable room in any other residential premises (regardless of whether any door or window to that room is open):

(a) before 8am or after 10pm on any Saturday, Sunday or Public Holiday, or (b) before 7am or after 10pm on any other day.









10. Building Code of Australia classification

The classification of the buildings pursuant to the Building Code of Australia is 1 and 10a.

11. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr T Wong. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

ANNEXURES A. Amended plans numbered 205 cnl 09 to 205 cnl 13 B. Letter from Morgan Dickson Architecture dated 20/2/2006 C. Assessment Report dated 10/1/2006



SECTION 96 APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT ITEM No. D10

FILE No. DA 368/2004/2

ADDRESS: 32A Darling Point Road DARLING POINT 2027

EXISTING CONSENT:

DA 368/2004/1

TYPE OF CONSENT: Local Development DATE OF CONSENT: 15/02/2005

ZONING: Residential 2(b) zone PROPOSED MODIFICATION:

Modify part of approved roof, delete two windows, add two new Julliet balconies and minor changes to internal layout.

DATE S96 LODGED:

25/01/2006

CONSENT AUTHORITY:

Council

APPLICANT: Stening Architects OWNER: Mr R H Fisher AUTHOR: Ms C Owen LOCALITY PLAN


North

Locality Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report In accordance with Council’s delegations, the matter is referred to the Application Assessment Panel, as an objection has been received that has not been resolved. Issues Visual and acoustic privacy of residents of 32 Darling Point Road Objections Council received two (2) objections. Recommendation Approval, subject to conditions.

2. DESCRIPTION OF APPROVED PROPOSAL The original DA was approved at AAP and the works included: Ground Floor Level Refurbishment of the laundry and bathrooms and installation of a butler's pantry and cellar

within the existing fabric of the building; Extension of the existing enclosed verandah on the ground floor to provide a screened loggia;

and Refurbishment of the existing swimming pool, installation of a new pool fence, modification to

the steps to the back garden and general minor landscaping works involving changes to paving in the immediate perimeter of the building.

Level 1 Extension of garage providing 2 car spaces, with detailing of the existing and modified steps

retained, to include new gardeners' WC below and kitchen door; Extension of the existing enclosed verandah to provide a screened loggia with glazing to

louvred side opening. A 400mm high x 500mm wide planter at the edge of the loggia slab and bi-folding doors to the west façade

Acoustic treatment to the ceilings of the loggia and terrace Refurbishment of kitchen and scullery; and Alterations to side steps. Level 2 Enclosure of the existing east-facing balcony to the master bedroom and provision of new

windows; Modifications to fenestration; and Internal alterations.



Attic Level Minor extension to existing dormer windows to the existing attic bedrooms; and Internal alterations to stair and en suite.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED MODIFICATION The proposed modifications include the demolition and reconstruction of the existing rear loggia structure as per the original consent, DA 368/2004/1, subject to additional amendments. The demolition of the existing structure is necessary to implement the previously approved works which are not possible to implement without the replacement of the existing building fabric. Additional other minor works are also included in the new DA, including: Ground level

Refurbishment of wet bar in playroom Level 1

Removal of internal wall to create open living/dinning space New stud wall in living/dinning space with bi-fold doors Decorative fireplace in living room Deletion of approved south facing loggia window and louvres and insertion of ‘blind

window’ (space would be bricked up however indentation of window shape would remain) Extended copper roof to loggia Removal of internal skin and engaged piers of garage and apply a waterproof coating to the

exterior Level 2

Replacement of approved west facing windows to master bedroom and bedroom 2, with timber glazed doors and Juliet balconies

Deletion of approved master bedroom window on north elevation Deletion of approved south facing window of bedroom 2 and insertion of ‘Blind’ window

Revised plans were submitted on 14/3/2006 which proposed to replace the existing roof tiles with terra cotta shingles.

4. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The subject property is located at the northern junction of Darling Point Road, Loftus Road and Annandale Street, Darling Point. The property at No. 32A Darling Point Road is a large 4-storey house, erected during the Inter-War period in the Georgian Revival style, on the terraced site, sloping from Darling Point Road. This residence presents as a two-storey building to the street, with a single-storey gabled double garage backing onto a second gable, forming the entry porch. The approved DA included works to extend the existing east facing balconies on ground and first floor to result in enclosed loggias. The roof has been converted to an attic with west-facing dormers. The large rear garden area consists of a series of landscaped terraces, with a swimming pool in the garden. This property is adjoined to the south by a two and three-storey residential flat building containing 3 apartments, designed by J. Horbury Hunt, known as 'Cloncorrick'. Both these properties have been subdivided and the current layout of these two properties was part of an original subdivision.



The subject dwelling was built within the grounds of 'Cloncorrick' at No. 1 Annandale Street, which resulted in a compromised setting for both properties and the unusual subdivision. To the north is a large, Federation-style dwelling positioned on an excavated site with modern additions. To the south is a large brick, late 19th century house with three-storey, gabled timber additions. These additions front the subject site and a large verandah overlooks the garden. A modern brick apartment building adjoins the site to the west. The immediate surrounds are characterised by grand-scale dwellings on truncated sites, mixed with apartment buildings of a variety of styles.

5. PROPERTY HISTORY Apart from the original application, to which this S96 applies, Council's records show that three building applications were received for alterations and additions to this building in 1981, 1976 and 1972.

6. REFERRALS 6.1 Heritage The revised plans were referred to Council’s Heritage Officer, Ms L Thom, who made the following comments: I refer to the following documents received for this report: Drawing set by Stening Architects numbered 1.S96; 2.S96; 3.S96 dated Dec 05 Letter from Jennifer Stenning 14.3.06 SEE 10.03.06 Heritage Status: Heritage item: no Conservation area: Darling Point Road Heritage Conservation Area Vicinity of heritage item: yes – no.1 Yarranabee Rd and no.32 Darling Point Rd (no.1

Annandale St) Potential heritage item no Significance of property to the conservation area “The subject house, built about 1941, is a good example of an Inter-War Georgian Revival house with much of the original house intact. The house has suffered from painting of the original terracotta tile roof, timber shingles and face brickwork and this has obscured much of the original decorative brick detailing. The house contributes to the significance of the conservation area because its design complements the late 19th century and early 20th century houses which largely determine the significance of the conservation area.” 2004 Heritage Referral Kate Higgins Assessment of heritage impact The proposed alterations to the original approval are relatively minor and will have a negligible impact upon the significance of the Darling Point Road Heritage Conservation Area. The most significant visual impact will be the replacement of the existing roof with terracotta shingles. The existing roof is a tile roof that has been painted green and is hence intrusive in the precinct. The new terracotta shingles will suit the architecture of the building and will make a positive contribution to the conservation area.



There will also be a positive impact upon the adjoining heritage item at 32 Darling Point Road due to the removal of the intrusive green tiles on the roof of 32A. Recommendation Approval ASSESSMENT UNDER S96 7.1 S96 (2) Other Modifications The original DA was for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including the extension of the existing garage and changes to the external rear balconies. The proposed development seeks to make minor internal alterations and minor changes to the approved rear loggias, as well as the removal of several approved windows and the replacement of approved first floor windows with balconies. The proposed works would only result in minor amendments to an approved scheme. The proposed works are of a nature which would not merit a new development application. 7.2 Substantially the same development Section 96 (2)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, requires Council as the consent authority to be satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified. The proposed works are for the minor internal and external alterations to the existing dwelling which would result in substantially the same development, as the works would not significantly alter the approved building envelope. 7.3 S96 (2) (b) Consultation with Minister, public authority or approval body N/A 7.4 Threatened species N/A ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:

8. RELEVANT STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION



8.1 SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Under clause 7 (1) (a) of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether the land is contaminated. An assessment of the Initial site evaluation indicates the land does not require further consideration under clause 7 (1) (b) and (c) of SEPP 55. 8.2 REPs SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 The impact of the original DA in relation to the views from Sydney Harbour were carefully considered during the assessment of the original application, DA 368/2004/1. The proposed amendments to that application would not have any further significant impacts on the views from the harbour and accordingly, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the provisions of this instrument. 8.3 Other relevant legislation None which are applicable to this application.

9. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 9.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5)) The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2(b) zone. 9.2 Statutory compliance table Site Area (717.3m²) Approved



Overall Height 13.5m 9.0m 9.5m YES

* Existing non-compliance 9.3 Height The proposed development would be 9.0m in height which would be in compliance with the maximum height allowance of 9.5m as set out in the WLEP, 1995. 9.4 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 18 Excavation: The proposed excavation is acceptable in terms of Clause 18. Clause 19 HFSPA: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 19(2).



Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 25(1) and (2). Clause 25D Acid Sulphate Soils: The proposed works do not require the need for an assessment of acid sulphate soils under clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995. Clauses 26-33 Heritage and conservation area provisions: The subject site is situated within the Darling Point Road Heritage Conservation Area and is located in the vicinity of heritage items, being 'Cloncorrick' to the southwest at No. 32 Darling Point Road, and No. 1 Yarranabbe Road to the northeast. Accordingly assessment of the heritage impact of the proposal is required under Clauses 27 and 28 of the WLEP. The impact of the originally approved works was assessed at the original application stage. These further proposed amendments to the approved consent are considered minor and as a result would not have any negative impact on the adjoining individual Heritage Items or the Conservation Area. The proposal is therefore acceptable in relation to heritage and conservation.

10. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS None relevant to this application.

11. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 11.1 Numeric Compliance table - Woollahra Residential Development Control Plan 2003 Site Area (717.3m²) Approved



Maximum Number of Storeys – Dwelling part 2/ part 4 Part 2/ part 4 2 NO*

Building Footprint 23.9% (171.46m²)

23.9% (171.46m2)

40% (286.92m² ) YES

Floor Space Ratio 0.66:1 0.66:1 0.55:1 max NO*

* Existing non-compliance Site analysis performance criteria (Part 3) A suitable site analysis plan was submitted with the application. Due to the minor nature of the work the proposal would not have any negative impacts on the objectives of Section 3.1 of the WRDCP, 2003. Desired future precinct character objectives and performance criteria (Part 4) The minor alterations would not have any negative impact on the desired future character performance of the Darling Point Road Conservation Area or the overall character of Darling Point. Streetscape performance criteria (Section 5.1) The majority of the proposed works would take place at the rear of the property and would not have any impact on the streetscape.



Council’s Heritage Officer has commented that the replacement of the existing roof with terracotta tiles would lead to a significant visual improvement to the streetscape. Views performance criteria (Section 5.5) The proposed works would not impact significantly on the approved building form and therefore would not impact on any existing views or vistas. Acoustic and visual privacy performance criteria (Section 5.8) Due to the proximity of the subject property and the adjoining property, 32 Darling Point Road, a certain amount of overlooking is inevitable. The original application 368/2004/1 sought to limit the impacts on visual and acoustic privacy through the use of louver windows on the south elevation and the soundproofing of the ceiling of the first floor loggia. This S96 application seeks to see the approved first floor, south facing louvered, loggia window and the approved second floor, south facing bedroom window replaced with ‘blind windows’ (the window space would be blocked up however the window indentation would remain). The sealing up of these openings would act to increase the visual and acoustic privacy of the flats within 32 Darling Point Road, and the subject property. Two objections have been raised in relation to the two proposed west facing Juliet balconies off the master bedroom and bedroom 2 on level 2. The balconies would each be 0.9m deep and 2.7m wide. Due to their small size and the private nature of the rooms from which they are accessed, the use of the balconies is likely to be limited. The space provided by the approved ground and first floor loggias also mean that the Juliet balconies are unlikely to be used extensively. The doors of the balconies have also been located at the furthest point from the adjacent buildings to minimise negative impacts. The private open space of flat 2, 32 Darling Point Road is under a verandah which restricts much of the views from the subject site. The proposed Juliet balconies would not provide direct sight into any windows of 32 Darling Point Road and the impact of them is not considered to be any greater than the approved windows. The height of the proposed Juliet balconies would mean that no impact would be had on 1 Yarrenabbe Road, to the north of the site. The replacement of the approved master bedroom window with a ‘blind window’ would act to increase visual privacy. The proposed amendments to the approved windows and the minimal impact of the proposed Juliet balconies mean that there would be no detrimental impacts on the visual or acoustic privacy of the adjoining properties and is therefore considered acceptable. Access and mobility performance criteria (Section 5.13) Not relevant having regard to the minor nature of the proposal. 11.2 Woollahra Access DCP The Access DCP applies to all classes of buildings and includes alterations to Class 1, dwellings. The proposal is for minor alterations to an existing dwelling. The Access DCP encourages, rather than requires, visitor access for older people or people with a disability for Class 1 buildings. Details of Access have not been provided in this proposal, however, this is considered acceptable under the provisions of the DCP due to the minor scale of the proposed works.



11.3 Other DCPs, codes and policies None relevant to this application.

12. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS None relevant to this application.

13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE MODIFIED DEVELOPMENT All the likely impacts of this development have been discussed in earlier sections of this report.

14. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with the regulations and in accordance with the Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. Two (2) submissions were received from: Rob Chandler and Kathryn Warman- owners of Flat 3, 32 Darling Point Road, Darling Point Catriona Wilson on behalf of Mrs. M Wilson- Flat 2 32 Darling Point Road, Darling Point The objections raised the following issues: Comment: “Loss of privacy to 32 Darling Point Road” Response: The proximity of the subject site and 32 Darling Point Road to each other means that there is already a degree of overlooking. The proposed works would result in a number of approved windows and louver windows being blocked up which would improve privacy. The proposed Juliet balconies would not result in any direct sightlines into the habitable rooms of the adjacent property and the use of the balconies is likely to be limited due to the private function of the rooms. The impacts of the balconies are therefore considered acceptable. Comment: “Loss of acoustic privacy to Darling Point Road” Response: The two Juliet balconies would be located off the master bedroom and bedroom 2. The private function of the rooms, means that the use of the balconies would be limited and not for social functions. The doors of the balconies have been located away from the adjoining properties which would further reduce the impacts of the balconies. The impacts of the balconies on acoustic privacy are not considered to be detrimental to the adjoining property, 32A Darling Point Road. Comment: “Loss of security to 32 Darling Point Road” Response: The use of the balconies for a private residence is not considered to impact negatively on the security of the adjoining residences.

The revised plans submitted, on 14/3/2006, which related to the replacement of the existing roof with terra cotta shingles were advertised in accordance with the regulations and in accordance with the Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. No submissions were received.




16. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT Council, as the consent authority, modify development consent to Development Application No. 368/2004/2 for Section 96 Modification on land at 32A Darling Point Road Darling Point, in the following manner: Condition No. 1 is to be amended as follows: 1. Approved Section 96 Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on plans numbered 2081 DA1 and DA3, both issue A, dated 24.01.05 and drawing numbered 2081 DA2, dated March 2004, and drawn by Stenning Architects, as amended by all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, as amended by the works shown in colour on plans numbered 2081-1, 2081-2 and 2081-3, dated December 2005, drawn by Stening Architects, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved S96 Plans” and the signature of a Council officer on the plans except where amended by the following conditions.

Condition No. 2 is deleted Ms C Owen Mr G Fotis ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER ANNEXURES

1. Plans and elevation 2. Photographs of subject site and setting




FILE No. DA 489/2005/1

ADDRESS:

134 Glenmore Road PADDINGTON 2021

PROPOSAL:

Alterations and additions to existing dwelling.

TYPE OF CONSENT: Local

APPLICANT: GDB Architecture Pty Ltd OWNER: Mr C D & Mrs S J Delmenico DATE LODGED:

09/08/2005 (Amended plan received on 11/12/2005)

AUTHOR: Mr T Wong LOCALITY PLAN


North

Paddington Society

Locality Plan



1. SUMMARY Reason for report Having regard to Council’s delegations, the matter has been referred to the Application Assessment Panel for determination, as one objection has been received, which cannot be overcome by conditions. Issues Heritage Conservation Building height Scale and Bulk Privacy Objections One objection was received.

Cost of works The stated cost of the proposed work of $500,000 has been checked using the standard criteria specified in the Cordell Building Guide and is considered to be accurate. Recommendation Approval 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The proposal includes the following works:- First Floor - Demolition of the rear section (including the existing kitchen, living room,

bathroom and sitting room) and to create new kitchen/causal dining area, laundry, toilet, a central courtyard and a rear timber deck balcony

Second Floor – Extending the second floor to the rear (north) aligning with the first floor below to create a new master bedroom with ensuite and walk-in robe and a rear timber deck balcony

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The subject site is located on the northern side of Glenmore Road, Paddington, near Brown Street. The area is dominated by two and three storey terrace development. The site is also directly opposite from the Paddington Green Development. The site slopes down from south to north with many of the terraces on the northern side of Glenmore Road including a floor below street level. The site is occupied by a terrace that presents as two storeys to Glenmore Road and three storeys to the rear. The site has a double garage accessible from Cooper Lane at the rear.



4. PROPERTY HISTORY The most recent application relevant to the proposal is BA1005/97 for extension of the ground floor living room, demolition of existing garage and construction of a new garage with roof deck which was approved on 23/12/1997

5. REFERRALS 5.1 Comments from external approval bodies Not applicable. 5.2 Building No objection subject to standard conditions. 5.3 Health Not applicable. 5.4 Heritage Council’s Heritage Officer, Louise Thom, provided her initial comments as follows:

“Heritage Status: Heritage item no Conservation area Paddington Heritage Conservation Area Vicinity of heritage item no Potential heritage item no

Heritage significance The building on the subject site is one of a group of four late Victorian, three storey terraces with the lowest level below Glenmore Road and three storey rear wings. It dates from a key period of the historical development of Paddington. The terrace group is contributory in the street scape of Glenmore Road. Assessment of heritage impact Two of the subject terrace group (138 and 140) have recently undergone extensive alterations to the extent that they have been virtually rebuilt behind the front façade and are four storey to the rear. The adjacent terrace at 136 has approval for a similar scale development as 138 and 140. The row has also been the subject of recent garage additions with roof terraces. The rear of the proposed development is very similar to the development of the other three terraces both built and proposed. The visual character of the lane-scape will be uniform and the impact of the proposed development of 134 will not be intrusive in this context. The retention of the main rooms of the existing building is considered to be a good development outcome.



Consideration : Variance with Paddington DCP controls 5.1.3 Rear Elevations G5. The rear façade does not retain solid to void ratios. It is recommended that the rear elevations of the upper two levels have solid panels either end of the row of bi-fold doors. 5.2.8 Materials Glass balustrades are not a suitable material and must be changed to metal or timber slats. Recommendation Approval. Special Conditions 65. Rear Elevation

The two end panels of the upper most balconies must be solid and not transparent. 66. Balustrades

Glass balustrades must be changed to timber or metal slats.” Amended plans were received on 22 November 2005 with alternative scheme to the rear elevation with steel vertical balustrade and timber handrail. Ms. Thom provided her further comments below:-

“Consideration : The changes outlined in the letter from Graeme bell satisfactorily address the concerns of my previous referrals. Recommendation Approval”

5.5 Urban Design Not applicable.

5.6 Stormwater Drainage Not applicable. 5.7 Landscaping/Trees Management Not applicable. 5.8 Parking and Traffic Not applicable. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:



6. STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION 6.1 SEPPs State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Under clause 7 (1) (a) of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether the land is contaminated. An assessment of the Initial site evaluation provided by the applicant indicates the land does not require further consideration under clause 7 (1) (b) and (c) of SEPP 55. 6.2 REPs Not applicable. 6.3 Section 94 contribution Not applicable. 6.4 Other legislation Not applicable.

7. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995 7.1 Aims and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the LEP and the relevant objectives of the Residential 2(a) zone 7.2 Statutory compliance table Site Area (313.9m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies

Overall Height (metres) 10.5-13.2m 9.4-11.4m 9.5m NO*

* Existing non-compliance 7.3 Site area requirements Not applicable. 7.4 Height The proposal breaches the height limit by 1.9m. The applicant has submitted a SEPP 1 objection in relation to this non-compliance, which states that:

“It is considered in this instance, due to the site constraints and bulk and scale adjoining development in the vicinity of this site that strict compliance with the development standard would undermine the aim of the policy to allow flexibility of the application of the development standard contained in the Woollahra LEP where strict compliance with the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in this particular case.



It is also my firm belief that compliance with the development standard in question would hinder the attainment of the following objects of the Act in seeking to encourage: the proper management and development of cities and towns for the purpose of

promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and the promotion and co-ordination of orderly and economic use of land A development complying with the height standard – would not increase views from adjoining existing development would be compatible with adjoining residential development would not change the visual privacy enjoyed by neighbouring dwellings will not change the impact on the public domain would not change the amenity of dwelling house areas would change the existing characteristics of the bulk and scale of this area which is

characterised by terrace style dwelling houses would not retain the distinctive height of bulk and scale of the terrace style dwelling

houses would maintain the established height of significant streetscapes would not conform to the appropriate heights in the street would not materially change the amount of access to sunlight to adjoining private

properties would also promote the concept of view sharing The proposed increase in height above the standard will not in any way harm or undermine the height requirements or objectives of the standard, nor adversely impact on the heritage significance of the conservation area, nor materially impact on residential amenity of neighbours The proposal provides for alterations and additions to the existing terrace dwelling and thereby must be assessed against the following development standard: Maximum height of building permitted: 9.5 metres Existing: between 10.5-13.2 metres Proposed rear extension: between 9.4-11.4 metres Justification:- direct northerly views toward the harbour from north facing windows in adjoining

existing development will be maintained will provide compatibility with rear extensions to adjoining development at Nos

132, 138, 140, 146 & 148 Glenmore Road will maintain the visual privacy of both the interior and exterior living spaces of

Nos 132 and 136 Glenmore Road will minimise additional impact on sunlight access to adjoining properties with only

some increase in shading at noon midwinter over the rear roof and at noon and 3.00 pm over the same roof of No 136 Glenmore Road

there will be no amenity impacts onto the public domain by this proposal, nor will there be any adverse impact to the special qualities of this section of Glenmore Road

the amenity of existing adjoining development will not be affected by the proposed development



the existing built form characteristics of this conservation area will not be compromised by the proposed alterations and additions at the rear of this terrace house

this proposal is for alterations and additions for the continued use of the building as a dwelling house

the proposal due to its location away from the foreshore of Sydney Harbour will not impact on foreshore access

the land is not within a coastal or foreshore location the proposal will reinforce the distinctive height, bulk and scale of this section of

Glenmore Road and its terrace style dwelling houses the existing building is a part two/ part three storey dwelling house and this does

not change the proposal reinforces the rear extensions which have already occurred on at least

five other adjoining dwelling houses there is no change to the height or existing characteristics of the street front

elevation the alterations and additions to the rear are in scale and bulk with recent changes to

the rear of Nos 132, 138, 140, 146 & 148 Glenmore Road the proposal does minimise the impact on access to sunlight to adjoining private

properties (see submitted shadow diagrams) there will be no adverse impact on any part of the public domain, including parks in

relation to access to sunlight by the proposed development the proposed development has minimised the impact on views from adjoining

properties and particularly looking north from the rear of Nos 132 and 136 Glenmore Road

harbour glimpses are maintained from No 132 and views of the harbour from No 136 Glenmore Road

there will be no adverse impact on views from public places by the proposal the alterations and additions undertaken at the rear have been carefully designed to

allow for and promote the concept of view sharing there will be no adverse impact on the heritage significance of the conservation

area or the building as viewed from Glenmore Road the works are subsidiary to the principal rooms, roof form and main detailing of the

Glenmore Road façade the alterations and additions have maintained the character of the service wing of

terrace style housing” The SEPP 1 Objection is assessed under Council’s procedure as set out below:- 1. Is the planning control in question a development standard?

The maximum building height is a development standard under WLEP 1995.

2. What is the underlying purpose of the standard?

The objectives of the maximum building height development standard in Woollahra LEP 1995 are as follows: a) To minimise the impact of new development on existing views of the Sydney

Harbour, ridgelines, public and private open spaces and views of the Sydney City skyline;

b) To provide compatibility with the adjoining residential neighbourhood;



c) To safeguard visual privacy of interior and exterior living areas of neighbouring dwellings;

d) To minimise detrimental impacts on existing sunlight access to interior living rooms and exterior open space areas and minimise overshadowing;

e) To maintain the amenity of the public domain by preserving public views of the harbour and surrounding areas and the special qualities of the streetscapes.

3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy,

and in particular, does the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in s.5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?

Having considered the objectives of the development standard contained in Woollahra LEP, the height of the development will be comparable to that of adjoining development, will not obstruct water and city skylines, will not significantly exacerbate overshadowing and, it will not have an adverse impact upon views from adjoining properties. Therefore, the proposal will achieve the objectives of the height standard. As such, the strict application of the maximum building height development standard is considered unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.


In view of the above, the strict application of the maximum building height development standard is considered unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.

5. Is the objection well founded?

The objection advanced by the applicant that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary is well founded and it is considered that granting of development consent would be consistent with the aims and objectives of SEPP 1.

7.5 Floor space ratio Not applicable. 7.6 FSBL Not applicable. 7.7 Other special clauses/development standards Clause 24 Land adjoining public open space: “The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 24(2). Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 25(1) and (2). Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils: The proposed works do not require the need for an assessment of acid sulfate soils under clause 25D of Woollahra LEP 1995.



Clauses 26-33 Heritage and conservation area provisions: The subject terrace forms part of a group of four terraces that have retained their significant front facades although have been substantially altered at the rear. The terraces at 138 and 140 Glenmore Road have recently added four storey rear wings and the terrace at 134 Glenmore Road has a two and three storey rear wing. The subject terrace has a dilapidated rear wing that does not conform to the scale or form of any of the other three terraces in the group. The proposal will match the scale and form of the recently constructed terrace at 138 and 140 Glenmore Road to enhance the reading of the group when viewed from the rear (it is noted that the top most level of No. 138 and 140 have been illegally constructed). The significant and original front section of the terrace is proposed to be retained, including the main roof form. Council’s Heritage Officer also did not raise any objections to the amended proposal. The development is considered to maintain the setting of the Conservation Area and satisfies the provisions of Clause 2(2)(g) of the LEP.

8. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 applies Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Act requires that in determining a development application, a consent authority is to take into consideration any draft environmental planning instrument "EPI" that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority. Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004 ("the proposed SEPP") was publicly exhibited from 10 May to 18 June 2004. In considering how much weight should be placed upon an exhibited draft environmental planning instrument under section 79C of the Act one must assess how likely it is that the draft EPI will commence, in what form it is likely to commence and consider what effect the instrument would have if applied. The proposed SEPP received significant criticism from the development industry in submissions. Officers of DIPNR have advised that it will not be made in the form it was exhibited and that it will now be included as part of the new Integrated LEP Template. This template will be placed on public exhibition in late April/May 2005. Therefore, it is not known in what form the draft SEPP will be made. Clause 14 of the draft SEPP provides Saving and Transitional provisions. These provisions provide that any application submitted prior to the commencement of the proposed SEPP and within 28 days after the commencement of the proposed SEPP is to be determined in accordance with the former SEPP No.1 as if the former SEPP No.1 had not been repealed by the proposed SEPP. It is likely that the draft SEPP, if made, will contain transitional provisions. The draft SEPP would, if it commenced in its exhibited form, require a higher threshold test in order for an objection against a development standard to be sustained. However, the draft policy should not be given determining weight in the assessment of development applications for the following reasons: 1. The draft SEPP will not be made in the form it was exhibited 2. It is not known whether the threshold tests contained in the exhibited SEPP will be

retained 3. It is likely that, if made, the draft SEPP will contain savings and transitional provisions.



This means that objections submitted under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 must be assessed under the current policy.

9. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS 9.1 Compliance table Paddington Development Control Plan Site Area (313.9m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies

Building Setback to Street Frontage 2m 2m Maintain Existing Setback YES

Height of Existing Building at Street Frontage (metres) 7.8m 7.8m Maintain Existing

Height YES

Height of Rear Addition to Two Storey Building (metres)

Below Gutter Line of Main

Roof Over Existing Building

Below Gutter Line of Main

Roof Over Existing Building

Below Gutter Line of Main Roof Over Existing Building YES

Private Open Space (m²) 165m² 155m² 1/6 of Site Area or 52m² YES

Soft Landscaping at Ground Level (%) or (m²) 11.4m² 11.4m²

50% of Required Private Open Space

or 26m² NO *

Solar Access to Habitable Rooms, Private Open Space and Public Domain (Hours in mid winter)

> 2 hours > 2 hours 2 Hours Between 9am and 3pm in

Midwinter YES

* Existing non-compliance Street frontages The significant and original front elevation is not proposed to be altered. Rear elevations and yards The existing rear wing is a significantly smaller scale than the other terraces within the group. The demolition of the rear wing, which is considered to be of low significance, is to be replaced by a more contemporary addition which accords with Guideline G9. The proposed alterations and additions will preserve the existing and original front section and construct a new rear wing. The rear wing extends from the gutter line of the main roof with a flat metal roof behind a parapet. While the proposed new rear wing would extend past the rear alignment of the existing building on No. 136 Glenmore Road, it is noted that this neighbouring property has an approved proposal (DA975/2002, approved on 19/3/2003) for alterations and additions to extend its rear wing. The approval allowed this neighbouring property at No. 136 Glenmore Road to extend the rear wing to the north matching with the rear building line of the current proposal. The proposed alignment provides greater conformity within the terrace group when viewed from the rear. The breezeway along the western boundary is to be preserved consistently with the pattern of the group. The proportions of the rear fenestration also relate to the form of the neighbouring terraces. The height, alignment, and overall form of the proposed development are compatible to the neighbouring terrace and introduce a greater degree of conformity within the terrace group when viewed from the rear. The proposal is therefore considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.1.3 of the DCP.



Roofs The proposal would retain the main roof form. The rear wings of the terrace group currently exhibit a variety of skillion roof forms with some falling towards the rear and to the side. The proposed development incorporates a flat roof behind a parapet. The flat roof will not be visible from the public domain and will have a similar appearance to the neighbouring terraces when viewed from the rear. The proposed roof form will not detract from the roofscape of the area and is considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.1.4 of the DCP. Site coverage, setbacks and levels The proposal will increase the site coverage by increasing the building footprint of the dwelling. The siting of the proposed additions conforms to the siting pattern of the neighbouring properties by not extending past the rear building alignment and maintaining a large rear courtyard. The front setback will be preserved and the proposed rear wing will maintain the breezeway along the western boundary to preserve the siting pattern of the terrace group. The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.1.5 of the DCP. Landscaping and private open space Due to the increase in building footprint, the proposal would result in a slight reduction in the private open space provision but it would still comply with the DCP’s requirements. As there is no proposed works to the rear yard, the current deep soil landscape provision would remain unchanged. Building height, bulk and scale The proposed development will significantly increase the height, bulk and scale of the rear of the subject terrace, however, the overall height of the terrace will not be increased. The increase in the scale of the development relates to the demolition of the existing rear structures and the construction of a rear wing that is considered more compatible with the scale of recent developments of the other terraces in the row. The proposed height and bulk of the rear wing is compatible to the neighbouring terraces at 136 (the approved proposal DA975/2002) and at 138 and 140 Glenmore Road as well as the terraces to the west at 128 to 132 Glenmore Road. The increase in size of the rear wing will not impact on the existing views from the neighbouring properties, as it does not extend past the established rear building alignment. The proposed development will maintain substantial solar access to the rear courtyards of the neighbouring properties. Solar access will also be maintained to the habitable room doors and windows at the rear of the approved proposal of No. 136 Glenmore Road by restricting the rear alignment of the proposed development behind the established rear building alignment. The increase in height and bulk of the rear wing will increase the overshadowing caused by the building. With respect to the existing dwelling of No. 136 Glenmore Road, the rear habitable room windows would still receive 2 hours of solar access in winter solstice complying with Guideline G4 under Part 5.1.7 of the DCP. Due to the orientation of the site the additional overshadowing impact from the proposed development over the windows to the breezeway of 132 Glenmore Road is limited to early morning in winter solstice. Then, these windows would be overshadowed by its own rear wing which is not considered a significant difference as compared with the existing situation.



The proposed development will be compatible to the height, bulk and scale of the surrounding built environment and particularly the neighbouring terrace developments. The increase in bulk and scale will not detrimentally impact on the views or solar access to the neighbouring residential properties and the proposal complies with the requirements of Part 5.1.7 of the DCP. Acoustic and visual privacy The proposal will increase the size and floor area of the building but will retain the use of the terrace as a single dwelling. The existing outdoor courtyard area would have no change and is not considered to generate any additional noise. In order to reduce the overlooking impact upon the rear private open space of adjoining properties, Condition No. 2(a) is recommended to include privacy screens to be placed at the eastern and southern ends of the rear balconies on the first and second floors. New windows on the west elevation to the kitchen and master bedroom are highlight windows which would not have an impact upon the privacy of the adjoining to the west. With respect to the west-facing windows to the hallway on the first floor and bathroom on the second floor, they would only be facing a blank wall of the adjoining property to the west and therefore would have not privacy impact. With the imposition of Condition No. 2(a), the proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.1.8 of the DCP. Windows, doors and shutters The original windows and doors on the front façade are not proposed to be altered. The size and proportions of the rear windows and doors proposed are considered acceptable. The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.2.3 of the DCP. Verandahs and balconies The proposed rear balconies are considered in appropriate bulk and scale which would complement the form of the building and the surrounding context. As discussed above under Acoustic and visual privacy, privacy screens are required to be placed at the side ends of these balconies safeguarding the privacy of adjoining properties. As such, the proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.2.4 of the DCP. Materials and details The new rear wing is proposed to be fibre cement external wall highlighted with vertical metal balustrade and timber handrail on top to conform to the materials of existing terrace buildings and the historic context of the area. Condition No. 2(b) is also recommended requiring that the proposed bi-fold doors to the two rear balconies on the first and second floors are to be timber framed to respond to the historic context of the area. The proposal is therefore considered satisfactory with regard to the objectives and guidelines prescribed in Part 5.2.8 of the DCP.



Building types The subject multi-storey terrace building forms part of a group of four terraces. The group have largely preserved the original front facades although have been substantially altered at the rear. The proposed rear alterations and additions will maintain the significant front façade and will enhance the reading of the group from the rear by conforming to the alignments, form and scale of the neighbouring terraces at 136, 138 and 140 Glenmore, which form the eastern half of the terrace group. The proposal accords with the objectives for multi-storey terrace houses and complies with Part 5.3.2 of the DCP. 9.2 DCP for off-street car parking provision and servicing facilities Not applicable for assessment as the proposal does not alter the existing on-site parking provision. 9.3 Woollahra Access DCP This proposal is for a class 1 building. The Access DCP encourages, rather than requires, visitor access for older people or people with a disability for class 1 buildings. Access has not been provided in this proposal, however, this is considered acceptable under the provisions of the DCP. 9.4 Other DCPs, codes and policies None applicable.

10. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Clause 92 of the Environmental Planning & Regulations 2000 requires Council to consider, in the case of a development application requiring the demolition of a building, the provision of AS2601 – 2001: The Demolition of Structures. Condition No. 13 of the recommendations requires all demolition work to be undertaken in accordance with the provisions of AS2601-2001: The Demolition of Structures.

11. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL All likely impacts of the proposal have been assessed elsewhere in this report.

12. THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE The site is considered suitable for the proposed development.

13. SUBMISSIONS The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and Notifications DCP. Submissions were received from the Paddington Society. The objection raised the following issues: Non-compliance with the DCP control with respect to the alterations and additions to the

rear of building



Comments:- This has been addressed in Section 9.1 above under Rear elevations and yards.

Overlooking Comments:- This has been addressed in Section 9.1 above under Acoustic and visual privacy.

Overshadowing

Comments:- This has been addressed in Section 9.1 above under Building height, bulk and scale.

Amended plan with revised rear elevation details was submitted on 22/11/2005 and was not renotified under clause 5.1 of the DCP because, having considered clause 9 of the DCP, the replacement application is substantially the same development as the original proposal and considered to have no greater environmental impact upon neighbours.


15. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 THAT the Council, as the consent authority, is of the opinion that the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to the maximum building height development standard under Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995 is well founded. The Council is also of the opinion that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of this case as the development will not impact on views, not create additional overshadowing and will achieve the objectives of the height standard

AND

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, being satisfied that the objection under SEPP No. 1 is well founded and also being of the opinion that the granting of consent to Development Application No. 489/2005 is consistent with the aims of the Policy, grant development consent to DA No. 489/2005 for alterations and additions to existing dwelling on land at 134 Glenmore Road, Paddington, subject to the following conditions: 1. Approved Plans

This consent relates to the work, shown in colour, on plans numbered DA-04 (Issue B) to DA-12 (Issue B) inclusive, dated July 2005, drawn by GDB Architecture, including the amended north elevation plan (A4 size) unnumbered, dated 22/11/2005, drawn by GDB Architecture, all of which carry a Council stamp “Approved DA Plans” and the signature of a Council officer, except where amended by the following conditions.

2. Modification of details of the development (s80A(1)(g) of the Act)

The approved plans must be amended and the Construction Certificate plans and specification, required to be submitted to the Certifying Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail:



(a) that privacy screens to a minimum height of 1.7m measured from the finished floor level be erected along the full length of the eastern and western ends of the rear (north) balconies on the first and second floors; and

(b) that the bi-fold doors to the two rear balconies on the first and second floors are to be timber framed to respond to the historic context of the area.

Note: The effect of this condition is that it requires design changes and/or further information to be provided with the Construction Certificate drawings and specifications to address specific issues identified during assessment under section 79C of the Act. Note: Clause 146 of the Regulation prohibits the issue of any Construction Certificate subject to this condition unless the Certifying Authority is satisfied that the condition has been complied with. Note: Clause 145 of the Regulation prohibits the issue of any Construction Certificate that is inconsistent with this consent.



(a) detailed plans and specifications of the building have been endorsed with a

Construction Certificate by:


(b) a principal certifying authority (PCA) has been appointed and the Council has

been notified in writing of the appointment, and














8. Levels

For the purpose of indicating relative levels in terms of Australian Height Datum and boundary clearances, and to ensure that building construction complies with the development consent, survey certificates must be provided to the PCA in respect of the building/s layout and ground floor level/s prior to pouring of concrete or laying of timber floor boards.







11. Payment of Long Service Levy, Security, Development Levy and Fees


required; or b. prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate, where only a subdivision certificate

is required; or c. prior to the issue of an occupation certificate in any other instance.









Security Administration Fee $158 No T16 TOTAL SECURITY, CONTRIBUTIONS,



How must the payments be made? Payments must be made by: 1. Cash deposit with Council, 2. Credit card payment with Council, or 3. Bank cheque made payable to Woollahra Municipal Council. The payment of a security may be made by a bank guarantee where: a. the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b. the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by

Council on completion of the development or no earlier than 12 months from the provision of the guarantee whichever occurs first;







a. the reasons given; b. whether any prejudice will be caused to the community deriving benefit from the public facilities; c. whether any prejudice will be caused to the efficacy and operation of this plan; and d. whether the provision of public facilities in accordance with the adopted works schedule will be

adversely affected. Council may, as a condition of accepting deferred or periodic payment, require the provision of a bank guarantee where:

a. the guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution; b. the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by

Council on completion of the development or no earlier than 12 months from the provision of the guarantee whichever occurs first;




12. Wet areas

All floors of wet areas are to be constructed and finished so as to be impervious to water and graded to a sufficient number of floor drains.







a. describe the anticipated impact of the construction works on: local traffic routes pedestrian circulation adjacent to the building site and on-street parking in the local area, and; b. describe the means proposed to: manage construction works to minimise such impacts, provide for the standing of vehicles during construction, provide for the movement of trucks to and from the site, and deliveries to the site,

and; c. show the location of: any site sheds and any anticipated use of cranes and concrete pumps, any areas of Council property on which it is proposed to install a Works Zone




Stormwater run-off from the proposed (specify; roof, addition, outbuilding, paved area… etc) to drain to the existing stormwater drainage system. The existing stormwater drainage pipes on the property must be checked and certified by a practising hydraulic engineer to ensure that all existing stormwater pipes are in good condition and are operating satisfactorily. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Note: connection of stormwater run-off to the Sydney Water sewer system is not permitted. If the existing stormwater pipes are not in good condition and/or not operating satisfactorily, the existing drainage system must be upgraded. Certification and a plan showing pipe locations and diameters of the upgraded system must be submitted to Council or the accredited certifier prior to the final building inspection. Stormwater disposal is to comply with the requirements and conditions as set out in Council’s Draft Stormwater Development Control and Local Approvals Policy.

16. Footpath levels












(b) This condition does not apply to the extent to which an exemption is in force

under Clause 187 or 188, of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, subject to the terms of any condition or requirement referred to in Clause 187 (6) or 188 (4) of the Regulation.













(b) A certificate purporting to be issued by an approved insurer under Part 6 of the

Home Building Act 1989 that states that a person is the holder of an insurance policy issued for the purposes of that Part is, for the purposes of this clause, sufficient evidence that the person has complied with the requirements of that Part.



(i) stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited; and (ii) showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone

number at which that person may be contacted outside working hours.



(i) building work carried out inside an existing building; or (ii) building work carried out on premises that must be occupied continuously

(both during and outside working hours) while the work is being carried out.








(i) to a public sewer; or (ii) if connection to a public sewer is not practicable, to an accredited

sewage management facility approved by the Council; or (iii) if connection to a public sewer or an accredited sewage management

facility is not practicable, to some other sewage management facility approved by the Council.









(a) the proposed builder's details (in writing); and (b) proof of payment of the required insurance premium pursuant to Part 6 of the

Home Building Act 1989.

Mr T Wong George Fotis SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER



ADVISINGS 1. Other approvals

This development consent does not remove the need to obtain any other statutory consent or approval necessary under any other Act.

















9. Appeal

Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact Mr T Wong. However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34 Conference, instead of a full Court hearing. This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to agree, in writing, to the Court appointed assessor having the full authority to completely determine the matter at the conference.

ANNEXURES 1. Plans and elevations

time: 3.00pm one of two parts - municipality of woollahra · 5/23/2006 · 3. front balcony in...

Documents