MINUTES OF Randwick Local Planning Panel MEETING
HELD ON Thursday, 13 August 2020 AT 1.05pm
Present:
Chairperson: Annelise Tuor
Expert Members: Deborah Laidlaw & Peter Romey
Community Representatives: Mio Margarit Chow
Council Officers present:
Manager Development Assessment Mr F Ko
Personal Assistant to Manager Development Assessment Ms A Halcro
Coordinator Fast Track Development Assessment Tony Ristevski
Declarations of Pecuniary and Non-Pecuniary Interests
|
|
Nil. |
Address of RLPP by Councillors and members of the public
Deputations were received in respect of the following matters:
D40/20 34 Clovelly Road, Randwick (DA/51/2020)
Objector Cr Kathy Neilson
Applicant Ms Juliet Suich (on behalf of applicant)
Ms Kerry Etkin
D41/20 148 Brook Street, Coogee (DA/944/2018)
Objector Cr Kathy Neilson
Objector Ms Linda Avramides
Objector Ms Felicia Huppert
D42/20 13 Winchester Road, Clovelly (DA/574/2019)
Objector Cr Kathy Neilson
Objector Ms Tina Vantos
Applicant Mr Lee Kosnetter (on behalf of applicant)
Mr Smyth (on behalf of applicant)
D44/20 7 Seaside Parade, South Coogee (DA/36/2020)
Objector Mr Colin Love
Applicant Mr Garry Chapman (on behalf of applicant)
Mr Paul Dos Santos (on behalf of applicant)
After the above speakers had addressed the panel, the public meeting was closed at 2.18pm. The Panel then continued to deliberate and vote on each matter via Microsoft Teams.
The resolutions, reasons and voting outcomes for each item on the agenda are detailed below.
Development Application Reports
|
|
|
|
|
A. That the
RLPP is satisfied that the matters detailed in clause 4.6(4) of Randwick
Local Environmental Plan 2012 have been adequately addressed and that consent
may be granted to the development application, which contravenes the Floor
Space Ratio development standard in Clause 4.4 of Randwick Local
Environmental Plan 2012. The concurrence of the Secretary of Planning, Industry and Environment may be assumed. B. That the
RLPP grant consent under Sections 4.16 and 4.17 of the Environmental Planning
and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No.
DA/51/2020 for Use of the garage fronting
the rear right of way as a habitable room to be used ancillary to the
existing dwelling, and alterations and additions to the existing
dwelling (Heritage Conservation Area),
at No. 34 Clovelly Road, Randwick, subject to the development consent
conditions attached to this report. REASON: The Panel has viewed the site from the public domain and or electronically, considered the submission and reviewed the assessment report prepared by Council officers that addresses the relevant matters detailed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.
The Panel supports the application for the reasons given in the assessment report. The Panel notes the submission that the development should not be eligible for a parking permit as the application involves the removal of a garage. However, as the existing garage is undersized and does not comply with the Australian Standard, the Panel does not consider the imposition of this condition to be appropriate.
CARRIED Unanimously. |
|
|
|
|
|
That the RLPP refuse consent under Section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/944/2018 for demolition of existing structures, construction of a 4 storey residential flat building containing 4 dwellings, basement carparking for 9 cars, landscaping and associated works (variation to height and floor space ratio controls) at 148 Brook Street, Coogee for the following reasons:
1. The proposal would not conserve the environmental heritage of Randwick as it would involve the removal of a heritage item of local significance. Adequate information has not been provided to dispute the significance of the item and to justify its demolition.
2. The proposal would not conserve the significance of the heritage item due to the removal and loss of significant fabric.
3. The proposed demolition would remove a contributory building from the draft heritage conservation area ‘Edgecumbe Estate’ and would harm the significant Inter-War character and appearance of the subject portion of the Brook Street streetscape.
4. The proposal is inconsistent with the objectives of the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone of the RLEP 2012 in that the proposed development does not contribute to the desired future character of the area, proposing a development that significantly exceeds a level of built form anticipated for the subject site, nor recognise the desirable elements of the existing streetscape. The proposed development shall result in unreasonable amenity impacts upon the adjoining and surrounding properties, and an adverse visual impact as viewed from the public domain.
5. The proposal is inconsistent with the guidelines and recommendations outlined in Part B2, Section 1.9 (Demolition) of the Randwick DCP 2013.
6. The proposed development is of an excessive height and is incompatible with surrounding developments, resulting in non-compliance with the building height development standard prescribed by clause 4.3 of RLEP 2012, and the maximum external wall height specified by RDCP 2013. The submitted clause 4.6 is not considered to be well founded in that it does not sufficiently demonstrate that the proposed height breach is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, nor that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify a variation to the development standard.
7. The development proposes an excessive level of Gross Floor Area, resulting in non-compliance with the maximum Floor Space Ratio for the site prescribed by clause 4.4 of RLEP 2012. The additional floor area results in an excessive level of built form on the site and detrimental visual impact. The submitted clause 4.6 is not considered to be well founded in that it does not sufficiently demonstrate that the variation to FSR is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, nor that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify a variation to the development standard.
8. The proposed development shall result in an excessive level of bulk and scale on the site and is inconsistent with the existing and desired future character of the streetscape and the locality.
9. The proposed development shall result in unreasonable residential amenity impacts upon the surrounding properties with regards to visual amenity, solar access, visual and acoustic privacy and view loss.
10. The application fails to demonstrate that an adequate level of solar access can be achieved to the proposed units and private open space.
The proposed development does not provide adequate residential amenity with regards to communal open space, landscaping and pedestrian access.
12. The application has not provided sufficient and adequate information, including vehicular access to the development.
13. The proposal fails against a number of design guidelines as required by the Apartment Design Guide and is inconsistent with the design principals of SEPP 65. Non-compliance with this policy is seen to result in a development that is incompatible with the locality, and an unsuitable design response that will result in poor residential amenity.
REASON: The Panel has viewed the site from the public domain and or electronically, considered the submissions (oral and written) and reviewed the assessment report prepared by Council officers that addresses the relevant matters detailed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.
The Panel refuses the application for the reasons given in the resolution above.
CARRIED Unanimously. |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
A. That the
RLPP grant consent under Sections 4.16 and 4.17 of the Environmental Planning
and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/574/2019
for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house including a
first-floor addition, at No. 13 Winchester Road, Clovelly, subject to the
development consent conditions attached to this report, as amended. REASON: The Panel has viewed the site from the public domain and or electronically, considered the submissions (oral and written) and reviewed the assessment report prepared by Council officers that addresses the relevant matters detailed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.
The Panel supports the application for the reasons given in the assessment report. However, it considers that the extent of the building bulk on the northern boundary would result in unacceptable amenity impacts on the habitable rooms of No 11. The Panel has imposed additional conditions to address this concern and is satisfied that, as amended, the development will achieve acceptable and reasonable amenity for both No.11 and 13 Winchester.
The Panel has also imposed a condition requiring a dilapidation report to address concerns of neighbouring properties.
Amend Condition 1 to read as follows:
1. The development must be implemented substantially in accordance with the plans and supporting documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s approved stamp, except where amended by Council in red and/or by other conditions of this consent:
Amend Condition 2 to read as follows:
2. The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements:
a. The external wall on the northern side boundary shall be rendered and painted in light colour (i.e. similar to the colour of the existing northern external wall).
b. The proposed window openings along the northern elevation at first floor level must have a minimum sill height of 1.6m above floor level, or alternatively, the window/s are to be fixed and be provided with translucent, obscured, frosted or sandblasted glazing below this specified height.
c. A privacy screen having a height of 1.8m is to be provided on the northern and southern sides of the front (western) and rear (eastern) first floor balcony and the screen shall be constructed of obscured glazing. The total area of any openings within the privacy screens do not exceed 25% of the area of the screen.
d. The roof skylight windows along the northern ground floor portion of the dwelling shall be provided with fixed and obscured glazing
e. The length of the courtyard shall be increased by a minimum of 3.0m to the east and maintain the same depth. This may require re-configuration of the internal layout of the ground floor level including provision of new windows / openings. The entire courtyard area shall be deep soil with screen planting along the northern boundary.
f. The overall height of the ground floor external wall on the northern side boundary as well as the skillion roof within 900mm setback from the northern boundary shall be reduced by at least 500mm.
Details of compliance of the above conditions are to be submitted to and approved by Manager Development Assessment prior to the issue of the construction certificate.
Insert New Condition 18A
Dilapidation Reports 18A A dilapidation report must be obtained from a Professional Engineer, Building Surveyor or other suitably qualified independent person, in the following cases:
· excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or other substantial structures which are proposed to be located within the zone of influence of the footings of any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining premises; · new dwellings or additions to dwellings sited up to shared property boundaries (e.g. additions to a semi-detached dwelling or terraced dwellings); · excavations for new dwellings, additions to dwellings, swimming pools or other substantial structures which are within rock and may result in vibration and or potential damage to any dwelling, associated garage or other substantial structure located upon an adjoining premise; · as otherwise may be required by the Principal Certifying Authority.
The dilapidation report must be submitted to the Council, the Principal Certifying Authority and the owners of the adjoining/nearby premises encompassed in the report, prior to commencing any site works (including any demolition work, excavation work or building work).
CARRIED Unanimously. |
|
|
|
|
|
That the RLPP refuse consent
under Section 4.16 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as
amended, to Development Application No. DA/277/2020 for the 'use' of the as-built unauthorised alterations and
additions to the approved two storey attached dual occupancy at Nos. 36-38 Jennings Street, Matraville, for the
following reasons: 1. The Applicant has not submitted a written request pursuant to clause 4.6 to vary the Floor Space Ratio development standard, and Council has no authority to approve the application without the submission of a written request.
2. The Floor Space Ratio of the development is excessive and detrimentally attributes to an excessive level of built form. The as-built development is inconsistent with the objectives of clause 4.4 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012 in relation to Floor Space Ratio and the variation cannot be supported in this instance.
3. The as-built development results in a variation to the maximum building height. The Applicant has not submitted a written request pursuant to clause 4.6 to vary the Height of Buildings development standard, and Council has no authority to approve the application without the submission of a written request.
4. The development is found to be inconsistent with Council’s built form controls in relation to floor space ratio, building height, site coverage, deep soil areas and building design.
5. The resultant development is inconsistent with the desired future character of the area in relation to dual occupancy developments and cannot be said to be commensurate of a level of development anticipated for the site.
6. The as-built development shall result in unreasonable amenity impacts upon adjoining and surrounding properties with regards to visual amenity, privacy and overshadowing.
REASON: The Panel has viewed the site from the public domain and or electronically, considered the submission and reviewed the assessment report prepared by Council officers that addresses the relevant matters detailed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.
The Panel refuses the application for the reasons given in the resolution above.
CARRIED Unanimously. |
|
|
|
|
|
That the RLPP grant consent under Sections 4.16 and 4.17 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. 36/2020 for Construction of a fishing deck at the rear of the site, at No. 7 Seaside Parade, South Coogee, subject to the development consent conditions attached to this report, as amended.
REASON: The Panel has viewed the site from the public domain and or electronically, considered the submissions (oral and written) and reviewed the assessment report prepared by Council officers that addresses the relevant matters detailed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.
The Panel considered that the fishing deck as proposed in the application is not acceptable given that it is within the foreshore building line, in close proximity to the cliff edge, relies on additional structure to be placed on the natural rock shelf for its support and the extent of built form that already exists in this location. The Panel has therefore imposed conditions to modify the size, materials and extent to which the fishing deck projects over the cliff face. This will reduce the impact of the fishing deck to an acceptable level but is the maximum the Panel considers to be supportable in this sensitive coastal location.
Amend Condition 2 to read as follows:
2. The approved plans and documents must be amended in accordance with the following requirements:
a. The depth of the fishing deck shall be reduced to match the eastern alignment of the approved deck at the rear lower garden level of No. 9 Seaside Parade (shown at RL15.89 in the Survey plan dated 18/06/2020 Reference: 12086-19).
b. The balustrade to the fishing deck shall be constructed in an open form of metal mesh similar to the balustrade of No. 9 and finished in a dark tone.
c. That section of the deck south of the lowest tread of the stairs providing access to it shall be deleted.
d. The steps leading to the deck are to be in unpainted timber or steel painted in a dark colour and open in form.
e. The deck is to be constructed in unpainted timber or steel painted in a dark colour and is to be fully cantilevered, i.e. with no supporting piers or like structure beneath it.
f. The fishing deck shall not be used until such time as the northern side boundary wall/fence approved under DA/851/2015 is constructed or alternatively a 1.8m high privacy screen shall be installed along the northern side of the fishing deck, as reduced in depth by condition 2. a. of this consent. Any such privacy screen must be constructed with fixed vertical or horizontal louvres finished in a dark colour with the individual blades angled and spaced appropriately to prevent overlooking into the private open space of the adjacent deck at No. 5 Seaside Parade.
Details of compliance of the above conditions shall be submitted to and approved by Council’s Manager Development Assessment prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.
CARRIED Unanimously. |
|
|
|
|
|
A. That the
RLPP is satisfied that the matters detailed in clause 4.6(4) of Randwick
Local Environmental Plan 2012 have been adequately addressed and that consent
may be granted to the development application, which contravenes the height
of buildings and floor space ratio development standards in Clause 4.3 and
Clause 4.4 of Randwick Local Environmental Plan 2012. The concurrence of the Secretary of Planning, Industry and Environment may be assumed. B. That the RLPP grant consent under Sections 4.16 and 4.17 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, to Development Application No. DA/104/2020 for alterations and additions to the Coogee Legion Club, including refurbishment and extension of the function centre and construction of a terrace at Level 2, new windows and associated works at No. 200-210 Arden Street, Coogee, subject to the development consent conditions attached to this report, as amended.
REASON: The Panel has viewed the site from the public domain and or electronically and reviewed the assessment report prepared by Council officers that addresses the relevant matters detailed in Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.
The Panel supports the application for the reasons given in the assessment report. The Panel has included and additional condition requiring a Plan of Management.
New Condition:
Condition 3b Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, an updated Plan of Management is to be submitted to and approved by Council. The Plan of Management is to reflect the existing development consent(s) for the premises and the premises is to continue to operate in accordance with the previous development consents. In this regard, the Plan of Management shall detail the operations of the Club including number of patrons, staff numbers and hours of operation. Please note, no changes to the above are permitted under this development consent.
Amended Condition:
Condition 53 The use of the club must continue to operate in accordance with the development consents issued previously for the use of this site and in accordance with the updated Plan of Management required by this development consent. No changes are approved to the operation of the premises, including patrons’ numbers of hours of operation under this development consent.
CARRIED Unanimously. |
The meeting closed at 6:33pm.
|
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES BY PANEL MEMBERS |
|
|
Annelise Tuor (Chairperson) |
Peter Romey |
|
Deborah Laidlaw |
Mio Margarit Chow |