agenda template council - mosman council · reporting officer: danielle dunford, executive town...

MOSMAN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

ORDINARY MEETING

AGENDA

MEETING DATE: 18 July 2005

INFORMATION ABOUT PROCEDURES FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

Open Question Time Council meetings are scheduled to commence at 6.00pm. However, Open Question Time is held for a maximum of 10 minutes if required, from 6.00pm prior to the commencement of the meeting. Questions from members of the gallery may be directed to the Mayor on any relevant matter unless it is on the Agenda for this meeting. Open Question Time is an opportunity for questions only, not speeches, and every endeavour to answer will be given immediately by the Mayor or referred to the General Manager. Ordinary Meeting The Ordinary Meeting of Council commences in accordance with the Agenda prepared for the Meeting. Committee of the Whole The General Manager will ask residents prior to the commencement of the Council meeting if they seek to address Council on a General Manager’s and Departmental Report listed on the agenda and will register their names. Council will resolve into Committee of the Whole to allow residents to address the Committee and for Councillor discussion and questioning in relation to the report listed on the agenda. Reports on which residents wish to address Council will be dealt with expeditiously as possible between 6.00pm and 8.00pm. Should there be too many matters to be heard or should residents have major matters that need lengthy discussion, the affected residents will be advised to come back to the meeting at a particular time. All remaining items will be dealt with following resolution of reports which residents have an interest in. The Committee of the Whole is delegated authority to resolve items by majority vote. Supper Adjournment At approximately 9.00pm there is usually a recess break for 15 minutes at which time the Mayor will invite those people in the gallery to join the Councillors for supper. Resume Ordinary Meeting The Ordinary Meeting resumes at the conclusion of the supper break.

MOSMAN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

COUNCIL CHAMBERS SEATING 2004-2007 MAYORAL TERM

Cr Patricia Harvey

East Ward

Manager

Governance

General Manager

Mayor

Cr Shirley Jenkins Manager

DevelopmentServices

Minutes

Secretary

Director Environment

and Planning

Balmoral Ward

Cr Denise Wilton

Cr David Strange

West Ward

Cr Lynette Elsegood

Cr Simon Menzies

Cr Anne Connon

Cr Martin Skipper

Cr Jim Reid

Middle Harbour Ward

Cr Andrew Brown

Cr Kate Traill

Cr Dom Lopez, OAM

AGENDA - ORDINARY MEETING 1. NATIONAL ANTHEM, PRAYER AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INDIGENOUS

PEOPLE 2. WELCOME TO VISITORS 3. APOLOGIES AND LEAVE OF ABSENCE

4. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 5. DISCLOSURES OF NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST 6. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Confirmation of the Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 4 July 2005

7. MAYORAL MINUTES 8. DIRECTOR ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING REPORTS

EP/169 Curlew Camp Artists' Walk - Progress report ...............................................1 EP/170 147 Awaba Street .........................................................................................5 EP/171 73A Spofforth Street ...................................................................................29 EP/172 41 Congewoi Road .....................................................................................55 EP/173 Unit 3 & 4 - 803 Military Road.....................................................................75 EP/174 3/120 Prince Albert Street ..........................................................................91 EP/175 75 Cowles Road .........................................................................................99 EP/176 51 Moruben Road.....................................................................................109 EP/177 7 Dalton Road...........................................................................................131 EP/178 Alexander Avenue (Croquet Lawn) ..........................................................147 EP/179 Land and Environment Court Legal Expenses .........................................161 EP/180 Development Applications ........................................................................165

9. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Reports to Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 July 2005 Page 1

EP/169 Curlew Camp Artists' Walk - Progress report MOSPLAN REF: 03.01.08 REPORT BY: Strategic Planner, Joe Vertel SUMMARY Report on the results of the public exhibition of the Draft Interpretation Strategy for the Curlew Camp Artists’ Walk project. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Planning and Transport recommends: A. The Draft Interpretation Strategy for the Curlew Camp Artists’ Walk be adopted. B. That a further report be prepared for Council once the second stage of this project –

the development of the Interpretation Plan, has been completed. REPORT Council has previously resolved to engage heritage consultants to undertake an Interpretation Study for the Curlew Camp Artists’ Walk project at Little Sirius Cove. The purpose of the Study is to identify appropriate methods and materials for the interpretation of the heritage values of the area. The first stage of the Study, the preparation of an Interpretation Strategy has been completed. At the Council meeting of 18 April 2005, Council resolved: “A. The Draft Interpretation Strategy be placed on public exhibition for a period of four weeks. B. That following the exhibition period, a further report be prepared for Council advising

of any submissions received and progress on this project”. The Draft Interpretation Strategy was publicly exhibited in the Council offices, the library and on Council’s web site. Notices of the exhibition were placed in the Mosman Daily, on Council’s web site and sent to the owners of properties in close proximity to the route of the walk. In response Council received three submissions and these are summarised as follows: 1. R & P Drake (1 Curraghbeena Road) The route of the proposed walk, providing access to the “Cooee point” within Curraghbeena Reserve may not be appropriate for the following reasons: • Curraghbeena Road is steep, very narrow and unsuitable for additional pedestrian traffic; • The proposed route crosses Curraghbeena Road just beyond a blind corner; and • Curraghbeena Reserve is very steep in the location of the proposed route and would

require significant work and structures to be built to enable safe access to the waterfront;


As an alternative to providing direct access to the “Cooee point” in Curraghbeena Reserve, it is suggested that signboards be provided at Curraghbeena Park to identify the location of the “Cooee point”. Walkers would then be directed back along Raglan Street to the existing steps down to Curlew Camp Road. Planning Comment: It is acknowledged that Curraghbeena Road and Curraghbeena Reserve both have a steep grade, however, this should not preclude pedestrian access, especially as the proposed route is intended to follow the original route used by the visitors to Curlew Camp in the 1890’s. It is envisaged that this would involve clearing of undergrowth to uncover the original steps/path leading down to the waterfront and works to reinstate these steps/path as necessary. The crossing point between Curraghbeena Park and Curraghbeena Reserve is within approximately 10 metres of the bend in Curraghbeena Road, however, given the low volume of traffic on this street, a crossing at this point is not considered to represent a major safety problem. The suggestion of providing signboards in Curraghbeena Park may be appropriate and will be given further consideration. However, re-instating the original route to provide access down to the waterfront is desirable given that improving public foreshore access is one of the main aims of the Sharing Sydney Harbour Access Program, under which funding for the works is proposed to be sourced. 2. R & M Davies (147 Young Street, Cremorne) Raise opposition to the proposal and request that it be abandoned or modified for the following reasons: • The walk will require widening and upgrading of the path along the western shores of

Little Sirius Cove, parallel to Curlew Camp Road. This will result in the destruction of native bush.

• The walk will attract many visitors, which will destroy the peaceful ambience of the area. • The privacy of residents in Sirius Cove will be compromised. • Increased traffic that will pose a safety threat to children and the elderly. • Inadequate parking at Little Sirius Cove. • Sirius Cove Road is narrow and is not capable of handling extra volume of traffic. • Increased litter. Further, if heritage interpretation is proposed then this could be concluded without the need for an “artists’ walk”. A simple plaque at the site of the camp should suffice. Planning Comment: While a detailed design of the walk has not yet been undertaken, it is considered that the existing path could be improved without the destruction of bushland. It is acknowledged that the upgrading of the walk is likely to result in an increase in the number of people enjoying the walk, however, this is not considered to result in any significant loss of privacy for residents of Sirius Cove given that walkers would only be passing by the front of properties. The upgrading of the walk is unlikely to result in any significant increase in vehicular traffic given that the walk is simply providing a link between existing paths at Mosman Bay and the eastern side of Little Sirius Cove. Further, the walk can be easily accessed by public transport as it extends between two ferry wharves. The upgrading of the walk is not considered likely to result in any significant increase in litter. 3. J & S Butler (2 Rickard Avenue) Delighted to see attention being given to the Curlew Camp Artists’ walk and make the following suggestions:


• Use of cement along the upper path adjacent the Zoo is an inappropriate material for a bush setting.

• Desirable to avoid excessive signage and other man made structures encroaching the bush.

• Desirable to regenerate existing path adjacent the Zoo and develop the lower path along foreshore.

• Desirable to extend steps from bottom of Rickard Avenue down to new path along water’s edge.

Planning Comment: The Draft Interpretation Strategy (the Strategy) recommends the provision of “interpretative pavement” for a section of the path in order to indicate that Curlew Camp was once situated below the path, adjacent to the shore. The Strategy notes that “the section of pavement would be made of different material to the rest of the commuter route and would include images and sculptural pieces to evoke the camp below. Materials might include coloured concrete edging to the section of the path with ceramic and metal inlays to highlight activities of the artists, their lifestyle at the camp and the artistic production at the camp”. In light of the fact that the use of cement is proposed in only a small section of the path and the opportunity for interpretation which the use of such a material provides, the limited use of cement pavement is considered acceptable. It is agreed that it is desirable to avoid excessive signage and other man made structures encroaching the bush, however, it is considered that the Strategy recommends an acceptable balance between the provision of interpretative structures and the preservation of the natural environment. The development of a lower path along the foreshore, below the Zoo, is recommended in the Strategy, however, it is questionable whether the development of this alternative route as the main commuter route is appropriate on environmental and economic grounds. It is therefore suggested that the existing route of the path be maintained for the main commuter route. Conclusion The first stage of the Curlew Camp Artists’ Walk project – the development of an Interpretation Strategy, has now been completed and publicly exhibited. The submissions that have been received have been addressed in this report. It is now appropriate for Council to adopt the Strategy and for the second stage of the project – the development of an Interpretation Plan, to proceed. (It should be noted that the second stage of the project is included in the overall budget for the Study). Recommendation endorsed by Director – Environment and Planning COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS • Submissions received


EP/170 147 Awaba Street DA NUMBER: 8.2005.24.1 PROPOSAL: Demolition of an existing dwelling house and the erection

of a new dwelling house REPORTING OFFICER: Danielle Dunford, Executive Town Planner LODGEMENT DATE: 1 February 2005 (Downtime 22 days) RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

LOCALITY MAP

DP

1844

09

DP 8608

DP 130195

DP 844751

DP

9608

09

1

DP

4066

11D

P 50

6458

D

26

DP

8

1

56

60

19

59

18

DP 3985

2

1

1

6362

21

61

B

1

1

1

B1098

3

7

54

17

57

16

5655

1514

DP 8608

58

20

65421

1112

DP 8608

DP

1301

87

DP

1301

87

1505352

151

13

128 126

141

124

139

44

11

133A

122

137

120

135135

118

133A

116

50

49

48 46A

47

46

45 4358 56 54 52

149

134 132

147

130

145 143

62

81

66 64

53

60

153

140 138

151

136

77

144 142

WYONG

ST

JU

MAC

PHER

SON

AWABA

CONGEWOI


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal is for demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and erection of a new three storey dwelling house. While the proposal results in minor numerical non-compliances with height, floor space ratio and setback requirements of Mosman LEP 1998 and Residential DCP, the objectives of these controls are met. No submissions have been received. The proposal is recommended for approval with conditions.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the northern side of Awaba Street, between McPherson Street and Congewoi Road. The site is rectangular in shape with a frontage of 13.01m to Awaba Street. The site falls approximately 6m to the north (rear) at an average gradient of 14%. The site presently contains a single storey brick dwelling with a tile roof and inground swimming pool at the rear of the site. Surrounding development consists of two and three storey dwelling houses. 2.0 BACKGROUND N/A 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of: • Demolition of the existing dwelling; • Construction of a new, three storey dwelling house comprising of the following:

Lower ground floor – 3 bedrooms, TV room, rumpus room, 2xbathrooms, laundry, 2 external courtyard areas

Ground Floor – double garage, kitchen/living/dining area, balcony to rear, courtyard First Floor – bedroom, study/library, ensuite

• Retention of the swimming pool; and • New landscaping works. The proposed materials of construction include flat roofs comprising of part zinc and part concrete with pebbles, grey zinc feature walls, concrete walls, glass balustrades, aluminium framed glass and doors, with timber screens. No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 1a. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998


• Mosman Residential Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan • Mosman Transport Development Control Plan • Mosman Section 94 Contributions Plan – Open Space 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 NUMERIC CONTROLS SUMMARY TABLE LEP Controls Control Proposed Compliance

Site Area 700m2 571.05m2 No (SEPP 1)

Building Height 8.5m 8.2m Yes

Wall Height 7.2m 8.2m (+9.3%) No (SEPP1)

Number of Storeys 2 storeys 3 storeys No (SEPP 1)

Gross Floor Area 286 m2 306m2 N/A

Floorspace Ratio 0.5 : 1 0.54 : 1 (+7%) No (SEPP 1)

Landscaped Area 218m2 222m2 Yes

Foreshore Building Line (FBL) N/A N/A N/A DCP Controls Control Proposed Compliance

Setbacks

Front - Lower Ground First

Side (west) – Lower Ground First

Side (east) – Lower Ground First

Rear

2m on merit on merit

0.9m 1.5m 3m

0.9m 1.5m 3m

on merit

1.4m 4.3m 4.3m

0.9m 1.4m 3.1m

1.8m 1.8m 1.8m

17m

No Yes Yes

Yes No Yes

Yes Yes Yes

Yes

Parking

Garage / Carport Width

On merit

5.2m

2 spaces

6.1m

Yes

No

Fencing Height 1.2m 1.2m Yes

Solar access to living and main private open space areas

2 hours between 9.00 am and 3.00 pm

>2 hours

Yes

BASIX Certificate Water – 40%

Thermal - Pass

Energy – 25%

Water – 40%

Thermal - Pass

Energy – 90%

Yes

5.2 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.2.1 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards Three objections made under SEPP1 have been lodged in relation to the development standards for minimum lot size in clause 12 of Mosman LEP 1998, building height, wall


height and number of storeys in clause 13 of Mosman LEP 1998, and floor space ratio in clause 14 of Mosman LEP 1998. Subdivision The existing site area is 571.05m2 and is less than the 700m2 required in the Residential 2(a1) zone. Clause 12(2) states that: (2) A lot resulting from a subdivision of land in a residential zone for the purpose of

dwellings and a lot on which a dwelling house or semi-detached dwelling is erected in a residential zone must comply with the requirements to the Table of this Clause.

Given the development involves ‘a lot on which a new dwelling house’ is proposed to be erected in a residential zone, the development standard is applicable. The relevant objectives of the subdivision standard contained in Clause 12(1) are:

a) To retain the pattern of subdivision in residential areas while allowing infill development of smaller lots in some localities, and

b) To ensure lots have a minimum size which would be sufficient to provide useable

area for building and landscaping.

The applicant has argued that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary for the following reasons:

“There is no subdivision proposed. The development application is for the demolition of an existing dwelling house and erection of a new dwelling house on a lot that currently does not satisfy the minimum subdivision requirement. The proposed development satisfies the landscaping requirements and has sufficient useable private open space. The site area is almost identical to all the other allotments in this part of Awaba Street.

Notwithstanding the above non-compliance, the proposal easily satisfies the above relevant objectives of Clause 12 of the LEP. The variation to the development standard contained in Clause 12 of the Mosman LEP has been shown to be consistent with the aims of SEPP 1, consistent with the underlying objectives of the standards and that strict compliance to the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.”

The SEPP1 objection is well founded. For the reasons given above, compliance with the development standard would be inconsistent with the aims and objectives of SEPP1, and would hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act. Height The existing dwelling on the site is a single storey dwelling house with an overall building height of approximately 6.1m (roof ridge - RL 57.08). The proposed development will result in a building height of 8.2m (maximum of RL 58.5) which complies with the 8.5m maximum building height control. However the proposal has a wall height of 8.2m and is three storeys, neither of which complies with clause 13 of Mosman LEP 1998.


The development standards in clause 13 of Mosman LEP 1998 require a maximum: building height 8.5m, a maximum wall height of 7.2m and a maximum of two storeys. The objectives of Clause 13 are to protect public and private views; to minimise the visual impact of buildings when viewed from the harbour and surrounding foreshores; to ensure buildings resulting from new development are compatible with existing buildings in terms of height and pitched roof form; and to minimise the effects of bulk and scale of buildings arising from new development in existing residential areas. The applicant has argued that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary for the following reasons: • The main reason for the contravention of the height standard is the topography of the

site, with a difference of over 5m from the front to rear boundaries. The non-complying part of the development is the rear section.

• Due to the cross slope, the contravention of the height control is more evident along the western side. To compensate the development has been setback 3000mm from the western boundary. This generous setback will preserve the view corridor available from the Awaba Street and residents located to the south of the subject site.

• The three storey section of the development is limited to the rear. From the street, the development will appear single storey.

• The overall height of the new dwelling is a lower than the two dwelling houses either side of the subject site.

The SEPP1 objection is well founded. The proposal satisfies the objectives of clause 13. Public and private views will not be affected. The proposed development is compatible with surrounding buildings in terms of height and roof form. It is well modulated with minimal impacts on adjoining properties. Floor space ratio The proposal has a floor space ratio of 0.54:1 (306sqm), which exceeds the development standard of 0.5:1 in clause 14 of Mosman LEP 1998 by 20sqm. The objectives of Clause 14 are to control the scale of development so that it is compatible with housing characteristics of the locality; to limit excavation of sites and retain natural ground levels for the purpose of landscaping and containing urban run-off; and the minimise the effects of bulk and scale. The applicant has argued that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary for the following reasons: • The proposed development is lower in height, less bulky and better articulated than the

two adjoining dwellings on either side of the subject site. • A large portion of floorspace is located under the proposed driveway/garage and utilises

the existing ground level thereby limiting excavation. This floorspace does not add to the bulk or scale of the proposal.

• The building is well articulated with ample landscaping at the front, rear and sides. • The new dwelling does not encroach past the existing rear building line and the 235sqm

of rear garden area will remain undisturbed. • The 3m side boundary setback along the western boundary and the internal courtyard

area on the central eastern portion of the new dwelling will result in a development that is well modulated with good use of space that will allow natural light into most parts of the building.


The SEPP1 objection is well founded. The extent of non-compliance is relatively minor and the effects of bulk and scale are minimised by substantial side boundary setbacks, considerable articulation and siting the building on the existing building platform. The proposal is consistent with the objectives of clause 14 and strict compliance with the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. 5.2.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The proposal does not conflict with the aims and objectives of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.23. The location and scale of the proposed alterations and additions will not detrimentally affect the current skyline of the Middle Harbour area. 5.2.3 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 2(a1) Residential. The works are defined as demolition and a dwelling house and are permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at clause 11. The development satisfies zone objectives. Height and Floorspace Ratio See section 5.2.1 above. Landscaped Area The proposal has a landscaped area of 222sqm (39% of site) thereby satisfying the requirement of 218m2 (38% of the site) in clause 15 of Mosman LEP 1998. The proposal also satisfies the objectives of this clause. Excavation While the proposal involves excavation of up to 2.5m in depth, the natural topography of site has already been substantially modified to provide the building platform for the existing dwelling. Subject to consent conditions, the objectives of clause 31 will be satisfied. Heritage The site does not contain a heritage item and is not within a heritage conservation area. The site is in the vicinity of the ‘divided road’ section of Awaba Street which is identified in Schedule 2 of Mosman LEP 1998 as a heritage item of local significance. The proposal will not adversely affect the heritage significance of this item. 5.3 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.3.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Siting and Scale The siting and scale of the proposed dwelling are satisfactory (height and floor space ratio are addressed in 5.2.1. The proposal will occupy a similar footprint to the existing dwelling.


Setbacks generally satisfy Council’s requirements except for the proposed 1.4m front setback for the lower ground floor level. Given that this part of the dwelling is located under the driveway and will not be visible from the street, the proposed setback is satisfactory. Views The proposal satisfies section 4.3 of the DCP. The dwellings on the opposite side of Awaba Street enjoy views over the site. These will be largely unaffected by the subject proposal. The survey shows that the property at No.134 Awaba Street has a window with a height at RL 61.04, well above the maximum height of the proposed development. The proposal will possibly improve views available along the western boundary. It is noted that there have been no submissions regarding view loss. Landscaping The landscape plan submitted with the application shows that the existing landscaping in the rear yard will be retained and protected. There are two trees on the site and another street tree (adjacent to the south-east corner of the site) that are also to be retained and protected during construction. The arborist’s report submitted with the application recommends measures to protect these trees. These recommendations will be incorporated into conditions of consent. Streetscape and Building Design The proposed development presents as a single storey dwelling from the street and a two-three storey dwelling from the rear of the site. The proposed dwelling, with its contemporary design, is sympathetic to the character and scale of the existing and surrounding dwellings. The roof form consists of sections of flat and skillion roofing which minimises the bulk and scale of the dwelling and allow views over the site. While the RDCP encourages pitched roof forms, the proposed roofing is consistent with the variety of roofing styles within the neighbourhood. A condition of consent will require that materials and finishes be complimentary to the character of the streetscape and that highly reflective roofing not be used. The proposed 1.2m high fence complies with RDCP guidelines. Car Parking and Access The existing dwelling house has no off street parking. A double garage with dimensions of 6.1m wide x 6m long, integrated into the overall design, is proposed. The proposed garage does not comply with two aspects of the RDCP being: • The garage width exceeds 40% of the block frontage. The proposed width of the garage

is 6.1m which equates to 46.5% of the width of the site; • The garage will be elevated approx. 2.5m from the existing ground level (i.e. level with

the adjacent footpath). With respect to the width non-compliance, the proposed width is satisfactory. The non-compliance is minor, being only 900mm over the required 5.2m. The simple design and its


integration with the dwelling will minimise its impact on the streetscape. For these reasons the proposed width of the carport is acceptable. The elevated nature of the garage is also acceptable. Given the dramatic 2m drop, within the front setback area, the provision of a garage at natural ground level would be impractical. In addition, a carport/driveway has recently been constructed at No. 145 Awaba Street, at a similar level as proposed. There are also other carports and garages, within the front setback and at street level, along this part of Awaba Street. The RDCP also requires that vehicular crossings be no more than 3m in width in order to minimise the loss of on-street parking. The architectural plans do not clearly indicate the proposed width. A recommended condition of consent will restrict the width of the vehicular crossing to 3m and other conditions will require protection of the existing street tree adjacent to the driveway. Privacy The proposal is satisfactory in respect to privacy. Windows in side elevations are minimal and do not directly face onto the windows of the adjoining dwellings. A timber screen is proposed along the eastern elevation of the balcony. A recommended condition of consent will also require a timber screen along the western elevation of the rear balcony to minimise privacy impacts on adjoining dwellings. Overlooking of neighbouring open space areas from the proposed rear decks will occur, however, given the existence of large balconies/decks on both adjoining properties, the topography of the sites and orientation toward the view, some degree of mutual overlooking is unavoidable. Overshadowing Given the orientation of the site, additional overshadowing from the proposed development will be minimal and will largely fall over the road reserve and the site itself. Stormwater Management Section 5.13 of the RDCP requires that sites which do not fall to the street must obtain an easement over a downstream property to allow installation of a gravity based stormwater disposal system. The subject site falls to the rear. The applicant proposed to utilise a pipeline located at 54 Wyong Street to drain to Wyong Road. However, there is currently no easement in existence to allow this to occur. In order for this to happen an easement must be created over either 56 Wyong Road or 145 Awaba Street in order to connect to the pipe at 54 Wyong Street. It is recommended that this be a deferred commencement condition. The proposal incorporates both a 7m3 OSD tank and a 7,000 litre rainwater tank. Townscape Controls The site is located within the Ourimbah townscape. The proposal generally satisfies the desired future character objectives for this area. 5.3.2 Mosman Transport Development Control Plan Satisfactory, as per comments under Car Parking and Access at section 5.3.1.


5.3.3 Mosman Section 94 Contributions Plan – Open Space The application involves one additional room capable of use as a bedroom (an increased occupancy rate of 0.71 persons), necessitating a section 94 contribution of $3,001.17. 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, fire safety, fire upgrades, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, compliance with the Home Building Act, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Landscape Designer raised no objection subject to conditions. Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection subject to conditions and made the following comments:

The applicant proposes to utilize a pipeline located in 54 Wyong Street to drain to Wyong Road. However no easement has been created for this property to do so. In order to drain this property to this pipeline the applicant must be granted an easement to drain through either 56 Wyong Road or 145 Awaba Street. This condition of approval can be a deferred commencement condition.

7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 10 February 2005 and 25 February 2005. No submissions were received. 8.0 CONCLUSION The proposal has been considered against relevant matters for consideration. While the proposal results in minor numerical non-compliances with height, floor space ratio and setback requirements of Mosman LEP 1998 and Residential DCP, the objectives of these controls are met. The non-compliances primarily result from the topography of the site and will not result in any detrimental impacts on adjoining properties. The proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant and owner is Sybelle Anne Christopher. The estimated value of works is $1,193,400. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services recommends that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES’ RECOMMENDATION A. That the objections made under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to the

development standards relating to minimum lot size within clause 12, maximum wall height limit and number of storeys within clause 13 and maximum floor space ratio within clause 14 of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 are well founded, and in


this case varying the standard to permit the proposed development is acceptable for the following main reasons: (a) The proposal meets the objectives of the development standards; (b) The design of the proposal appropriately responds to the constraints of the

site, and the context of surrounding development; (c) The areas of non-compliance will not cause significant detrimental impacts on

adjoining properties; and (d) Requiring compliance with the standard would unreasonably constrain the

development and the design response.

B. That Development Application No. 8.2005.24.1 be approved as a deferred commencement subject to the following conditions:

PART A 1. This consent shall not operate until the applicant submits the following information to

the satisfaction of Council:

• An easement shall be created under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 over Lot 6 in Deposited Plan 8608 or Lot 17 in Deposited Plan 8608 to drain Lot 16 in Deposited Plan 8608. Mosman Municipal Council shall be identified as the authority able to modify, vary or release the easement. Evidence that the positive covenant has been registered with the Land and Property Information branch of the Department of Lands is to be provided to Council.

Such information shall be submitted within twelve (12) months of the date of this determination. Upon written notification from Council that the above has been satisfied, conditions as listed under Part B of this consent shall apply in addition to other conditions nominated in Council's written notification that arise from the information provided in response to Part A.

PART B APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION

2. The development must be carried out in accordance with the following stamped approved plans and documentation, except where amended by later conditions of consent:

Plan Nos. Date of plan Prepared by DA:01, DA:02, DA:03, DA:04 25.01.2005 Boddam Whetham Dorta Stormwater Drainage Plan DA H-01

undated Warren Smith & Partners

Landscape Plan 490/DALI Dec 2004 Warwick Ralph Survey Plan 4037-01A 18.10.2004 Geomat Engineering


Document Title Date of document Prepared by Statement of Environmental Effects

December 2004 Boddam Whetham Dorta

Arboricultural Assessment December 2004 Urban Forestry Australia PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

The following conditions must be satisfied prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. Conditions may require the submission of additional information with the Construction Certificate application. Applicants should also familiarise themselves with conditions in subsequent sections and provide plans in accordance with any design requirements contained therein.

Construction Certificate Application Plans

3. Two copies of architectural and Structural Engineer’s plans must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application. The structural engineering plans must be signed by a qualified practicing Structural Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia or who is eligible to become a corporate member and has appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

The plans are to incorporate and note any changes from the approved development application plans as required by conditions of this consent.

For applications involving alterations and additions, one set of plans should be coloured which indicate the extent of new works.

Dilapidation Report – Council Assets

4. To assist with an assessment of claims for the refund of the security deposit over Council’s property, a dilapidation report must be submitted. The report must document and provide photographs that clearly depict any existing damage to the road, kerb, gutter, footpath, driveways, street trees, street signs or any other Council assets in the vicinity of the development. Any damage not shown in this manner will be assumed to have been caused as a result of the site works undertaken and must either be rectified at the applicant’s expense or compensated by deduction from the security deposit.

Excavation, Backfilling and Support for Neighbouring Buildings

5. Excavation works shall not commence prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate or the issue of any relevant notices to adjoining owners, the Principal Certifying Authority or Council as required by other conditions of this consent.

Retaining Walls

6. If soil conditions require it, retaining walls or other approved methods necessary to prevent the movement of soil, together with associated stormwater drainage measures, shall be designed by a civil engineer or other appropriately qualified person. Details of any retaining walls shall accompany plans and specifications submitted with the Construction Certificate application.


Rainwater Re-use System

7. The rainwater re-use tank is to be connected to the house and at a minimum used for flushing of toilets and washing machine purposes. A detailed design is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application. Only rainwater from the downpipes and gutters is allowed to enter the tank. The tank is to be fully sealed to prevent any surface run off from entering the tank.

Sydney Water

8. The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Quick Check agent to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met. The approved plans will be appropriately stamped. For Quick Check agent details please refer to Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92.

The consent authority or a private accredited certifier must ensure that a Quick check agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before the issue of any Construction Certificate.

Driveway

9. The internal driveway and parking area shall be designed in accordance with Australian Standard 2890.1-2004 and specifications in Council’s “Transport Development Control Plan". Longitudinal sections for both sides of the vehicular crossing and driveway commencing at the centre line of the road carriageway shall be provided with the Construction Certificate application demonstrating that vehicles will not scrape their undercarriage.

10. To ensure the vehicle crossing is properly completed, the applicant shall complete and pay applicable fees for an application under Mosman Council’s “Construction of Vehicle Crossing By Contract”.

Utility Services

11. The applicant shall consult with the relevant public utility providers and meet any costs imposed by those providers for alterations to mains or services required as a consequence of this approval.

Materials & Finishes

12. Materials and finishes shall be complimentary to the character and streetscape of the area. Highly reflective roofing materials shall not be used. Details of finished external surface materials, including colours and texture, must be to be submitted to the satisfaction of Council or the Accredited Certifier.

Long Service Levy

13. In accordance with Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, the applicant shall pay a long service levy at the prescribed rate of 0.2% of the total cost of the work to either the Long Service Payments Corporation or Mosman Municipal Council for any work costing $25,000 or more.

http://www.sydneywater.com.au/


Security Deposit

14. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $5,000 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good any damage caused to Council property. A request for a refund of unused funds may be made following the completion of works and an inspection of the property by Council.

Section 94 Contribution

15. Pursuant to Section 94 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, a monetary contribution of $3,001.17 towards the acquisition and embellishment of public open space shall be paid to Council.

This condition is imposed under Mosman Municipal Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan. The Plan may be inspected at Council’s offices within the Civic Centre, Mosman Square, Mosman.

Note: Contribution rates will be indexed by use of the Consumer Price Index and the actual amount to be paid will be determined at the date of payment. You may contact Council on 9978 4111 prior to payment to confirm current figures.

PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF SITE WORKS

The following measures must be satisfied prior to the commencement of site works, including any works relating to demolition, excavation or vegetation removal.

Notice of Intent to Commence Site Works

16. In accordance with Section 81A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, no site works (including building works, demolition, excavation or the removal of vegetation) are to commence until:

(i) the Construction Certificate has been issued; (ii) the person benefiting from the consent has appointed a Principal Certifying

Authority (PCA) by way of completing Form 7A (attached at the end of the consent);

(iii) in instances where Council is not the PCA, the PCA has, no later than 2 days before the building work commences, notified Council of his or her appointment by way of forwarding a completed copy of Form 7A and notified the person benefiting from the consent of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work by way of completing Form 7B (attached at the end of this consent). In instances where Council is the PCA, Council has completed Form 7B if necessary and forwarded it to the person benefiting from the consent.

(iv) the person benefiting from the consent, if not carrying out the work as an owner-builder, has (by way of completing Form 7C): • appointed a principal contractor for the building work who must be the holder

of a contractor licence if any residential building work is involved; and • notified the PCA of any such appointment; and • unless that person is the principal contractor, notified the principal contractor

of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work; and

(v) the person benefiting from the consent has given Council at least 2 days’ notice of the person’s intention to commence the erection of the building by way of completing Form 7D.


Home Building Act

17. Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989 must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the following information:

(a) in the case of work to be done by the holder of a contractor licence under that Act:

(i) the name and licence number of the contractor; and (ii) the name of the insurer by whom the work is insured under Part 6 of that

Act,

(b) in the case of work to be done by the holder of an owner-builder permit under that Act, the name and permit number of the owner-builder.

If arrangements for doing the residential building work are changed while the work is in progress so that the information notified above becomes out of date, further work must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to which the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the updated information.

Protection of Adjoining Areas

18. If site or building works will:

• cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient or unsafe; or

• involve the enclosure of a public place; or • have the potential to damage adjoining private land by way of falling objects

then a temporary hoarding, fence or awning must be erected between the work site and the adjoining area. Any such hoarding, fence or awning must be removed when the work has been completed. The fence must be constructed prior to the commencement of works and where adjoining public land shall be covered in cyclone wire mesh to discourage the fixing of posters or graffiti.

Protection of Landscape Features

19. To limit the potential for damage to the following trees to be retained, the area beneath its canopy must be fenced prior to the commencement of demolition, excavation or building works.

Species Location Magnolia sp Near pool fence, W boundary Archontophoenix sp E boundary 16.5m from front boundary

The fencing must extend 2m beyond the tree’s trunk, be kept in place until the completion until the completion of building works and be marked by appropriate signage notifying site workers that the tree is to be retained. The fencing should be a minimum of a 1.8 metres high chainlink or welded mesh fencing. All fencing shall be maintained for the duration of construction works.

All areas within the perimeter of the safety fencing shall be covered with woodchip mulch to a depth of 100mm (or where steep grades prevent this, the area shall be protected with suitable material) to facilitate moisture levels. Adequate soil moisture


must be maintained during the course of construction works through the implementation of an irrigation program or temporary irrigation system.

Trunk Protection

20. To limit the potential for damage to trees to be retained, trunk protection measures must be installed for the following tree (s):

Species Location

Eucalyptus nicholii Road reserve, adjacent SE corner front yard

Trunk protection shall comprise the placement of 2.0 metre lengths of 100mm x 50mm hardwood battens spaced at 150mm centres around the trunk and secured in place by metal strap bindings or 10 gauge fencing wire fixed at 300mm centres. Prior to placing battens, a soft protective padding must be installed to the ends of timbers to prevent damage to bark and conducting tissue. Trunk protection must remain in place for the duration of site works.

Sediment & Erosion Controls

21. Temporary sedimentation and erosion controls shall be constructed prior to commencement of any site works in order to prevent the discharge of sediment from the site. The controls shall be designed and installed in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Environment and Conservation’s "Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Manual Volume 1, 4th Edition March 2004”.

Lapsing of Consent if Site Works Not Commenced

22. In accordance with Section 95 (1) of the Act, this consent shall lapse unless work has physically commenced on the land within 5 years from the date of the consent or in instances where no work is required, the use has commenced within 5 years from the date of the consent.

Public Liability Insurance

23. Public liability insurance to the value of $5,000,000 must be taken out by the builder or owner to protect any person, firm or company from injury, loss or damage sustained as a consequence of the carrying out of site works, including all excavation, demolition and construction works. A copy of the policy must be provided to Council or the Accredited Certifier.

DURING SITE WORKS / CONSTRUCTION

The following conditions must be satisfied during site and construction works.

Demolition

24. All demolition work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Australian Standard 2601-2001: The Demolition of Structures.

Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

25. All works are to be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.


Signs for Building and Demolition Sites

26. A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any work site on which building work or demolition work is being carried out:

(a) showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work; and

(b) showing their name of the person in charge of the work and a telephone number at which that person may be contacted outside work hours; and

(c) stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

Any such sign shall be maintained while the building work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

Where Council is the nominated PCA, these signs may be purchased from Council’s offices for a fee of $25.

This condition does not apply in relation to building work or demolition work that is carried out inside, and does not affect the external walls of, an existing building.

Site Work Hours

27. In order to maintain the amenity of adjoining properties, audible site works shall be restricted to between 7.00am and 6.00pm, Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 1.00pm Saturday. Inaudible site works may also take place between 7.00am and 8.00am on Saturdays. No site works shall be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

Unless otherwise approved within a Construction Traffic Management Plan, construction vehicles, machinery, goods or materials shall not be delivered to the site outside the approved hours of site works.


28. If an excavation extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must:

• preserve and protect the building from damage; • if necessary, underpin and support the building in an approved manner; and • at least 7 days before excavating, give notice of an intention to excavate to the

adjoining owner and furnish particulars to the owner of the proposed work.

29. All excavations and backfilling must be executed safely and if necessary properly guarded in accordance with appropriate professional standards to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.


30. Sedimentation and erosion controls must be effectively maintained at all times during the course of construction and shall not be removed until the site has been stabilised or landscaped to the Principal Certifying Authority’s satisfaction.

Council Property

31. The land and adjoining areas shall be kept in a clean and tidy condition at all times. No construction vehicles, building materials, waste, machinery or related matter shall


be stored on the road or footpath for the duration of works unless separate approval has been obtained from Council’s Traffic Committee for the establishment of a Construction Zone. Under no circumstances will any person be allowed to mix or dispose of concrete, mortar or slurry within Council property.

32. Any works carried out to Council owned property or Infrastructure as a result of this consent are to be undertaken in accordance with Council specifications; i.e “Specification For Concrete Kerb & Gutter, Footpaths, Vehicle and Kerb Crossings & Concrete Converters” , “Public Domain Improvement Program”, “Specification For Brick Paving”, “Specification For Stormwater Drainage Construction” or “Specification For Asphalt Pavement Construction”.

Drainage

33. Stormwater shall be directed to the drainage easement. All drainage works shall be constructed in accordance with Council’s “Guidelines For Stormwater Drainage Systems”.


34. To ensure proper installation of the rainwater re-use tank, all work is to be undertaken in compliance of Sydney Water’s “Guidelines for Rainwater Tanks in Residential Properties” and “Rainwater Tanks, Information For Plumbers” and the NSW Code of Practice: Plumbing and Drainage. A licensed plumber must supervise all plumbing work.

35. For safety purposes, the tank and the fittings must be labelled ‘RAINWATER, NOT SUITABLE FOR DRINKING”.

36. To ensure stormwater and drainage objectives continue to be achieved and to promote awareness of the rainwater re-use system, a plaque measuring no less than 400mm by 200mm shall be permanently attached and prominently displayed within the immediate vicinity of the rainwater tank advising occupiers of the existence of the rainwater tank and that the device is not to be altered without prior approval from Mosman Council.

37. For health reasons, a first-flush-by-pass device must be installed allowing the first 1mm of initial runoff to bypass the tank.

38. For health reasons, in the occurrence of prolonged periods of rain any overflow from the rainwater tank should be discharged via an existing stormwater drainage system or to a Council approved device such as an on-site detention system. This pipeline must be covered with an insect proof mesh to prevent the breeding of mosquitoes.

39. Any mechanical equipment associated with the rainwater re-use tank and associated reticulation system shall be located in a sound proof container and positioned so that there is no increase in noise level at any point on the boundary with another property, including a public place.

Driveway

40. The levels at the boundary alignment of the property along the Awaba Street frontage shall be defined by the existing levels.

41. To preserve on street parking and to ensure the protection of the existing tree in the road reserve, the width of the kerb crossing shall be reduced to 3m (excluding transition wings on each side).



42. All natural landscape features including trees and other vegetation; natural rock outcrops, soil and watercourses shall remain undisturbed except where affected by necessary works detailed on approved plans.

43. To minimise impacts upon trees to be retained, no permanent fill or storage of building materials, excavated fill or topsoil during site works shall take place within their driplines.


44. To minimise disturbance to retained trees, no excavation shall take place within the critical root zone, measured as a radius from the trunk of the tree. Excavation may occur between the critical and primary root zones but only by hand under the supervision of an experienced arborist or tree surgeon.

Species Location CRZ PRZ Eucalyptus nicholii Magnolia sp

Road reserve, adjacent to SE corner of front yard

Magnolia sp Near pool fence W boundary

Archontophoenix sp

E boundary 16.5m from front boundary

As determined by the on-site arborist for all trees

In the event that major structural or feeder roots are encountered between the critical and primary root zones, the arborist is to recommend and or implement appropriate measures to ensure the retention of the tree. If these measures involve structural alterations to the building or work, such measures must be certified by a practicing Structural Engineer that the modified plans/details comply with the relevant Building Code of Australia and/or Australian Standards. (Note: Council’s Tree Management Officer may be contacted for advice regarding appropriate tree protection measures.)

Arborist Inspections

45. The applicant must engage a suitably qualified and experienced arborist (Australian Qualification Framework level 5 or above) to assess the impact of the proposed works and employ best practices (e.g. minimise compaction, soil build up and or excavation within primary root zones*) to ensure the longevity of trees to be retained. The arborist is to attend on site during critical stages of excavation and construction works within the vicinity of trees to be retained and is to record the following information;

• the methods of excavation or construction used to carry out works; • any damage sustained by the tree/s as a result of the works; • any subsequent remedial works required to be carried out by the arborist as a

result of the damage; and • any future or on-going remedial work required to be carried out to ensure the long

term viability of the tree/s. *primary root zone = 10 x Trunk diametre 1400mm from ground level (measured as a radius from the trunk)


Tree Preservation

46. All street trees and trees on private property that are protected under Mosman Council’s Tree Preservation Order 2003, shall be retained except where Council's prior written consent has been obtained, or where after approval of the relevant Construction Certificate, trees stand within the envelope of approved buildings or within the alignment of approved permanent paved vehicular access roads and parking areas.

Toilet Facilities

47. To provide reasonable worker amenity, toilet facilities shall be provided at or in the vicinity of the work site for the duration of site work activities.

Swimming Pools & Outdoor Spas

48. For safety reasons, access to the swimming pool must be restricted by fencing or other measures as prescribed by the Swimming Pools Act, 1992. The fencing or measures must be completed before any water is placed in the pool.

Local Government Act 1993

49. This consent does not authorise the carrying out of any of the following activities which require the separate approval of Council under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993:

• Place a waste storage container in a public place • Swing or hoist goods across or over any part of a public road by means of a

lift, hoist or tackle projecting over the footway

Note: A person who fails to obtain an approval or who carries out an activity otherwise than in accordance with an approval is guilty of an offence under Sections 626 and 627 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Approved Plans

50. A copy of the stamped approved plans must be kept on site for the duration of site works and be made available upon request to either the Principal Certifying Authority or an officer of the Council.

Critical Stage Inspections

51. To ensure building works are carried out properly and in accordance with the conditions of this consent, with the Building Code of Australia and or with relevant Australian Standards, the following critical stage inspections are to be carried out:

• At the commencement of the building work; • After the excavation for, and prior to the placement of, any footings; • Prior to pouring any in-situ reinforced concrete building element; • Prior to covering of the framework for any floor, wall, roof or other building

element; • Prior to covering waterproofing in any wet areas; • Prior to covering any stormwater drainage connections; • Fire separation if the building is within 900mm of the property boundary prior to

any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building;


• Smoke alarms prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building; and

• Final inspection after the building work has been completed and prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building.

The critical stage inspections must be carried out by the Principal Certifying Authority PCA, or if the PCA agrees, by another certifying authority excepting the final inspection which must be carries out by the PCA. Notes: Records of the above critical stage inspections will be required to be submitted prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate – see later conditions of consent. If you intend engaging Council to undertake inspections, please telephone the area Building Surveyor to arrange a suitable time.

PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

The following conditions must be satisfied prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

Record of Inspections Carried Out

52. In accordance with clause 162B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, the certifying authority responsible for the critical stage inspections must make a record of each inspection as soon as practicable after it has been carried out. Where Council is not the PCA, the PCA is to forward a copy of all records to Council.

The record must include details of:

• The development application and construction certificate number; • The address of the property at which the inspection was carried out; • The type of inspection; • The date on which it was carried out; • The name and accreditation number of the certifying authority by whom the

inspection was carried out; and • Whether or not the inspection was satisfactory in the opinion of the certifying

authority who carried it out.

Swimming Pool

53. For safety reasons, a resuscitation chart and warning sign containing information as prescribed by the Swimming Pools Regulation 1998 must be erected within the pool enclosure and shall be maintained in a clearly legible condition.


54. To ensure the proposed rainwater re-use tank and associated reticulation system is installed in accordance with the approved plans, a compliance certificate shall be submitted on completion of the works to the principal certifying authority from an appropriately qualified hydraulic or civil engineer certifying that the rainwater re-use tanks and associated reticulation system has been installed in accordance with the conditions of consent, the approved plans and the requirements of Sydney Water.

55. A compliance certificate must be submitted to Council which includes work-as-executed details of the rainwater re-use system prepared by a suitably qualified


person with experience and competence in the related field. Any variations to approved plans must be shown in red and supported by calculations.

56. To ensure that future owners are made aware of their responsibilities with respect to the rainwater re-use tank, a positive covenant shall be created on the title of the allotment requiring that the owner(s) maintain and keep in working order the rainwater re-use tank, unless otherwise approved in writing by Mosman Council

The terms of the positive covenant shall read:

i. In this Positive Covenant “rainwater re-use tank” means the rainwater re-use tank forming part of the proposal the subject of Mosman Municipal Council Development Consent No.8.2005.024.1 (or any modification of that consent) or any Council approved replacement or substitute rainwater re-use tank.

ii. The Registered Proprietor will at all times and at the Registered Proprietor’s

expense properly maintain and keep in good repair and working order the rainwater re-use tank.

iii. The Registered Proprietor shall not cease using or remove from the land the

rainwater re-use tank without the prior consent of Mosman Municipal Council. iv. The Registered Proprietor shall indemnify Mosman Municipal Council against

all claims, actions, suits, proceedings, demands, losses, damages, costs, fees and expenses whatsoever incurred or arising out of or in connection with or in consequence of any malfunction or non-operation of the rainwater re-use tank.

v. The term “Registered Proprietor” shall include the Registered Proprietor or

Proprietors of the land from time to time and all his/her/their heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors in title to the land and where there are two or more registered proprietors of the land the terms of this covenant shall bind those registered proprietors jointly and severally.

Privacy

57. A 1.8m high privacy screen shall be erected along western side of the rear balcony to ensure reasonable privacy for the adjoining property at No.149 Awaba Street.

Landscape Completion

58. To ensure landscaping works are properly completed, the landscape designer shall provide a compliance certificate to the Principal Certifying Authority certifying that landscaping has been implemented in accordance with the approved landscape plan. Where Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a copy of the certificate must be provided for Council’s records.

Follow-up Arborist’s Report

59. As part of the ongoing assessment of the trees to be retained, the arborist engaged by the applicant is to assess their health and any impacts suffered by them as a result of the proposed approved development. Findings are to be compiled in a detailed report to be provided to Council at the completion of construction and prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate which documents the following;

• the methods of excavation or construction used to carry out works; • any damage sustained by the tree/s as a result of the works;


• any subsequent remedial works required to be carried out by the arborist as a result of the damage; and

• any future or on-going remedial work required to be carried out to ensure the long term viability of the tree/s.

Energy Efficiency

60. To ensure that the development satisfies the NSW Government’s sustainability requirements, a Compliance Certificate/s shall be prepared by a suitably qualified person or persons, certifying that the BASIX commitments selected in the relevant BASIX Certificate have been complied with.

PRIOR TO OCCUPATION

The following condition must be satisfied prior to occupation of the development.

Compliance Certificates and Inspection Records

61. Where Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a copy of any compliance certificates and or records of inspections received by the PCA shall be forwarded to Council prior to occupation or commencement of the use.

Occupation Certificate

62. Occupation or use, either in part or full, shall not take place until an Occupation Certificate has been issued. The Occupation Certificate must not be issued unless the building is suitable for occupation or use in accordance with its classification under the Building Code of Australia and until all preceding conditions of this consent have been complied with.

Where Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, a copy of the Occupation Certificate together with registration fee must be provided to Council.

DURING OCCUPATION

The following conditions must be satisfied during occupation or use of the development.

Noxious Weeds

63. To prevent the spread of undesirable and invasive species and to ensure the preservation of urban bushland, all noxious weeds shall be removed and continually suppressed. A list of noxious weeds may be obtained from Council or viewed on its web site at http://www.mosman.nsw.gov.au and then under “Environment” and “Trees and Weeds”.

ADVICE / NOTES

The following points are issued as advice to the applicant. They do not form conditions of the Notice of Determination.

(i) Headings such as “Prior To The Release Of The Construction Certificate” together with bolded notes that immediately follow, form part of this Notice of Determination. Conditions under the respective headings shall be read in the context of the heading and note.

http://www.mosman.nsw.gov.au/


(ii) Section 82A of the Act provides for an applicant to request Council to review its determination excepting applications made on behalf of the Crown or applications in respect of designated development, integrated development or a complying development certificate. The request for review must be made within 12 months of the date of determination or prior to appeal being heard by the Land and Environment Court. A decision on a review may not be further reviewed under section 82A.

(iii) If you are unsatisfied with this determination, Section 97 of the Act gives you the right of appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 12 months of the determination date.

(iv) A public inquiry by a Commission of Inquiry was not held under Section 119 of the Act.

(v) Other public authorities may have separate requirements and should be consulted in the following respects:

• Australia Post for the positioning and dimensions of mail boxes in new commercial and residential developments;

• AGL Sydney Limited for any change or alteration to gas line infrastructure; • Energy Australia for any change or alteration to electricity infrastructure or

encroachment within transmission line easements; • Telstra, Optus or other telecommunication carriers for access to their

telecommunications infrastructure.

(vi) This decision does not ensure compliance with the Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992. Applicants may wish to investigate their potential for liability under that Act.

(vii) Failure to comply with the relevant provisions of the Act and/or the conditions of this consent may result in the serving of penalty notices or legal action through the Land and Environment Court.

(viii) In accordance with section 81A of the Act, the person benefiting from this consent is notified that if Council is engaged as the Principal Certifying Authority, critical stage inspections to be carried out will include those listed under the sub-heading “Critical Stage Inspections” in this consent. If additional inspections are required, further notice will be provided.

(ix) All references to “the Act” under this consent relate to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS • A4 Plans


EP/171 73A Spofforth Street DA NUMBER: 8.2003.464.1 PROPOSAL: Conversion of medical consulting rooms to veterinary

consulting rooms REPORTING OFFICER: Peter Wells, Team Leader North LODGEMENT DATE: 22 December 2003 (Downtime 7 months) OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

LOCALITY MAP

DP 931987

D

P

9324

64

DP

9324

66

4321

D

P

2038

11

DP

9662

03

1

DP

9377

72

2 1

?

A

DP 931

DP

9317

73

1

1B

1

A

1

D

P

4408

76

1 12

DP 931984

9

DP 455947

4

112211

DP 3271

SP 1

0865SP

233

6

821

D

P

5658

77

DP 932467DP 2311

SP 6941

1

SP 5

4241

DP 101643

DP

4509

00

DP 938074

D

P

9667

22SP

295

S P12107

14

91011

15

DP 3271

D

P

5394

21

5

DP

9320

15

DP

4559

47

DP

9319

85

DP

9319

86

3

6

2

11

D

3877

96D

P39

4431

SP 1

606

DP

45DP

DP

9

DP

92

92

8989

90 8

91

102 10098 96 94

75

75 9795 93

73B

73A 108

104

95 93 9399

107 105 103 101 99 97

110

109115

114 112

117 113111 107

123

120 118

121

116

119

SPENCER

S

CABRAMATTA

LINDSAY

SPO

FFO

RTH

STR

EET


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal seeks to convert existing medical consulting rooms to veterinary consulting rooms. The proposal has attracted many public submissions which relate to permissibility within the zone, existing use rights, and residential amenity impacts associated with its use, particularly noise. It is recommended that conditions be imposed in relation to noise, parking and privacy so as to not cause adverse amenity impacts on nearby residential developments.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The site is located on the eastern side of Spofforth Street, at the corner with Cabramatta Road. The site is close to square in shape with frontages of 20.835m to Cabramatta Road and 21.34m to Spofforth Street. The site presently contains a vacant building. Surrounding development consists of residential development on the eastern and western side of Spofforth Street. Spofforth Street defines the boundary between the Mosman and North Sydney Local Government areas. 2.0 BACKGROUND The development application claims existing use right provisions. Council records indicate that approval for alterations to a doctor’s surgeries was granted on 3 June 1971. The applicant has submitted that the property was previously legally used for commercial (medical consulting rooms) purposes. A submission from a member of the public raised the question as to whether or not this use had ceased for a period of more than 12 months prior to the submission of the application. The submission included a photograph of a notice attached to the front door of the building indicating that the medical practice had ceased to operate on 12 December 2002. The application was submitted to Council on 22 December 2003. The onus is on the applicant to demonstrate that the site enjoys existing use rights. Following a number of requests for the applicant to address this issue, a letter from the applicant’s solicitors acknowledges that the use of the premises as medical consulting rooms ceased “prior to the sale of the building”. However, the letter also states that the previous owner, a medical practitioner who conducted the use, “did not intend to abandon the existing use rights that the property enjoyed” and that “the lawfully commenced existing use rights have not been abandoned”. The applicant does not dispute that the medical consulting practice was not physically conducted on the premises for the 12 months preceding the application. This circumstance would normally have resulted in the extinguishment of any existing use rights. An advertisement for an auction on 30 October 2003 indicates an intention for the site to continue its use as medical consulting rooms. Evidence of an intent to continue existing use rights, such as seeking to rent the premises for a continuation of the unlawful use, has been held by the Court to negate an assumption of abandonment of the use. The proposal is assessed as enjoying existing use rights by virtue of the owner’s intention to continue the use of the business as medical consulting rooms. The use of the building for the purposes of a vet, as well as associated carparking, is the subject of this report.


3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of: • Partial demolition of the building and partial demolition of existing boundary fencing; • Conversion of former medical consulting rooms to accommodate veterinary consulting

rooms; and • On-site parking for 4 vehicles in the rear yard accessed from Spofforth Street involving

construction of an elevated concrete platform. The proposal seeks to trade from 8am – 7pm (weekdays), 9am-3pm (Saturday) and 10am – 12pm (Sunday). Staffing will usually comprise one vet, a receptionist and assistant vets as required. Occasionally two vets will be on the premises. The proposed veterinary clinic consults at 15 minute intervals. The veterinary building comprises a cat consulting room, a dog consulting room, a treatment area, radiology and animal holding pen. The holding pen is for the purpose of accommodating sick animals overnight to allow for recuperation. The proposal does not include boarding animals outside the realm of veterinary care, such as kennel use involving accommodating animals whilst owners are on holidays. No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 5, 7 and 10b. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Part 4 Division 10 "Existing Uses"; and Environment Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 Part 5 "Existing Uses" form the basis of the planning assessment. Existing use rights override the normal application of planning controls. Nonetheless, in assessing the proposal under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act it is appropriate to use the objectives of the Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998, State Regional Environmental Plan No. 23, the Mosman Residential DCP and the Transport DCP as a guide in determining the appropriateness of the proposal in its surroundings. 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 NUMERIC CONTROLS SUMMARY TABLE LEP CONTROLS CONTROL PROPOSED SATISFACTORY?

Site Area N/A 447.5m2 Yes

Building Height N/A 6.9m Yes

Wall Height N/A 4.8m Yes

Number of Storeys N/A 1 storey Yes

Gross Floor Area

Existing 182.9m2 N/A

To be demolished 37.0m2 N/A

Total 145.9m2 N/A

Floorspace Ratio N/A 0.33:1 Yes


LEP CONTROLS CONTROL PROPOSED SATISFACTORY?

Landscaped Area

Existing N/A 158.8m2 N/A

Proposed N/A 60.6m2 Yes DCP CONTROLS CONTROL PROPOSED SATISFACTORY?

Setbacks

Ground floor – south

N/A

0.3m

No

Parking N/A 4 spaces Yes


N/A >2 hours Yes

5.2 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.2.1 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The proposed development is not visible from the foreshore or a waterway and therefore the proposed development does not conflict with the aims and objectives of SREP 23. 5.2.2 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned Residential 2(d). The use is defined as commercial premises and is prohibited under Clause 11 of the MLEP 1998. The development satisfies the definition of an existing use under section 106 of the Act, it being noted that use of the site for medical consulting rooms was approved prior to the gazettal of the Mosman LEP in 1998 and that the use (or an intention for continuation of the use) has continued to the present day. Pursuant to section 108, alterations and extensions to existing uses are permissible with the consent of Council. The statutory requirements of the zone, the LEP in general and the MRDCP 1999 do not directly apply to a non-conforming use. The proposal is assessed on a merit basis where MLEP 1998 and MRDCP 1999 objectives and requirements are examined as guidelines simultaneously with the Section 79C assessment under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The development generally satisfies the general and zone objectives of the LEP. Height The development does not increase the height of the existing building and is therefore acceptable. The building is compatible with the height of surrounding residential housing. The height of the carparking slab and railing is discussed under Section 5.3.2 of this report. Floorspace Ratio The proposal involves the demolition of the rear (southern) portion of the building which results in a reduction of approximately 37sqm from the existing floor area. The scale of building is compatible with existing housing characteristics of the locality.


An elevated carparking slab approximately 2 metres above ground level is proposed to cover the southern portion of the site. Although not representing floorspace, it is contrary to the floorspace ratio objective to maintain ground levels. The height of the slab creates privacy and visual impacts and is discussed further under "Landscaped Area", "Landscaping", "Streetscape" and Section 5.3.2. Landscaped Area The proposal decreases the current soft landscaping provision by 98.2 square metres due to the proposed carparking area. The resultant landscaped provision is 60.6m2 which would be a 31% departure from that notionally required by clause 15. The provision of soft landscaping on the site is not dissimilar to nearby sites, particularly along the Spofforth Street commercial strip which contains a number of commercial premises and does not culminate in a dominance of the built form over landscape. The large tree at the rear south-eastern corner of the property is proposed to be retained on the site which assists in retaining the appearance of landscaping when viewed from the adjoining residential units (particularly Nos. 73B Spofforth Street and 108 Cabramatta Road). Additional planting including street trees are proposed to ensure that the proposal does not create significant visual impacts on the surrounding properties. Additional soft landscaped area is sought by condition in order to mitigate visual impacts associated with the elevated carparking area at the south-western corner of the property. The increase in provision necessitates the deletion of carparking space No. 1, but does not result in the entire space being dedicated for landscaping. The reason for this is that carparking space No. 2 is recommended for relocation partly into the deleted space No. 1 so that the vehicular access ramp can be shifted slightly south to allow for a compliant disabled access ramp at the south side of the building providing access to the footpath and then to the building. These design changes reduce the notional variation from 31% to 21% and are the subject of a deferred commencement condition, should Council be mindful to approve the application. Foreshore Scenic Protection Area The site is located within Council's Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. The proposed development is consistent with foreshore protection objectives under clause 27(1) of MLEP 1998. Heritage The site does not contain a heritage item, is not within immediate proximity of a heritage item and is not within a heritage conservation area. The proposed development will not adversely affect the nearby Holt Estate heritage conservation area. 5.3 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.3.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Siting and Scale The reduction in floor area by 37sqm will increase the setback to the adjacent southern residential property. However, the setback area is to be used for an elevated carparking area comprising 4 carparking spaces and associated manoeuvring space. This construction is clearly visible to adjoining properties and its height (including privacy screen) constitutes a significant visual impact to the adjoining residential properties.


In order to reduce the visual impact for the adjoining residential properties it is recommended the structure be reduced in height. The proposed level of the carparking area is RL 77.49, which is approximately 2 metres above the ground level at the south-eastern corner of the site. It is recommended the structure be reduced by 230mm to RL 77.26. The finished level cannot be reduced any further as this would mean the disabled access ramp would be too steep. The reduction by 230mm assists in reducing the impact of the structure on the adjoining residential properties and responds more appropriately to the existing levels of the site. To further minimise impacts to an acceptable level, the recommendation includes a condition to eliminate carparking space No. 1 and to provide extra landscaping to assist in creating a dominance of landscaping on the site. Views No significant public or private views will be impacted as a result of this development proposal. Landscaping The proposal includes the removal of a Ficus and 2 Eucalyptus (one on the site and one street tree) in order to accommodate the proposed car parking structure and driveway. Council’s Landscape Designer has had regard to the applicant’s arborist report, which reports that the Ficus is an unsuitable species in the context as it is characterised by aggressive rooting and attains a large size at maturity. The arborist recommends a number of indigenous species to be used as replacement trees. Council’s Landscape Designer accepts the trees removal and notes the concept submitted landscape plan indicates screen planting along the boundary and canopy trees that would contribute to a dominance of landscaping over building. The Landscape Designer further recommends that carparking space No. 1 be deleted and replaced with further planting so as to assist in mitigating impacts on the adjoining property to the south and enhancing the landscaping on the site in accordance with the zone objectives. The loss of the carparking space is reasonable in that it responds better to the site and its surrounds by providing a landscaped area more appropriate for its location adjacent to the surrounding residential building. The depth of planting ensures that the spatial separation between the carparking area and the adjoining property is increased to an acceptable level, so that privacy impacts are satisfactorily reduced. Streetscape The existing building resembles a dwelling house in design and scale. The proposal maintains the residential appearance of the building and reduces the floor area of the building to the rear (southern) side of the building. The carparking slab is proposed 0.3 metres below the level of the driveway entrance level. A landscape strip 1.2 metres wide is proposed between carspace 2 and the Spofforth Street boundary and carspace 1 is recommended for deletion and replacement (in part) with landscaping. The occupation of part of the carparking space No. 1 with space No. 2 so as to allow the ramp to be re-allocated to allow for a disabled ramp is discussed further in the section “disabled access” in this report. These combined measures are satisfactory in achieving the zone objectives which seek to ensure a dominance of landscaping over buildings.


The applicant submitted amended plans increasing the setback of the mechanical (a/c) from the boundary with the adjoining residential property at No. 108 Cabramatta Road, from 0.35 metres to 2.6 metres. These amended plans appropriately introduced an attached garbage compound to the a/c to accommodate two bins. These structures are suitably screened from Cabramatta Road and No 108 Cabramatta Road by landscaping. No front fences are proposed to either of the two street frontages. Overshadowing There will be no significant loss of solar access to the living room areas or private open space of adjoining properties as per the requirements of Part 5.8 of MRDCP 1999. The increase in setback of the carparking area from the southern boundary will assist in the preservation of sunlight to the lower levels of the adjoining residential units on Nos 73B Spofforth Street. Townscape Controls The site is located within the Belmont townscape. The development will reduce the scale of the building through demolition of the southern portion of the building. Screening vegetation is proposed for the car parking structure. The proposal will not conflict with the desired future character objectives of the townscape area, which generally seeks to have alterations and additions to buildings which respect the scale of the host building. Noise In relation to acoustic privacy, the applicant responded with the submission of a Noise Assessment report. The main points of this report are: • dogs that are unwell or recovering from surgery are likely to be less noisy than healthy

dogs; • traffic noise generated by the proposed use will be very low compared with existing

noise from general traffic; • animal noise generated whilst animals are outside (when arriving / leaving) will require

no special measures due to “low numbers”; • the building will be effectively sealed against noise emission; • the “dog accommodation room” for overnight stay will need to be especially well

insulated using a number of measures; and • the plant will need to be housed in a plant room and located so as to minimise noise to

neighbours. The acoustic report states that typically there is not an animal housed every night, more so in the order of 1 or 2 per week. The dog cages for overnight accommodation are located in a room at the front of the building fronting Cabramatta Road. Subject to appropriate noise attenuation measures which may include window treatment and/or acoustic absorption to the ceiling and upper walls, Council's Manager Environment and Services is satisfied with the proposal. Disabled Access The proposal in its submitted form combines the use of the vehicular access ramp with disabled pedestrian access. This is not satisfactory and creates a pedestrian/vehicular conflict contrary to Council’s controls. The deferred commencement consent requires a disabled access ramp at the south side of the building, separated from the driveway with


bollards. The driveway maintains its proposed 3 metre width and as a result carparking space No. 1 is lost and partially taken by the relocated space No. 2. The disabled ramp will be designed to not exceed a 1:14 grade in accordance with AS1428.1. 5.3.2 Transport Development Control Plan The proposal provides 4 car parking spaces on the site with access from Spofforth Street. Four spaces are required by the Transport Development Control Plan. The Traffic Engineer has commented that “Including staff trips (either from private or public travel) the development will not create any significant alterations to the traffic flow or intersection capacities in area surrounding the development”. The Development Engineer was initially concerned about the access to spaces numbered 2 and 4. The applicant provided further information to the satisfaction of Council’s engineer that manoeuvring and access to the spaces would be satisfactory. Due to the difficulty in accessing these spaces they were to be allocated to staff. However, space No. 1 is now proposed to be deleted for the purpose of improving the presentation of the building to the adjoining properties. The loss of space No. 1 increases the soft landscaping provision by 8.25 square metres, and the resulting notional departure in soft landscaping provision is reduced from 31% to 21%. The proposal includes screening measures to mitigate headlight and privacy impacts from the carparking area for the residential properties to the east and south. The ground level of the building to the south (No. 73B Spofforth Street) of the subject site is lower than that of the subject site. There is adequate privacy screening to the car parking area by virtue of the additional planting area created by loss of carparking space No. 1. The loss of the carparking space No. 1 from the proposal does not result in an insufficient parking arrangement on the site. The former doctor’s surgery was staffed by up to 4 doctors at once, plus a pathology clinic. The hours or operation of the doctor’s surgery were similar to that proposed in this application. The doctor’s surgery generated a demand for 7.3 car spaces, rounded up to 8. The business operated for years on zero carparking provision. The veterinary clinic creates a demand for 4 spaces and in reducing the provision to 3 by condition still results in a better situation than the former surgery. The provision of 3 spaces on the site assists in relieving the road system of parking demand, and in this regard satisfies Council’s Transport Development Control Plan. 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, fire safety, fire upgrades, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection subject to conditions. Council’s Landscape Designer has assessed the proposal and comments as follows:

“The removal of the Ficus and Eucalypts are approved. The Ficus is semi mature, but will soon outgrow the space and be inappropriate. The growth of the on-site Eucalyptus is being suppressed by the canopy of the Ficus. The tree on the eastern boundary, 3000mm from the southern boundary with the single trunk, will be affected


by the construction of the car park. The tree is a Large Leafed Privet and should be removed regardless of any construction work proposed. To limit the visual impact of the concrete carpark and the removal of the Ficus and the Eucalypts, the car space titled CAR 1 should be deleted to give more space for planting taking into account the changes in the visual outlook that will be experienced in the property to the south of the development. This change is to be addressed in the landscape plan too be submitted with the CC. It is recommended that approval be given for the removal of the Eucalypt street tree because this is the only possible location for the driveway but require 2 x 45 litre Jacaranda mimosifolia as street trees along the Cabramatta Rd frontage and 2 x 45 litre Lagerstroemia indica along the Spofforth Street frontage."

Council’s Manager Environment and Services raised no objection concerning health or waste issues subject to conditions. Council's Traffic Engineer made the following comments:

"Neither RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments nor Mosman Council’s Off Street Car Parking Code provide guidelines to traffic generation and parking requirements for veterinary clinics. As a result the applicant has provided data from a survey undertaken from the existing veterinary clinic located nearby. Traffic Generation The survey undertaken shows an average maximum of consultations per day was 24 with an additional short term visitors of 2.8 (say 3) a total of 27 visits each day. Due to restrictions on public transport not permitting animals, all visits to the clinic will be via private means (car or taxi). Including staff trips (either from private or public travel) the development will not create any significant alterations to the traffic flow or intersection capacities in area surrounding the development. Parking Provision Projected staff includes 1 receptionist, a maximum 2 veterinarians and veterinarian assistants (no number submitted). The survey shows that the average staff using private transport to work is 1 and a maximum of 3. From this a minimum of 2 spaces would be required for staff parking. The survey also shows the average consultation period was 15 minutes, a maximum of 24 consultations each day and 3 short term visits. Provided only 2 spaces are occupied by staff, a minimum of an additional 2 spaces for visitors should be provided however, it would be desirable that during the redesign of the car park as required, (refer to Development Engineers memo) that consideration be given to providing an additional car space for visitors. Note: That all visitor car spaces should be signposted accordingly to ensure adequate spaces are available and a suitable sign at the entrance indicating that visitor parking is available on site. Construction Traffic Management Plan Prior to the commencement of site works a Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted and adopted by Council’s Traffic Committee."

For reasons previously discussed regarding the parking demands of the former use, landscaping and visual impact, the findings of this report are that 3 spaces will be sufficient.


7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 9 February and 24 February 2004. Amended plans were notified between 27 September and 12 October 2004. Fifteen submissions to the original submission were received from or on behalf of the following properties: • 2/108 Cabramatta Road; • 6/108 Cabramatta Road; • 7/108 Cabramatta Road; • 8/108 Cabramatta Road; • 9/108 Cabramatta Road; • Owners Corporation 108 Cabramatta Road; • 9/104 Cabramatta Road; • 3/73B Spofforth Street; • 7/73B Spofforth Street; • 9/73B Spofforth Street; • 34/75 Spofforth Street; • 54/75 Spofforth Street; • Owners Corporation 104 Cabramatta Road; • Staldone Developments; and • Owner Corporation of 97-99 Cabramatta Road. A petition was received comprising 11 signatories and stating “I support the rejection of the proposed Veterinary Surgery at 73A Spofforth Street, Mosman DA 8.2003.464.1”. The signatories were: • 2/108 Cabramatta Road; • 34/75 Spofforth Street; • 6/108 Cabramatta Road; • 6/73B Spofforth Street; • 5/75B Spofforth Street; • 8/104 Cabramatta Road; • 9/104 Cabramatta Road; • 12/104 Cabramatta Road; • 1/104 Cabramatta Road; • 13/97 Cabramatta Road; and • 12/97 Cabramatta Road. Six submissions were received to the amended plans from properties: • 2/108 Cabramatta Road; • 8/108 Cabramatta Road (3 submissions); • 9/108 Cabramatta Road; and • 10/104 Cabramatta Road. The concerns raised for the amended plans were consistent with those originally raised and are therefore not separated in this report. Matters raised within all public submissions and commentary on those matters are summarised below:


The use is prohibited in the zone and the use of the premises as a doctor’s general practice ceased on 13 December 2002

Comment: The use is permissible under existing use right provisions of the Act by virtue of the owner demonstrating an intention to continue the use to the present. Insufficient parking and traffic impacts and no provision made for loading bay of stock

or animals Comment: Council’s development engineer has assessed the proposal and considers the proposal satisfactory in terms of parking provision and traffic. The loss of parking space number 1 does not unreasonably affect the ability of the road system to absorb on street parking demand. Parking and traffic will be improved compared to the former use. Proposal will negatively affect surrounding land values

Comment: This is not a relevant town planning issue. Nonetheless, given acceptable amenity impacts, effects on land values would be negligible. Noise impacts from animals on amenity of adjoining residential properties

Comment: The proposal has been assessed by Council’s Manager Environment and Services and found satisfactory subject to conditions of consent. Concerns about animal boarding (at night) creating noise impacts on adjoining

premises Comment: The acoustic report submitted with the application adequately demonstrates that sick animals kept overnight will not create significant amenity impacts for adjoining properties. A primary reason for this is that animals kept overnight in normal circumstances are kept in a sleeping state by injection, minimising the potential for amenity impacts from barking or the like. In the event barking does occur noise insulation is proposed in these rooms to mitigate against noise impacts. Conditions of consent will prohibit boarding of healthy animals. Concerns the proposal will result in odour and attract vermin

Comment: The standards for cleanliness and waste disposal proposed will ensure that the business does not attract odour and vermin. Measures include collecting and freezing potentially odorous waste prior to their collection. The management of the premises includes ensuring that any excrement are removed promptly from gardens or nature strips to ensure neighbourhood amenity. Appropriate conditions are recommended for waste storage. Concerns pharmaceuticals kept on the premises will attract a criminal element to the

area Comment: There is no evidence to substantiate this assertion. Objection to tree loss (which currently provides privacy and noise reduction to No.

6/108 Cabramatta Road and units at 73B Spofforth Street) Comment: Significant tree planting is proposed to compensate for the loss of trees from the site. Trees have no impact on noise levels. The operating times of the proposal is wider than that of the previous doctor’s

surgery, thereby increasing activity for longer periods


Comment: The operating times are satisfactory and do not create a significant net increase in impact on the adjoining properties. Fear that areas surrounding the premise will be used to exercise dogs associated

with the use creating noise impacts and an unpleasant area due to dogs defecating in these exercise areas

Comment: This matter is controlled under the Companion Animals Act. Section 13 of this Act requires that owners keep dogs under “effective control”, including the use of leashes. It would be impractical to condition that customers accompanying their pets to the vet cannot use the public footpath in the surrounds of the veterinary clinic. The area is public and permits public usage in this manner. Section 20 of the Companion Animals Act deals with defecation and requires immediate collection by the person accompanying the animal. This requirement applies to any public area. It is not expected approval of the veterinary clinic will attract a significant increase in persons and pets to the public footpath and, in any event, Council’s Rangers have powers under the Companion Animals Act to enforce the requirements of this Act. The conversion introduces ‘retail sales’ which was never associated with its use as a

Doctor’s premises. Also signage may be introduced which would be inappropriate to the area

Comment: The retail use is suitably appurtenant to the business and is satisfactory in this regard. The retail sales component of the proposal sells products of a veterinary nature. It is not expected that this aspect of the proposal will attract customers specifically for that purpose. The retail component primarily serves the purpose of conveniently providing access to veterinary products for those who have visited the site for consultation. The application does not include any signage. Proposed signage outside Council’s Exempt and Complying Development Control Plan would require development approval. 8.0 CONCLUSION The premises enjoy existing use rights. The proposed alterations and additions to the building and conversion to a veterinary clinic is satisfactory subject to conditions of consent which reduce the impacts of the proposal by reducing the height of the carparking slab and increasing landscaping. The adjoining residential properties have raised objections to the proposal. The assessment of the application has involved analysis of likely amenity impacts associated with the use. The conditions of consent, should Council be mindful to approve the application will ensure that the veterinary clinic does not create significant impacts on these properties. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant is Peter Waugh The owners are Joanne Mercurio Administration Co. Pty Ltd and Limazah Pty Ltd. The estimated value of works is in the order of $530,000. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services recommends that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION That Development Application No. 8.2003.464.1 be approved as a deferred commencement subject to the following conditions:


PART A 1. This consent shall not operate until the applicant submits the following information to

the satisfaction of Council:

• For the purposes of reducing visual, noise and privacy impacts on the adjoining residential properties at No. 73B Spofforth Street and No. 108 Cabramatta Road, to increase the provision of landscaping on the site, to improve streetscape presentation and to ensure adequate disabled access is provided to the site, the following amendments must be made to the plans:

• the carparking slab level must be reduced by 230mm from RL 77.49 to RL

77.26;

• Carparking space No. 1 must be deleted and carparking space No. 2 relocated further south on the site such that its southern edge is set back 1.8 metres from the southern boundary. The carparking space must be 2.5 metres wide. The 1.8 metre wide area must be maintained at existing ground level and comprise landscaping including a canopy tree capable of attaining a height of 8 metres at maturity and selected from Appendix C of the Mosman Residential Development Control Plan;

• An external 1 metre wide disabled access ramp must connect the front

Spofforth Street boundary to the carparking area. The ramp must run alongside the southern wall of the veterinary building, adjoining the dog waiting area and WC’s.

• The area of the site located between the disabled ramp described above and

the new carparking space must be constructed as the vehicular access ramp, measuring the same length as that shown on the approved plans. The plans must show the vehicular access ramp separated from the disabled access ramp with bollards to ensure safety of pedestrians using the pedestrian ramp.

Such information shall be submitted within 12 months of the date of this determination. Upon written notification from Council that the above has been satisfied, conditions as listed under Part B of this consent shall apply in addition to other conditions nominated in Council's written notification that arise from the information provided in response to Part A.

APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION


Plan Nos. Date of plan Prepared by

DA01 – DA05 (issue B) inclusive

10 March 2005 Gordon Valich Architects

14679 17 June 2004 Bee & Lethbridge Pty Limited

4912-1h DWG April 2005 Thomas Kane



DH-01 REV A

Document title Date of document Prepared by

Statement of Environmental Effects

Not dated P.A. Waugh


September 2004 Brett Newbold Urban Planning

Traffic & Parking Impact Assessment

20 July 2004 John Hewitt Traffic Planning Associates Pty Ltd

Acoustic Report 17 August 2004 Wilkinson Murray Pty Ltd

Mechanical Services Report

17 August 2004 MPI Consultants (NSW) Pty Ltd

Arborist’s Report 6 August 2004 Ladd Hudson Architects

PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE









Landscape Plan

5. A landscape plan prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect or Landscape Consultant to a scale of 1:100 or 1:200 and conforming to Council's Residential Development Control Plan and relevant conditions of this Consent, must be submitted to Council’s or the Accredited Certifier’s satisfaction with the Construction Certificate application.

The plan must include two canopy trees in total on the site. One is to be located in the area of the deleted carparking space No. 1, and the other in the landscape space adjoining carparking space No. 4 as shown on Drawing No. DA 04 Issue B, dated 10 March 2005 prepared by Gordon Valich Architects. Both canopy trees must be selected to attain a height of 8 metres at maturity.

The plan must include the location of all existing and proposed landscape features and delineate trees to be retained, removed or transplanted. The Plan must also show existing and proposed finished ground levels and 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. Consideration within the design should be given to the scale of planting in proportion to the development, consistency with the landscape character of the area and the views, solar access and privacy of neighbouring development.

Tree Replacement

6. The landscape plan submitted with the Construction Certificate application shall incorporate the following replacement trees to ensure the preservation of the landscape character of the area:

Species Required Location 2 x 45 Litre Jacaranda mimosifolia

Cabramatta Rd frontage

2 x 45 Litre Lagerstroemia indica

Spofforth Street frontage



Retaining Walls


Sydney Water





Long Service Levy


Security Deposit

11. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $2,500 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good of any damage caused to Council property and to ensure the satisfactory completion of any works required to be undertaken outside the property boundary. A request for a refund of unused funds (less an inspection fee if Council is not the PCA) may be made following the completion of all works, both inside and outside the property boundary, and an inspection of the site by Council.

Fire Safety

12. To enable the issuing of a fire safety schedule, information required by clause 168 (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

Rainwater Re-Use System 13. The proposed rainwater re-use tank is to be connected to the house for some

domestic use. The minimum domestic use shall be for flushing of all toilets in the building and connection to the laundry for washing purposes. A detailed design is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application. Only rainwater from the downpipes and gutters is allowed to enter the tank. The tank is to be fully sealed to prevent any surface run off from entering the tank.

Driveway















Construction Traffic Management Plan

17. To minimise disruption to and ensure reasonable safety for surrounding public and private property during site works, a Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to and adopted by Council’s Traffic Committee. The plan is to address matters raised in Council’s Guide For Construction Traffic Management Plans which is available in Appendix 4 of Council’s “Transport Development Control Plan”.

Note: Council’s Traffic Committee meets once every two months. Early lodgement of the plan may assist in avoiding delays in the commencement of works.









Note: This document is available from the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources.


















Site Work Hours










Council Property

28. The land and adjoining areas shall be kept in a clean and tidy condition at all times. No construction vehicles, building materials, waste, machinery or related matter shall be stored on the road or footpath for the duration of works unless separate approval has been obtained from Council’s Traffic Committee for the establishment of a Construction Zone. Under no circumstances will any person be allowed to mix or dispose of concrete, mortar or slurry within Council property.


29. All natural landscape features including trees and other vegetation, natural rock outcrops, soil and watercourses shall remain undisturbed except where affected by necessary works detailed on approved plans.

Tree Preservation

30. All street trees and trees on private property that are protected under Mosman Council’s Tree Preservation Order 2003, shall be retained except where Council's prior written consent has been obtained, or where after approval of the relevant


Construction Certificate, trees stand within the envelope of approved buildings or within the alignment of approved permanent paved vehicular access roads and parking areas. Approval for the removal of the street tree near the driveway is granted.

Water Conservation

31. To minimise domestic water consumption, water conservation devices with an AAA rating must be used, including low flow tap and shower head roses, dual flush toilets and six litre/minute flow regulators in all bathroom basins, kitchen and laundry sinks.

Energy Efficiency

32. To promote energy efficiency all hot water system/s installed must have a minimum rating of 3.5 stars.

Toilet Facilities







Approved Plans


• At the commencement of the building work; • After excavation for, and prior to the placement of, any footings; • Prior to the pouring of any in-situ reinforced concrete building element; • Prior to covering of the framework for any floor, wall, roof or other building

element; • Prior to covering waterproofing in any wet areas; • Prior to covering any stormwater drainage connections; • Smoke alarms prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the

building; • Mechanical ventilation where mechanical means for ventilating a room is required

prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building; • Access and mobility if disabled parking is provided prior to any occupation

certificate being issued in relation to the building; and


• Final inspection after the building work has been completed and prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building.


Partial Demolition

36. All demolition work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Australian Standard 2601 – 2001: The Demolition of Structures. Demolition is not to exceed that approved under this consent and as shown on approved plans. If for structural or other reasons additional demolition and then rebuilding works are found to be necessary, consent for such works is to be obtained from Council.

37. Where asbestos material shall be removed or disturbed as a result of any proposed demolition, alteration or addition, all work must be carried out by a person licensed under Chapter 10 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001 and undertaken in accordance with the requirements of clause 29 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996. All asbestos to be removed must be disposed of at a tip recommended by the NSW Environment Protection Authority and under no circumstances shall be re-used or sold.

Acoustic

38. To ensure reasonable acoustic amenity for surrounding properties is maintained, all recommendations made in the acoustic report prepared by Wilkinson Murray Pty Ltd, dated 17 August 2004 accompanying the application which require specialised acoustic treatment of the building shall be complied with and maintained.

Waste Storage Area

39. For safety, amenity and maintenance reasons, the waste storage area must be constructed to the following standards:

• Walls must be constructed with solid impervious material and shall be cement rendered internally to a smooth even steel trowelled surface;

• All intersections between the walls and floors shall be coved with coving having a minimum radius of 25mm;

• Adequate ventilation shall be provided; • Waste storage areas shall prevent the access of vermin; • Waste receptacles used shall be compatible with Mosman Council’s waste

collection service; • The door to the storage area shall be weatherproof and shall be openable

from the inside at all times; • Hot and cold water hose cocks shall be located inside or within close proximity

to the waste storage areas to facilitate cleaning.


Rainwater Re-Use tank 40. The proposed rainwater re-use tank and associated reticulation system to the house

for domestic purposes shall be installed to the requirements of Sydney Water.

41. A licensed plumber should supervise all plumbing work. All work is to be undertaken in compliance of Sydney Water's "Guidelines for Rainwater tanks in Residential Properties" and "Rainwater Tanks, Information For Plumbers" and the NSW Code of Practice: Plumbing and Drainage.

42. Both the tank and the fittings must be labelled "RAINWATER, NOT SUITABLE FOR DRINKNG".

43. A first-flush-by-pass device must be installed allowing the first 1mm of initial runoff to bypass the tank.

44. In the occurrence of prolonged periods of rain any overflow from the rainwater tank should be discharged via an existing stormwater drainage system or to a Council approved device such as an onsite detention system. This pipeline must be covered with an insect proof mesh to prevent the breeding of mosquitoes.

45. To ensure reasonable acoustic amenity for surrounding properties is maintained any mechanical equipment associated with the rainwater re-use tank and associated reticulation system shall be located in a sound proof container and positioned so that there is no increase in noise level at any point on the boundary with another property, including a public place.









Fire Safety

47. A final fire safety certificate prepared in accordance with Part 9 Division 4 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 must be issued by the owner. Copies of both the final fire safety certificate and the fire safety schedule must


be (1) supplied to Council, (2) forwarded to the Fire Commissioner and (3) prominently displayed in the building.

Rainwater Re-Use System 48. A compliance certificate must be submitted to Council which includes work-as-

executed details of the rainwater re-use system prepared suitably qualified person with experience and competence in the related field. Any variations to approved plans must be shown in red and supported by calculations.

49. To ensure that future owners are made aware of their responsibilities with respect to the Rain Water Re-Use Tank, a positive covenant shall be created on the title of the allotment requiring that the owner(s) maintain and keep in working order the Rain Water Re-Use Tank, unless otherwise approved in writing by Mosman Council.

The terms of the positive covenant shall read: (i) In this Positive Covenant “Rain Water Re-Use Tank” shall mean the Rain Water

Re-Use Tank approved by Mosman Municipal Council pursuant to Development Consent No. 8.2003.464.1 or any modification thereof approved by Mosman Municipal Council in writing.

(ii) The Registered Proprietors will at their own expense well and sufficiently maintain and keep in good and substantial repair and working order any Rain Water Re-Use Tank which exists from time to time on the land.

(iii) The Registered Proprietors shall not remove the Rain Water Re-Use Tank

without the prior consent of Mosman Municipal Council. (iv) The Registered Proprietors hereby agree to indemnify Mosman Municipal

Council from and against all claims, demands, actions, suits, causes of action, sum or sums of money, compensation damages, costs and expenses which Mosman Municipal Council or any other person may suffer or incur as a result of any malfunction or non-operation of any such Rain Water Re-Use Tank arising from any failure of the Registered Proprietors to comply with the terms of this Covenant.

(v) The term “Registered Proprietors” shall include the Registered Proprietors of

the land from time to time and all their heirs, executors, assigns and successors in title to the land and where there are two or more registered proprietors of the land the terms of this covenant shall bind all those registered proprietors jointly and severally.

Acoustic 50. A validation report must be submitted to the Accredited Certifier within 6 months of

the operation of the business, certifying that that all recommendations made in the acoustic report accompanying the development application (Wilkinson Murray Pty Ltd, 17 August 2004), including all treatment measures and target emission levels, were complied with. A person suitably qualified and experienced in acoustical engineering (e.g. a member of the Australian Acoustical Society, the Institution of Engineers, the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants or a person with other appropriate professional qualifications) must prepare the Validation Report. The report is to include at least one night period during which animals (including dogs) are housed overnight.


PRIOR TO OCCUPATION







DURING OCCUPATION


Shopfront Appearance

53. To preserve the streetscape, roller shutters are not to be placed over the entrance to the premises.

Trading Hours

54. To ensure reasonable neighbourhood amenity, trading hours are restricted to the following times:

Weekdays 8.00am - 7.00pm Saturdays 9.00am - 3.00pm Sundays & Public Holidays 10.00am - 12.00pm

55. Deliveries of goods or services and the collection of any waste (excepting emergency

services) shall not take place between 10.00pm and 7.00am on any day. An emergency service for the purpose of this condition means the delivery of any goods or services required for the maintenance of safe operating conditions upon the site.

Animal Boarding 56. The premises are not to be used for the boarding of animals on a paid basis by

customers in the form of kennelling, a cattery or the like.

Car Parking

57. Parking and manoeuvring areas shall be used solely for such purposes.


Acoustic

58. To ensure reasonable acoustic amenity for surrounding properties is maintained, all recommendations made in the acoustic report prepared by Wilkinson Murray Pty Td, dated 17 August 2004 accompanying the application which require specialised acoustic treatment in which the use must operate shall be complied with.

Advertising Signs

59. No advertisement shall be erected on or in conjunction with the development without prior development consent unless the advertisement is ‘exempt development’ under Council’s Exempt and Complying Development DCP.

Fire Safety

60. An annual fire safety statement (and where necessary supplementary fire safety statements) prepared in accordance with Part 9 Division 5 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 must be issued by the owner. Copies of each of the annual final fire safety statement, supplementary fire safety statements and the fire safety schedule must be (1) supplied to Council, (2) forwarded to the Fire Commissioner and (3) prominently displayed in the building.

Noise 61. The noise emitted from the premises :

(i) shall not be heard within a habitable room in any residential premises (regardless of whether any door or window to that room is open):

(a) before 8 am or after 10 pm on any Saturday, Sunday or public

holiday, or (b) before 7 am or after 10 pm on any other day.

(ii) at all other times shall not exceed background noise level (LA90) by more than

5 dB(A) when measured at all property boundaries in the absence of that noise source.

Waste 62. The bin storage area shall be maintained in a manner so as not to generate offensive

odour as defined under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

63. Any biological waste (animal waste) shall be secured in plastic bags contained within waste receptacles fitted with lids and shall not be stored on-site for a period of more than 24 hours.

64. All deceased animals shall be stored in sealed body bags in freezer prior to collection by private contractor.

65. Sharps waste (needles, syringes, scalpels) shall be stored in appropriate ‘Sharps’ containers compliant with AS4031 and collected by private contractors on a regular basis. All sharps waste is to be disposed of in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.


ADVICE / NOTES

















EP/172 41 Congewoi Road DA NUMBER: 8.2005.108.1 PROPOSAL: Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house

including extension of the first floor level, demolition of fishpond and spa and construction of a new in-ground pool

REPORTING OFFICER: Danielle Dunford, Executive Town Planner LODGEMENT DATE: 1 April 2005 (Downtime 17 days) OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

LOCALITY MAP

DP

1028

8

2

11

DP

5214

56

DP 542863

12

DP

1911

29

DP 748598DP

7884

3

1

DP

520

DP 5

DP

8543

20

1

1B

B

DP

9275

42

DP 979348

SP 1

7636

DP

9275

42

512

DP

3004

90

DP

8166

45

DP

8308

5

DP 929068

1

DP

8125

2

1131DP 752067

4

212

31

1

2A1

D

DP 318494

DP 74554

DP 797813

11F

1

DP

1335

9

C

E

3635

3433

4

DP

8608

37

382140411

DP

3131

65

DP

5772

61

DP 8608

251 24

1

4028

DP

8110

4

3 1

2

AB

C

DP 595

DP 15A

DP 364886

DP

3653

74

DP 743283

1730

37

22A

22B

22

3432

24

373735

1214

1618

20

911

1313

A

3

15

33

39

3335

3741

43

43

4139

31

2224

2

8

9

66

7

4

5

3A 31

45

2628

3032

11A15

12

7

10

11

5

CARRINGTONN

ST

RD

STBURTON

T

INKE

RM

AN

CO

NG

EWO

I


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This application is for alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house comprising of an extension to the existing first floor and construction of an in-ground swimming pool in the rear yard. While the proposal seeks variations to Council’s floorspace ratio, landscaped area and side setback controls, the objectives of these controls have been satisfied. Three objections have been received regarding view loss, however, the proposal satisfies Council’s view sharing objectives. Approval of the proposal is recommended, subject to conditions.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the eastern side of Congewoi Road, between Burton Street and Wyong Road. The site is rectangular in shape with a frontage of 15.24m to Congewoi Road. The site falls about 7m to the street at an average gradient of 20%. The site presently contains a two storey dwelling house with a spa and fishpond in the rear yard. Surrounding development consists of detached dwelling houses. 2.0 BACKGROUND On 28 August 2002, an application made under Council’s Tree Preservation Order was approved for the selective thinning (15% of overall live canopy) of three native trees located in the south-eastern corner of the subject site. The reason given for this application was to ‘improve views to neighbouring properties’. The applicant advises that while thinning did take place, the vegetation has since grown back. On 16 November 2005, Council staff held a pre-DA meeting with the applicant. On 1 April 2005, the subject application was lodged. On 26 May 2005, additional information regarding pool setbacks, SEPP 1 submission and landscaped area was requested from the applicant. This information was submitted on 10 June 2005. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal (as amended) consists of: • Minor internal works to the ground floor level comprising of a new stairwell and alteration

to the window adjacent the existing stairs; • Extension to the first floor to create two new bedrooms, a bathroom and terrace; • Replace existing roof with a new pitched tiled roof; and • Redesign of the rear garden comprising of a new in-ground pool, removal of existing spa

and fishpond; and landscaping works (including the removal of trees). Materials and finishes comprise of painted and rendered brickwork, timber framed windows and doors, colourbond steel gutters, stainless steel balustrades and a tiled roof. There are no changes proposed to the front garden, driveway or double garage. No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 1a and 10a.


4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours • Draft Sydney Regional Environmental Plan - Sydney Harbour Catchment 2004 • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Mosman Residential Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan • Transport Development Control Plan • Mosman Section 94 Contributions Plan – Open Space 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 NUMERIC CONTROLS SUMMARY TABLE LEP CONTROLS CONTROL PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

Site Area 700m2 533m2 N/A


Wall Height 7.2m 6.1m Yes

Number of Storeys 2 storeys 2 storeys Yes

Gross Floor Area

Existing 250m2 N/A

Proposed 61m2 N/A

Total 311m2 N/A


Landscaped Area Existing Proposed

167m2

207m2

157m2 (-6%)

172m2 (-17%)

No No

DCP CONTROLS CONTROL PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

Setbacks

Ground floor – north

south

First floor – north

south

Swimming Pool – north

0.9m

0.9m

1.5m

1.5m

2m

1.5m

1.1m

1.5m

1.1m

2m

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Height Plane (HP) 45o from ground level along southern boundary

80o No

Parking

Garage / Carport Width

On merit

6m

2 spaces (no change)

6m (no change)

Yes

Yes

Fencing Height 1.2m / 1.8m 1.8m (no change) No





>2 hours

Yes

5.2 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.2.1 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards An objection under SEPP1 has been lodged in relation to the development standard for floor space ratio in Clause 14 of Mosman LEP 1998. The proposal has a floor space ratio of 0.58:1 (311sqm), which exceeds the development standard of 0.5:1 in clause 14 of Mosman LEP 1998 by 61sqm. The objectives of Clause 14 are to control the scale of development so that it is compatible with housing characteristics of the locality; to limit excavation of sites and retain natural ground levels for the purpose of landscaping and containing urban run-off; and the minimise the effects of bulk and scale. The applicant has argued that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary for the following reasons: • The non-compliance occurs due to the first floor addition being constructed over the

existing load bearing ground floor walls. This will make construction easier, keep building costs low and will minimise structural interference to the ground floor.

• The additional first floor space balances the elevation to Congewoi Road and is compatible with housing characteristics of the locality.

• The additional floor space does not require any excavation of the site. • The proposal has been designed to minimise view loss and overshadowing. • A complying proposal would allow only a 16.5sqm addition which would not be worth

doing. While the applicant’s first and last reasons for justifying the variation have no validity, the remaining reasons are acceptable and therefore the SEPP1 objection is reasonable. Given that the proposed development satisfies the objectives of the floorspace ratio and that it represents an improvement over the existing unsympathetic first floor addition, the non-compliance with the floorspace ratio is justified. In addition, the scale of the two storey dwelling is compatible with the housing characteristics of the locality and the effects of bulk and scale are minimised by articulation and design. For the reasons given above, compliance with the development standard would be inconsistent with the aims and objectives of SEPP1, and would hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act. 5.2.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The proposed additions to the dwelling will be visible from Middle Harbour. However, due to the nature of the proposal, topography of the area and distance from the harbour and surrounding foreshore, any views from the harbour and its foreshore will not be adversely affected. The proposal satisfies the provisions of SREP23.


5.2.3 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 2(a1) Residential. The proposed works are ancillary to the use of the site for a dwelling house and are permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at clause 11. The development satisfies the zone objectives particularly in that the proposal is of a height and scale which complements existing buildings and streetscapes and has reasonable regard to local amenity, and, in particular, public and private views. Height As demonstrated in the compliance table, the proposal complies with Council’s height controls. Floorspace Ratio This has been addressed in section 5.2.1. Landscaped Area The site has a proposed landscaped area of 172sqm (32% of site) which is deficient in meeting the requirement by 35sqm. The site has an existing landscaped area of 157sqm (29% of site) which is also deficient in meeting the current requirement by 10sqm. As a result of the increase in gross floor area, the landscaped area requirement for this site has also increased. Therefore, while the proposed landscaping does not comply with clause 15, the proposal will actually increase the landscaped area for the site. This is a result of the existing spa and fishpond being removed. Notwithstanding the numerical non-compliance with clause 15, the proposal satisfies the objectives of this clause. That is; the front setback area of the site is well vegetated maintaining the landscape character of the street; natural ground levels will be maintained (excavation limited to the pool area only); and there is adequate recreational area provided for the residents (including the pool area which technically is not included as landscaped area). Other than removing existing pavers, which would serve no real purpose, there is little opportunity to provide additional landscaped area on the site. Given that the proposal will actually increase the amount of landscaped area and the quality of existing and proposed plantings, the amount of landscaped area proposed is satisfactory. Foreshore Scenic Protection Area The site is located within the foreshore scenic protection area. The proposal satisfies the objectives of SREP 23. The proposal will not have any detrimental impacts on the natural environment, the visual environment or the environmental heritage of Mosman. Excavation The objectives of this clause to control soil erosion, sedimentation, tree loss and drainage impacts are satisfied.


Heritage The site does not contain a heritage item, is not within immediate proximity of a heritage item and is not within a heritage conservation area. 5.3 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.3.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Siting and Scale Height and FSR have been previously addressed. The proposal complies with setback controls except for the 1.1m first floor southern setback which is required to be 1.5m. In addition, the proposal does not comply with the 45 degree height plane measured along the southern boundary. The purpose of these controls is to provide spatial relief between buildings, maintain views, preserve privacy to adjoining properties, provide access to sunlight and minimise overshadowing. The non-compliance with these controls is acceptable for the following reasons: • The proposed windows along the southern elevation are highlight windows that will not

present a privacy threat. • Shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that the north facing windows of

39 Congewoi Street will have adequate access to sunlight. • There will be no significant impacts on views associated with these non-compliances. • There will be no vegetation affected by this setback. For these reasons, the proposed 400mm variation to the side boundary setback is assessed as satisfactory. Views Views to the north of Quakers Hat Bay are available from the site and surrounding properties. The proposal satisfies the objectives of section 4.3 in that view sharing has been achieved. Three objections from property owners located to the south-east of the subject site (Nos 14, 16 & 18 Inkerman Street) have been received. These properties currently enjoy oblique views of the harbour. Given the proposed development complies with Council’s height controls and is only 0.94m higher than the existing roof ridge, it will have only a minor impact on the views available to these properties. The main view loss concerns of these property owners relate to the height of the existing trees located in the south-eastern corner of No 41 Congewoi Street. The landscape plan submitted with the application indicates that the existing Ficus hilli and Jacaranda trees are to be removed. However, the Podogarpus (Brown Pine Tree) and the Lilli Pilli’s located in the south-east corner are to remain. These trees do not interfere with the proposed development and therefore there is no need to remove them in association with this application. Removal or lopping of these trees requires approval under Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO) and this would require consent from the owner of the No 41 Congewoi Street.


Landscaping The proposal satisfies the landscaping objectives of section 4.4 of the RDCP. There are no changes proposed to the landscaping in the front setback area. This area is currently well vegetated, mainly with shrubs, ferns and one small tree. The landscape plan submitted with the application proposes the removal of two exotic species (Jacaranda mimosifolia and Ficus hilli). An arborist report has been submitted supporting the removal of these trees. Most of the existing trees, shrub and understorey planting in the rear yard are to remain. New native screen trees are proposed along the southern boundary. Streetscape and Building Design The proposal satisfies the streetscape and building design objectives contained in section 5.1 of the RDCP in that the proposal is of a scale and character which is in keeping with the neighbourhood character. The proposed development represents an improvement to the existing unsympathetic first floor addition which has a low pitch, metal roof that does not match the original dwelling. The proposed additions demonstrate architectural unity with the existing building. The first floor addition has been integrated into the design of the dwelling. The pitch and material of the proposed roof form is consistent with the neighbourhood character. Privacy The proposal satisfies the privacy objectives of section 5.6 of the RDCP. There is no change to the windows along the northern elevation. The first floor windows along the southern window are highlight windows with a sill height of 1.5m and therefore will not result in any overlooking. Overshadowing The proposal satisfies the solar access objectives of section 5.8 of the RDCP. The proposal itself has adequate access to sunlight and will not cause significant overshadowing of adjoining properties. Shadow diagrams submitted with the application indicate that while additional overshadowing of the property located to the south (39 Congewoi Road) will occur, this property will not have sunlight reduced to its north facing windows to less than two hours between 9am and 3pm. Swimming Pool The siting and design of the pool generally satisfy the objectives of clause 7.5 of the RDCP. The proposed pool is setback 2m from the northern boundary with a 2m wide landscaped area between the pool and the common boundary. The pool has a length of 8.35m, width of 3m and depth of up to 1.85m. It is located at ground level. In order to meet safety requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992, the design of the pool will have to be amended in order to ensure that there is sufficient area to conduct resuscitation works. This is discussed further in section 6 and will be addressed by way of condition of consent.


Additional conditions of consent will ensure lighting, equipment noise; drainage and safety fencing associated with the pool are adequately addressed. Townscape Controls The site is located within the Middle Harbour/Pearl Bay townscape. The proposal generally satisfies the desired future character objectives for this area. 5.3.3 Mosman Section 94 Contributions Plan – Open Space The application involves two additional rooms capable of use as a bedroom, thereby increasing the occupancy rate by 1.45 persons and necessitating a section 94 contribution of $5,997.20. 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, fire safety, fire upgrades, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, compliance with the Home Building Act, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Landscape Designer supports the removal of the two trees and raised no objection subject to conditions. Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection subject to conditions. Council’s Building Surveyor advised that the pool does not satisfy the requirements of the Swimming Pools Act 1992 as there is insufficient area surrounding the pool to enable a person to be pulled from the pool if required. In this regard, the design of the pool must be amended to allow pedestrian access around at least 50% of the perimeter of the pool. Details incorporating appropriate amendments are to be shown on plans submitted with the application Construction Certificate. This is a recommended condition of consent. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 14 April 2005 and 29 April 2005. Four submissions were received from or on behalf of the following properties: • 43 Congewoi Road; • 18 Inkerman Street; • 16 Inkerman Street; and • 14 Inkerman Street. Matters raised within public submissions and commentary on those matters is summarised below: The pool should be positioned further away from the northern boundary in order to

protect the amenity of the residents of No.43 Congewoi Road. Council should ensure drainage and the sound proofing of pool machinery are appropriately dealt with


Comment: The amended plans have increased the northern setback of the pool. Conditions of consent will ensure that drainage and acoustic impacts from pool equipment are adequately addressed. The new pitched roof will obstruct views of Middle Harbour from the properties

located to the south-east of the subject site (Nos 14, 16 &18 Inkerman Street). The proposal should incorporate a flat rather than a pitched roof

Comment: As discussed in section 5.3.1, the proposal satisfies Council’s view sharing objectives. Council’s RDCP prefers pitched over flat roofs. The existing trees in the rear yard of No 41 Congewoi Street obstruct views of Middle

Harbour from the properties located to the south-east of the subject site (Nos 14,16 &18 Inkerman Street) and should removed

Comment: As discussed in section 5.3.1, view loss associated with existing vegetation is not a matter for consideration with this development application. 8.0 CONCLUSION The proposal has been assessed against relevant legislation and is assessed as satisfactory. Where departures from development controls have been proposed they have been adequately justified. Consequently, approval is recommended, subject to conditions. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant is Sandberg Schoffel Architects. The owner is John Spalvins. The estimated value of works is $305,400. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services recommends that the site be inspected, and from 16 Inkerman Street. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION A. That the objection made under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to the

development standard relating to floor space ratio within Clause 14 of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 is well founded, and in this case varying the standard to permit the proposed development is acceptable for the following main reasons:

(a) The proposal meets the objectives of the development standard; (b) The design of the proposal appropriately responds to the constraints of the

site, and the context of surrounding development; (c) The areas of non-compliance will not cause significant detrimental impacts on

adjoining properties; and (d) Requiring compliance with the standard would unreasonably constrain the

development and the design response.

B. That Development Application No. 8.2005.108.1 be approved subject to the following conditions:





0413-01, 04, 06, 07, 09

24 January 2005 Sanberg Schoffel Architects

0413-05, 08 (Revision A)

6 June 2005 Sanberg Schoffel Architects

Landscape Plan LP01

23 March 2005 Leuchars Partners

Survey Plan 14772

23 August 2004 Bee Lethbridge Pty Ltd

Document title Date of document Prepared by


24 January 2005 Sanberg Schoffel Architects

Arborist Report 4 March 2005 Leuchars Partners

Plan Amendments 2. To ensure that there is sufficient area to conduct resuscitation works, the design of

the pool/spa area is to be amended so that the walkway/deck has a minimum width of 900mm clear of any obstructions, around at least 50% of the perimeter of the pool. These amendments are not to be at the expense of the reducing the amount of landscaped area on the site or reducing the setback of the pool and its coping to the side boundary. Details of these amendments are to be shown on the plans submitted with the application for Construction Certificate.












Retaining Walls


Sydney Water



Utility Services


Long Service Levy


Security Deposit

10. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $2,500 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good of any damage caused to Council property and to ensure the satisfactory completion of any works required to be undertaken outside the property boundary. A request for a refund of unused funds (less an inspection fee if



Council is not the PCA) may be made following the completion of all works, both inside and outside the property boundary, and an inspection of the site by Council.
















Home Building Act

13. Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989 must not be carried out unless the Principal Certifying Authority for the development to which


the work relates (not being the council) has given the council written notice of the following information:



Act,



















Demolition










Site Work Hours











Council Property




27. The finished external surface materials, including colours and texture of any building, shall match the detail and materials of the existing building.



Tree Preservation


Water Conservation


Energy Efficiency




32. For safety reasons, access to the swimming pool must be restricted by fencing or other measures as prescribed by the Swimming Pools Act, 1992. The fencing or measures must be completed before any water is placed in the pool.

33. For safety reasons, windows facing the pool area are to be secured in accordance with the Swimming Pools Act 1992.

34. Any mechanical equipment associated with a pool, spa or water feature shall be located in a sound proof container and positioned so that there is no increase in noise level at any point at the boundary with another property, including a public place.

35. To maintain the visual amenity of the area, devices or structures used for heating swimming pool water must not be placed on the roof of any building where it is visible from a public place.

36. In order to protect night time amenity for surrounding properties, any lighting installed for the pool/spa must avoid glare and light spill onto adjoining recreation spaces, habitable rooms and public places.

37. To ensure the proper disposal of polluted waters and to avoid runoff nuisance for downstream properties, all drainage including any overflow waters associated with the pool, spa or water feature must be pipe drained to the nearest sewer system in accordance with requirements of Sydney Water. No drainage, including overflow from a pool/spa/feature shall enter Council’s stormwater system.

Air Conditioning Units

38. To control noise impacts for adjoining properties, no external air conditioning unit shall be installed without prior consent. Applicants may have regard to Council’s complying development controls for external air conditioning units under the Exempt and Complying Development DCP. This condition applies for both during construction works and for the life of the development.

Toilet Facilities








Approved Plans






any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building; • Smoke alarms prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the

building; • Pool fencing prior to filling the pool with water; and • Final inspection after the building work has been completed and prior to any

occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building. The critical stage inspections must be carried out by the Principal Certifying Authority PCA, or if the PCA agrees, by another certifying authority excepting the final inspection which must be carries out by the PCA. Notes: Records of the above critical stage inspections will be required to be submitted prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate – see later conditions of consent. If you intend engaging Council to undertake inspections, please telephone the area Building Surveyor to arrange a suitable time.






• The development application and construction certificate number; • The address of the property at which the inspection was carried out; • The type of inspection; • The date on which it was carried out;


• The name and accreditation number of the certifying authority by whom the inspection was carried out; and

• Whether or not the inspection was satisfactory in the opinion of the certifying authority who carried it out.


44. For safety reasons, a resuscitation chart and warning sign containing information as prescribed by the Swimming Pools Regulation 1998 must be erected within the pool enclosure and shall be maintained in a clearly legible condition.

PRIOR TO OCCUPATION







Tree Replacement

47. To ensure the preservation of the landscape character of the area, two x 45 litre Elaeocarpus reticulus are to be planted in Council’s nature strip as per Council’s adopted Street Tree Master Plan.

ADVICE / NOTES
















(x) New and renovated pools greater than 10,000 litres will require a permit from Sydney Water before being filled.

COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS • A4 Plans • Photos


EP/173 Unit 3 & 4 - 803 Military Road DA NUMBER: 8.2005.2.1 PROPOSAL: Internal alterations and change of use to a veterinary retail

clinic REPORTING OFFICER: Shaun Garland, Senior Town Planner LODGEMENT DATE: 4 January 2005 (Downtime 15 days) OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

LOCALITY MAP

DP 115729

SP 1

DP

1232

SP

SP 56343

D P221573

SP 16

SP 4652

3

DP 901936

40

1A

SP 48378

SP 17916

SP 18487

SP 21832

SP 10794

1 DP 952617

SP 18881

SP 13028

D P

421358

1

11

9196

54

14

52

38

DP 219846

D P232038

33

42

21

DP

211609

D P

4496

SP 32927

1

1

215

5

DP 550906DP 595187

DP 630129

DP 582922

213

2

D P

534751

DP 585273

SP 55560

161

12

ASP 10974

13

14

1

1

DP 33875

SP 1078

SP 2

2134

SP 22664

SP 845 SP

1624

12

SP 45722

SP 3245

SP 15831

21

1

14

DP

103929

DP 843972

3

12021

1

DP 216882

DP 217004

DP 219186 DP 223911 DP 901936

DP 64519

1

DP 1232

DP 595486

DP 971773

DP 738415

D P

625436

D P

627980

DP

922080

DP 922582

SP

34337

1

1 2

22DP 10459 36

SP 71970

C2

B

3

B

DP 106341

DP 120705

05567715

188

3

SP 13111

145

192A 192

938934-936

922

6

928

110

155-159

161

896

898

900

902

904

910912

906-908

920

914

791

801

799

797

803

793793

116

118

120

785

779

789

777

781

783

787

892

769

6890771

773

775

139A

139

06B

108

167

171 173 175

184

184A

141

186

188 - 192

143

188-

192

188 - 192

143A

165

MAR

TENSST

RAGLAN

RD

CAR

NEY

LN

RD MILITAR

Y

RAGLAN


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal is for the change of use of an existing laundromat and hairdressing salon to a retail (pet products) outlet with minor ancillary vet services such as health check ups, vaccinations, dental checks and the like. The proposal was publicly notified and it attracted four (4) submissions. The concerns relate to noise, boarding of animals, parking/ traffic and health. Council heritage consultant was not supportive of the proposed footpath awning. The proposal is supported subject to conditions that there be no boarding of animals overnight (except relating to the holding of kittens for adoption), appropriate noise attenuation measures are implemented in accordance with the submitted acoustic report and the deletion of the proposed awning. The proposal does not meet the minimum car parking requirement of Council, however the shortfall is reasonable in this instance.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the north-western corner of Military Road and Raglan Street. The site is irregular in shape with a majority of its frontage facing Raglan Street. Shops 3 and 4 presently contain a hairdressing salon and a laundromat. Loading and unloading access is located to the rear of the units via the public car-park to the west. Surrounding development consists of mostly retail outlets and to a lesser extent commercial uses. 2.0 BACKGROUND There is a concurrent application under assessment (8.2005.63.1) for alterations and additions to the existing building including first floor and attic additions for commercial purposes and new awnings over the footpath. Determination of this application is not reliant on the other progressing. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of: • Internal alterations to walls; • Fit-out of shops 3 and 4 for use as a veterinary retail clinic. This is inclusive of one

treatment room, a consulting room, reception, tea room, retail section and pet pharmacy area. Hours of operation are 8am to 8pm weekdays. Weekend hours have not been specified. There will be no after hours service;

• A new awning together with an awning sign reading “Vets n Pets”; • New shop front entrance door; and • Ambulance service to transport animals to an affiliated veterinary clinic in Chatswood. The proposed use will involve minor health check ups, vaccinations, dental checks and the like. Minor ‘day only’ surgery will be carried out on site with cases requiring major surgery or critical care cases being referred to the main veterinary surgery in Chatswood. Cages are based on site to hold pets awaiting hospital transportation, consultation, treatment or collection. It has been disclosed that an exception may be made for kittens given to the clinic by animal welfare group(s) awaiting adoption by a new owner, which is a free of charge service that the store wishes to offer to the community.


No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 5 & 6. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Mosman Business Centres Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan • Transport Development Control Plan 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.1.1 State Environmental Planning Policy No.55 (Remediation of Land) Clause 7 of SEPP 55 requires Council to considered the likelihood that the site is contaminated. Shop 4 is currently used as a laundromat and provides self services such as washing and clothes drying. It also offers dry cleaning services, which is recognised as a potential contaminating use. During a site inspection and as confirmed by the owner, the laundromat has never carried out dry cleaning services on site, this was always sent off-site. As a laundromat is not a potentially contaminating use the proposal is satisfactory under SEPP 55. 5.1.2 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 3(a3) Mosman Junction Town Centre under the MLEP 1998. The proposal incorporates a number of land use classifications as defined by the LEP. These include demolition, advertisements, shops (for the retail sale of pet products component) and commercial premises (for the veterinary services component). The advertisement is permitted as exempt development while all other components are permitted with consent. One of the zone objectives is to maintain and enhance the heritage streetscape. Subject to the deletion of the proposed awning and retention of the existing awnings, discussed under heritage, the proposal reasonably satisfies this objective. Floorspace Ratio There is no change to the existing floorspace. The proposal is for the use of existing shops only. Height Limits There is no change to the existing height of the building.


Heritage Conservation Objectives and Development in the Vicinity of Heritage Items The subject site is adjacent to 787-801 Military Road, which are heritage items, known as ‘The Strand’ which is a group of 8 shops that have local heritage significance. The site is also located within the Military Road Conservation Area. Concern was raised by Council’s heritage advisor in relation to the detrimental streetscape impact the loss of the existing awning and the proposed new awning would have on the heritage conservation area. The comments are noted in Section 6 of this report. To address this issue it is reasonable to delete this element of the proposal and require the retention of the existing awnings. Subject to this measure the proposal will not result a development that is contrary to the objectives and considerations of cl.32 and 37 of the MLEP 1998. 5.2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.2.1 Mosman Business Centres Development Control Plan (MBCDCP) Mosman Junction Town Centre The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives of Section 4.5 in that there will be minimal impact on the Military Road heritage streetscape (subject to condition), the use will provide commercial diversity within the immediate area, it will be accessible and there is not an excess of advertising. Heritage Items and Conservation Areas The proposal is consistent with these provisions for the reasons given above under the heritage conservation objectives and development in the vicinity of heritage items assessment. Accessibility The applicant has indicated within the Statement of Environmental Effects that there will be disabled access to shops 3 and 4. A standard condition of consent is recommended to ensure compliance with the Building Code of Australia provisions in this regard. Advertisements and Business Signs The applicant proposes signage on the front awning but as this element of the application is recommended to be deleted there will be no signage. Retail Displays The proposal is compliant with these provisions as the use including all of the services and retail components are located at the ground floor level for ease of access to the customers, accessibility will be required in accordance with the Building Code of Australia and there is no proposed display of goods outside of units 3 and 4. Privacy and Security Noise from animals has been raised as an issue of concern. The proposal was referred to Council’s Environmental Health officer for comments in relation to this and other matters. Council’s Environmental Health officer is satisfied that the proposal will not result in a significant noise impact subject to conditions ensuring the provisions of noise attenuation measures have been implemented in accordance with the submitted acoustic report and animals are prohibited from being held at the premises between 8pm and 7am on any day. The applicant initially indicated within the Statement of Environmental Effects that no animals


were to be boarded. However, in a later submission it is noted that they would like to offer the community a free service for the adoption of kittens. This is considered acceptable, as kittens are not so noisy as to disturb the local amenity. 5.2.2 Transport Development Control Plan In accordance with this Plan 1 space per 16m2 floor area is required for a shop and 1 space per 37m2 floor area for commercial uses. The internal shop area is 101.9m2. Given that the site is a mixture of retail and commercial it is reasonable to split the car parking requirement between these two uses. The retail component accounts for 66.61m2 and the commercial 35.29m2. Consequently 4.16 spaces for the retail and 0.95 spaces for the commercial are required, therefore a total of 5.11 on site parking spaces are required to comply with this provision. There is no on site parking available. The existing uses require 1 space per 37m2, which equates to 2.8 spaces. As a result the proposed use has a shortfall of 2.31 spaces using the existing parking credit. The premises were constructed for use as commercial/ retail outlets within the established Mosman Junction Town Centre. To restrict the use of this site for commercial purposes only to ensure compliance with Council’s parking requirement is unreasonable, particularly because it retracts from the premise’s approved use as a shop in 1975, as there is no increase in floor area, as the premises is located within a primarily retail area and given the proposal’s compliance with other planning considerations. Further, the proposal meets other objectives of the Plan to provide on site loading bay and to be accessible by public transport. The premises is also located reasonably close to a residential area, where it can be expected that some consumers will also walk or ride to the site, which will achieve a further objective of the Plan to encourage walking. The shortfall will also be absorbed by the existing public carpark and on-street parking available in close proximity to the site without causing significant amenity impacts for surrounding uses or the road network. The proposed variation to the minimum car parking requirement is therefore acceptable in this instance. 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, fire safety, fire upgrades, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, compliance with the Home Building Act, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Heritage Advisor made the following comments:

“I consider that the changes to the awning details would be detrimental in streetscape terms and should be reconsidered. A sign on the upper fascia may be acceptable. Recent enquiries suggest that this site may be redeveloped and this would be encouraged to reduce its visual impact.”

Council’s Manager Assets and Services raised no objection. Council’s Building Surveyor raised no objection subject to conditions. Council’s Environmental Health Officer made the following comments:


“The additional information submitted by the applicant dated 7 March 2005 has been assessed and satisfies the Environment and Services memo of 21 February 2005. Additionally, the applicant has advised that no changes will be made to the mechanical ventilation plant servicing the units; however changes will be made to the location of vents to ensure adequate ventilation is provided to all internal rooms.”

Four recommended condition of consent were also recommended as part of this comment. These conditions relate to acoustic measures and the prohibition of boarding animals. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 17 January 2005 and 1 February 2005. Four (4) submissions were received from or on behalf of the following properties: • 2/803 Military Road; • 9 Canrobert Street; • 104 Spofforth Street; and • 8/108 Cabramatta Road Matters raised within public submissions and commentary on those matters is summarised below: Boarding animals- misleading/ imprecise information

Comment: The submission suggested that the facility will board animals overnight and the proposed cages located within the shop supported this claim. The applicant has pointed out that the ‘vet’ service is ancillary to the main retail use of pet supplies and that only basic services will be provided with no boarding of animals with the exception of the holding of kittens for their adoption. In addition, it is stated that any animals that need more skilled attention or a prolonged stay will be transported to their main veterinary facility in Chatswood via their ambulance service. The applicant also stated that the cages were needed to restrain animals that are in the practice at anytime during its operational hours. This situation is considered reasonable and will be supplemented by a condition prohibiting the boarding of animals overnight with the exception of kittens. A point was made that the public would not appreciate the difference between this and a full veterinary clinic. This in itself is a management issue and will relate to the day to day running of the business. However, in making this point, the site is also supported by the ambulance service that can transport animals to its main Vet Clinic in Chatswood for more specialised attention or prolonged stays. Therefore, if a situation was to occur where attention could not be given on site an alternative plan is in place to negate this problem. Noise from animals disrupting the local amenity

Comment: Council’s Environmental Health officer is satisfied that the proposal will not result in a significant impact subject to conditions of consent ensuring compliance with the submitted acoustic report for the implementation of noise attenuation measures. Animal waste on footpath area

Comment: Animal owners must abide by all legislative requirements for the removal of waste deposited within a public area. In the event that a wounded animal causes bleeding on the footpath, a condition will require the cleaning of the public area. Parking and traffic Implications cause by the proposed use


Comment: The shortfall of on site parking is acceptable for the reasons given above in Section 5.2.2 of this report. In regards to vehicles double parking, the public is compelled to comply with all road rules, this is not a matter for the applicant or shop owners to police. The availability of public parking in the area and the primary use of the site for retail activities suggest the likelihood of double parking would be low. 8.0 CONCLUSION The proposed awning is not supported because of the detrimental impacts to the Heritage Conservation area. Consequently, it is recommended that it be deleted and the existing awnings be retained. Subject to this condition and the requirement to restrict the boarding of animals, the proposal generally complies with Council’s planning controls. The proposed use meets the relevant planning controls, meets the intention of the zone, it will add to the diversity of services within the area, will operate within reasonable hours and will not have a significant amenity impact subject to conditions to ensure noise attenuation. Consequently, it is recommended that the proposal be supported. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant is Consult Arch Group. The owner is Mr P and Mrs E Balafoutis. The estimated value of works is $75,000. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services does not recommend that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION That Development Application No. 8.2005.002.1 be approved subject to the following conditions: APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION



A1000,A2000,A2001, A2002, A3000, A4000

December 2004 Consult Arch Group

Document title Date of document Prepared by Statement of Environmental Effects

December 2004 Consult Arch Group

Untitled (Acoustic Report)

7 March 2005 Acoustic Logic Consultancy Pty Ltd








Design Changes

3. To reduce adverse streetscape impacts of the development the proposed awning shall be deleted and the existing awnings must be retained.

Details of these design changes shall accompany the Construction Certificate.



Long Service Levy


Security Deposit

6. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $1500 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good any damage caused to Council property. A request for a refund of unused funds may be made following the completion of works and an inspection of the property by Council.


Fire Safety

7. To enable the issuing of a fire safety schedule, information required by clause 168 (3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.
















Then a temporary hoarding, fence or awning must be erected between the work site and the adjoining area. Any such hoarding, fence or awning must be removed when the work has been completed. The fence must be constructed prior to the commencement of works and where adjoining public land shall be covered in cyclone wire mesh to discourage the fixing of posters or graffiti.


















Acoustic

14. To ensure reasonable acoustic amenity for surrounding properties is maintained, all recommendations made in the acoustic report prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy dated 7 March 2005 accompanying the application which require specialised acoustic treatment of the building shall be complied with and maintained.

Site Work Hours

15. In order to maintain the amenity of adjoining properties, audible site works shall be restricted to between 7.00am and 6.00pm, Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 1.00pm


Saturday. Inaudible site works may also take place between 7.00am and 8.00am on Saturdays. No site works shall be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.


Council Property


Toilet Facilities


Materials and Finish

18. The finished external surface materials, including colours and texture of any building and/or hard paved areas, shall blend with the surrounding environment and shall be non-reflective.

Air Conditioning Units

19. To control noise impacts for adjoining properties, no external air conditioning unit shall be installed without prior consent. Applicants may have regard to Council’s complying development controls for external air conditioning units under the Exempt and Complying Development DCP. This condition applies for both during construction works and for the life of the development.



• Place a waste storage container in a public place • Swing or hoist goods across or over any part of a public road by means of a lift,

hoist or tackle projecting over the footway


Approved Plans





• At the commencement of the building work; • Prior to covering of the framework for any floor, wall, roof or other building

element; • Prior to covering waterproofing in any wet areas; • Smoke alarms prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the

building; • Mechanical ventilation where mechanical means for ventilating a room is required

prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building; and • Final inspection after the building work has been completed and prior to any











PRIOR TO OCCUPATION




Fire Safety

25. A final fire safety certificate prepared in accordance with Part 9 Division 4 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 must be issued by the owner. Copies of both the final fire safety certificate and the fire safety schedule must be (1) supplied to Council, (2) forwarded to the Fire Commissioner and (3) prominently displayed in the building.




DURING OCCUPATION

The following condition must be satisfied during occupation of the development. Boarding of Animals

27. To ensure the amenity of the area is maintained animals with the exception of kittens up for adoption are prohibited from being held at the premises between 8pm and 8am on any day.

Occupation

28. The premises shall be occupied solely for the approved use. No change of use or additional use of any part of the premises shall take place without prior development consent (other than for exempt development).



Trading Hours



Monday to Sunday 8.00am - 8.00pm except public holidays where the business is to be closed.

31. Deliveries of goods or services and the collection of any waste (excepting emergency

services) shall not take place between 10.00pm and 7.00am on any day. An emergency service for the purpose of this condition means the delivery of any goods or services required for the maintenance of safe operating conditions upon the site.

Advertising Signs


Noise Attenuation

33. A validation report must be submitted to the Accredited Certifier within 2 months of operation of the business, certifying that all recommendations made in the acoustic report prepared by Acoustic Logic Consultancy dated 7 March 2005, including all treatment measures and target emission levels, were complied with. A person suitably qualified and experienced in acoustical engineering (e.g a member of the Australian Acoustical Society, the Institution of Engineers, the Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants or a person with other appropriate professional qualifications) must prepare the Validation Report.

34. Noise from all mechanical plant on the premises (LAeq) shall be less than 5dB above the background (LA90) at all property boundaries.

Waste

35. If the public way adjacent and adjoining to the subject site is soiled by either faeces, blood or the like by an animal brought into the clinic, a staff member shall ensure the area is cleaned as soon as possible.

36. The bin storage area shall be maintained in a manner so as not to generate offensive odour as defined under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

37. Any biological waste (animal waste) shall be secured in plastic bags contained within waste receptacles fitted with lids and shall not be stored on-site for a period of more than 24 hours.

38. All deceased animals shall be stored in sealed body bags in a freezer prior to collection by a private contractor.

39. Sharps waste (needles, syringes, scalpels) shall be stored in appropriate ‘Sharps’ containers compliant with AS4031 and collected by private contractors on a regular basis. All sharps waste is to be disposed of in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.


40. This consent does not authorise the exposure (whether for sale or otherwise) of any article in or on or so as to overhang any part of the road or outside a shop window or doorway abutting the road or the hanging of an article beneath an awning over the road. Separate approval from Council for such activity is required under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.



Fire Safety


42. Fire safety measures provided within the building must be maintained in good working order.

Advice/Notes













EP/174 3/120 Prince Albert Street DA NUMBER: 8.2004.474.1 PROPOSAL: Change from a commercial premises to a shop REPORTING OFFICER: Peter McManus, Student Assessment Officer LODGEMENT DATE: 8 June 2005 (Downtime 7 days) RECOMMENDATION: Change determination to approval

LOCALITY MAP

SP 1930

SP 2307

DP 115729

SP 14540

1011

12

DP 1232

SP 2120

SP 5085

2

1

DP 3396

53673SP 57434

SP 61182

SP 16768

1A

12

1

134

11

1

DP 512103

SP 32902

SP 48378

SP 17916

SP 18487

SP 21832

SP 10794

1 DP 952617

SP 18881

SP 13028

D P

421358

1

DP 64812

DP

9196

54

DP 582922

213

2

D534751

DP 585273

91

SP 55560

DP 455964 *

1

A

SP 10974

13

14

1

1

DP 33875

SP 2

2134

SP 22664

12

SP 45722

1

2

11

DP 943069

DP 71643

DP 781

DP

9764

24

DP 64519

1 DP 1232

DP 595486

971773738415

DP

922080

DP 922582

45936

C2

B

3

B

1

DP 106341

DP 120705

2

6666666666

7470-72

410

8

145

2018

1614

12

96A

696

9898

938934-936

922

6

928

110

76

155-159

139-153

161

920

80179979

803

116

118

120

106

106B

108

100

102

104

141

188 - 192

143

188-

192

188 - 192

143A

BRADLEY

STHE

MIDDLE

ST

MU

STON

RAGLAN

RD

MAR

TENS

LN (M

46)PR

INC

E AL

BER

T ST

REE

T


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal is for the change of use from a hair dressing salon to an art gallery. The original development application was refused after the applicant failed to supply Council with required fire safety schedule information. The information has now been obtained and a Section 82A Review has been lodged. It is recommended that Council change its determination and approve the application.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the south-eastern side of Raglan Street, approximately 20m from intersection of Military Road and Raglan Street. The site is irregular in shape with a frontage of 4.8m to Raglan Street. The site presently contains a men’s hairdressing salon. Surrounding development consists of commercial premises including a medical practice, real estate agent and hairdressing salon. To the south of the site, away from Military Road, development consists of multiple dwellings. 2.0 BACKGROUND Development Application No. 8.2004.474.1 was refused on 24 May 2005 for the following reason:

1. The application does not contain the required information to allow proper assessment. Namely, the fire safety schedule required by the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 to ensure the safety of all persons using the building in the event of a fire, has not been submitted.

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of changing the use of the premises from a men’s hairdresser to an art gallery for the display and sale of art works and sculptures. The proposed hours of operation are from 9:00am to 6:00 pm Monday to Saturday and 10:00am to 4:00pm on Sunday. The gallery would employ 2 people. No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 6. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 82A and 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Mosman Business Centres Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan • Transport Development Control Plan


5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 STATE & REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICIES Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 3(a3). The proposed use is defined as a shop and is permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at Clause 16. The development satisfies zone objectives. Section 82A of the Act enables Council to change or confirm its earlier determination. The proposal as lodged is permissible pursuant to section 82A requirements, it being noted that: (a) the earlier determination was not for an application relating to Crown development,

designated, state significant or integrated development; (b) the application was lodged within 12 months of the earlier determination; (c) there were no amendments to the proposal other than the additional fire safety

schedule information; (d) the application was not required to be notified; (e) there has not been a previous section 82A review request for the application. Floorspace Ratio and Height The proposed change of use will not affect the existing floorspace ratio or height. Heritage The site contains a heritage item and is located within a heritage conservation area. There are no other heritage items in the immediate vicinity of subject site. No building works are proposed with this development application and the use will in no way detract from its heritage significance. 5.2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.2.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Streetscape and Building Design No building works are proposed with this development application. The application is only involves the change of use for the premises. It is noted that the application does not involve any form of signage. Shop Frontages The proposed conversion of the premises from a male hair salon to an art gallery would have had a positive affect on the continuity of retail use along the street level of Raglan Street. The original heritage façade of the premises would not be altered with all works being internal. Townscape Controls The site is located within the Mosman Town Centre townscape. The proposal does not involve works to the externalities of the existing building, with the heritage significance of the


site maintained. The proposal would not have a detrimental affect on the significance of either the conservation area or the Mosman Town Centre townscape. 5.2.2 Transport Development Control Plan The change in use from commercial premises to a shop will create an additional parking demand under the prescribed minimum parking requirements of the TDCP. Currently the site has a 0.4 space requirement which will be increased to 0.95 spaces. In reality it seems likely that the 15sqm gallery would generate less parking demand than the present hairdresser. The surrounding road network and public parking provisions will be sufficient for the use. 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Section 168 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 requires that “when granting a development consent for a change of building use (other than a complying development certificate) in circumstances in which no building work is proposed, the person doing so must issue a schedule (a “fire safety schedule”) specifying the fire safety measures (both current and proposed) that should be implemented in the building premises.” The fire safety schedule is required due to the class of the building. The schedule must include the fire safety measures for the building to ensure the safety of all persons using the building in the event of a fire. The satisfactory fire safety schedule information for 120-122 Prince Albert Street from Essential Certifiers Fire has been provided in conjunction with the review application. Other typical Regulation considerations do not arise in this instance as no building works are proposed. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Nil. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was not required to be notified under the Notifications DCP. 8.0 CONCLUSION The proposed change of use from commercial premises (hair dressing salon) to an art gallery satisfies the applicable controls and regulations and is recommended for approval in light of the additional information submitted concerning the fire safety schedule of the building. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant is Julie Mather. The owners are Anthony and Anna Teresa Sulfaro. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services does not recommend that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION That pursuant to section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Council change its determination and approve Development Application No. 8.2004.474.1 subject to the following conditions:




Plan Nos. Date of plan Prepared by 3/120-122 Prince Albert Street

No date Unknown

PRIOR TO OCCUPATION





DURING OCCUPATION


Occupation

3. The premises shall be occupied solely for the approved use. No change of use or additional use of any part of the premises shall take place without prior development consent (other than for exempt development).

4. To maintain public amenity, no spruiking or use of amplified music audible beyond the premises shall take place in association with the use.



Trading Hours


Monday to Saturday 9.00am - 6.00pm

Sundays & Public Holidays 10.00am - 4.00pm


Advertising Signs



8. This consent does not authorise the exposure (whether for sale or otherwise) of any article in or on or so as to overhang any part of the road or outside a shop window or doorway abutting the road or the hanging of an article beneath an awning over the road. Separate approval from Council for such activity is required under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.


Fire Safety


ADVICE / NOTES


(i) Headings such as “During Construction” together with bolded notes that immediately follow, form part of this Notice of Determination. Conditions under the respective headings shall be read in the context of the heading and note.






• AGL Sydney Limited for any change or alteration to gas line infrastructure;


• Energy Australia for any change or alteration to electricity infrastructure or encroachment within transmission line easements;

• Telstra, Optus or other telecommunication carriers for access to their telecommunications infrastructure.



(viii) All references to “the Act” under this consent relate to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS • A4 plans


EP/175 75 Cowles Road DA NUMBER: 8.2000.296.2 PROPOSAL: Modification of consent to remove a street tree REPORTING OFFICER: Kelly Webb, Team Leader Assessments (South) LODGEMENT DATE: 12 May 2005 (Downtime 0 days) OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION: Delegate authority to approve pending satisfaction of

heritage requirements This item cannot be resolved by the Committee of the Whole.

LOCALITY MAP

2113

9

18

DP

920

DP

6565

31

5

17

2

SP 21391

1SP

570

733

4

DP

2414

DP 24917

SP 590981

86

1

PT2

DP

230

334

DP 666632

DP 304404

SP 50521

DP 656527

DP 983758D

P 65

0562

PT6

1

4

1 DP 555122

5

DP 983758

13 2

SP 10718

811

7

16

2

10

12

DP

7460

25

DP

919

20

B

23

A

19

11

115

7

DP 456048

DP

4350

49

C25

SP 10588

SP 10589

SP 31625

1

1

DP 369030

3

1 PTA

SP 54235

9

141

DP

3130

32

36

33

DP

2332

SP 43081

DP 654828

DP

4347

06

D P556961

101

2222

DP

920A

DP 92121

DP 921640

1

DP

2332

D P310089

DP 723578

D P1002380

DP 455083

1

D

P

1354

98

1

281

27

282

1

D

P

4560

7526

PT21

100

SP 65177

38

4038

535

60

4852

5456

58

4038

42

4446

5

3

5 5 5 5 52

334

38

37

47

75

33

79 -

85

7577

79 -

8579

- 85

79 -

85878787

87A

71

66

6365

6769

73

84

7678

8084

86 -

88

491

- 505

61

6462

986

- 88

6870

7274

74A

86 -

88

84

17A

17B

17B

17C

1921

8486

- 88

491

- 505 RD

ST

NATHAN LN (M66)

WUDGONG WALK (M67)

SHORT

ST

STG

UR

RIG

AL

CO

WLE

S


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Development Consent No. 8.2000.296.1 approved the demolition of existing dwellings, land subdivision and the erection of two two-storey dwellings with access from Cowles Road (building 1) and from Gurrigal Street (building 2). Conditions numbers 3.1, 3.2, 5.1 and 5.2 required the protection of a 10m high Willow Gum (Eucalyptus scoparia) street tree located directly in front of the site in Cowles Road and in close proximity to the driveway to building 1. Street trees in this part of Cowles Road are identified as a heritage item in Schedule 2 of MLEP 1998. The trees have also been noted by Council as nearing the end of their life when adopting a revised street tree masterplan in September 2004. The Section 96 modification application seeks removal of the tree and in doing so the deletion of conditions no. 3.1, 3.2, 5.1 and 5.2. Based upon the tree’s limited life expectancy as acknowledged by Council and advice from Council’s Landscape Designer and Engineer that the tree will be destabilised by necessary severing of roots for the driveway (with no viable alternate driveway design), removal of the tree seems reasonable. Approval for its removal cannot be granted, however, until such time as a statement of heritage impact required under clause 33(3)(b) of the Mosman LEP has been submitted and considered. Subject to the satisfactory resolution of the heritage matter, it is recommended that the General Manager be granted delegated authority to approve the application. To enhance the landscape character of the street and as a compensatory measure for the tree’s removal, it would be appropriate to require two replacement trees in accordance with the species nominated in the revised street tree masterplan.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the eastern side of Cowles Road, between Short Street and Military Road. The site is rectangular in shape with a frontage of 14.085m to Cowles Road. A section of the northern boundary (9.5m) adjoins Gurrigal Street at the rear of the site. The site falls 1.26m to the west at an average gradient of 3.6%. The site presently contains two two-storey dwellings recently constructed (approval granted under DA 8.2000.296.1). Surrounding development consists of dwelling houses. Willow Gum (Eucalyptus scoparia) trees are predominant in this section of Cowles Road this is between Military Road and Belmont Road, and have heritage listing. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 The DA and CC Process Concerning the Street Tree Development Application 8.2000.296.1 involved demolition of the then existing dwellings, subdivision into two lots and the erection of two two-storey dwellings, one with access from Cowles Road (building 1) and one with access from Gurrigal Street (building 2). An issue in the assessment of the application was the impact that the driveway for building 1 would have on a 10m willow gum street tree in Cowles Road. Following the applicant submitting an arborist report asserting that measures to span over the roots of the tree would ensure its survival, the application was approved on 20 December 2000. Conditions 3.1, 3.2, 5.1 and 5.2 were relevant to the tree and read as follows:


3. The following conditions are to be satisfied prior to issue of Construction Certificate:

3.1 The street Gum tree (10 m high) is to be retained and protected and existing Palm trees within the footprint of the dwellings are to be relocated. This includes specific measures to protect the trunk and roots during construction. All trees to be retained and/or relocated are to be protected from trenching and excavation works or other construction works. The dripline of the tree is to be protected. A security bond for $30,000.00 will be required to ensure that the trees are protected and/or appropriately relocated during the construction stage in accordance with the requirements of a supervising Arborist. The security bond may be in the form of a bank guarantee which must be lodged with Council prior to the issue of approved building plans. And the bond will be returned after Council received a satisfactory final arborist’s report.

3.2 An Arborist report must be submitted by a NAAA member Arborist detailing

the appropriate measures for the protection of the street tree, including the protection of the tree trunk, during construction and the relocation of existing palm trees as indicated on plan or otherwise within the footprint of the new dwellings. Appropriate measures are to include a porous surface treatment within the root zone of the street tree and detail how all trees are to be protected during construction. These measures must also include undertakings for regular inspections of the trees during construction work around the trees as well as inspections 6 and 12 months after the construction period. A bond of $30,000 is required (see condition above), returnable 12 months after occupation.

5. The following conditions are to be satisfied during the construction

period 5.1 The street Gum tree (10 m high) is to be retained and protected and existing

Palm trees within the footprint of the dwellings are to be relocated. This Includes specific measures to protect the trunk and roots during construction. All trees to be retained and/or relocated are to be protected from trenching and excavation works or other construction works. The dripline of the tree is to be protected. A security bond for $30,000.00 will be required to ensure that the trees are protected and/or appropriately relocated during the construction stage in accordance with the requirements of a supervising Arborist. The security bond may be in the form of a bank guarantee which must be lodged with Council prior to the issue of approved building plans. And the bond will be returned after Council received a satisfactory final arborist’s report.

5.2 An Arborist report must be submitted by a NAAA member Arborist detailing

the appropriate measures for the protection of the street tree, including the protection of the tree trunk, during construction and the relocation of existing palm trees as indicated on plan or otherwise within the footprint of the new dwellings. Appropriate measures are to include a porous surface treatment within the root zone of the street tree and detail how all trees are to be protected during construction. These measures must also include undertakings for regular inspections of the trees during construction work around the trees as well as inspections 6 and 12 months after the construction period. A bond of $30,000 is required (see condition above), returnable 12 months after occupation.

In satisfaction of condition 3.2, the applicant submitted an arborist report with the CC which made the following comments and recommendations:


“Perusal of plans for the proposed residence shows a new crossover is required for access to the garage. The presence of large surface roots in nature strip would preclude excavation for crossover as such excavation would damage roots that contribute to the stability of tree. Recommendation: As excavation for crossover is not feasible given surface roots present, a system that bridges the surface roots is recommended. If a concrete ramp is constructed in the street to enable leaving current kerb in place, a coarse gap-graded material is bedded over roots with steel mesh grating to cross nature strip, then vehicle access can be achieved without excavating and damaging roots. The crossover should preferably be the last construction phase on site and prior to this phase, the tree should be fenced 3m either side of trunk for the width of nature strip to create tree protection zone. Nothing should occur in this zone particularly storage of materials or washing out of cement and other potential contaminants.”

Based on the above, the Construction Certification was issued by Anthony Protas Consulting, Accredited Certifier. Consents for the DA and CC were issued in good faith and upon reliance of expert arborist opinion that the tree could be preserved. As described at section 1.0, building 1 has now been constructed but its driveway has not. Exploratory excavation for roots around the tree in the location of the driveway has occurred. It is now evident to Council’s Landscape Designer and Engineer that the driveway design earlier thought to be the answer to saving the tree is simply unfeasible to build (refer to later comments at section 6.0). Any driveway will require cutting of the roots which will reduce the life expectancy of the tree. With respect to the palm trees mentioned in conditions 3.1 and 5.1, it is understood 3 palms have been relocated within the site. 2.2 Other Matters Concerning the Cowles Road Heritage Street Trees On 25 October 2002 a limb dropped from the tree outside 75 Cowles Road and damaged a car. Following a costs claim in the Local Court a report was prepared by Council’s Tree Management Officer concerning the health of Cowles Road street trees and recommending changes to the Street Tree Masterplan. With regard to the health of street trees, the report stated that “the trees are over mature and have been devastated by insect attack and will all be progressively removed over the next five years as they die out”. The report recommended Eucalyptus sideroxylon be planted along the eastern side of Cowles Road, with planting commencing in October 2004. Council adopted the report unanimously. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The current section 96 application was lodged on 12 May 2005. The application was accompanied by an arborist report dated 26 April 2005 which recommended pruning of the tree and works by hand during excavation to minimise tree damage. Notwithstanding this report, the application was made on the premise of removing the street tree and in doing so deleting conditions 3.1, 3.2, 5.1 and 5.2. Upon inspecting the site and the roots which have been exposed by exploratory excavation, Council’s Development Engineer and Landscape Designer have formed the view that the


methods of driveway construction proposed in either the original arborist report (refer to section 2.1) or in the 26 April 2005 report would not result in the tree being saved. With regard to the 26 April 2005 method, it apparent that the approved driveway could not be constructed on an acceptable grade without severing several large woody roots which would destabilise the tree. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 96(1A) and 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Mosman Residential Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.1.1 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The proposal is satisfactory having regard to the objectives and guidelines of SREP23. 5.1.2 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 2(c) Residential. The proposed works are ancillary to the use of the site for a dwelling house and are permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at clause 11. The development satisfies zone objectives. Replacement planting will maintain the general dominance of landscape over built form. The works are also permitted pursuant to section 96(1A) of the Act, it being noted that: (a) the modification is of minimal environmental impact; (b) the development remains substantially the same as that for which consent was

originally granted; (c) the application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notifications DCP; and (d) submissions received have been addressed at section 7.0 of this report. Height, Floorspace Ratio, Landscaped Area The proposal does not seek change to the built form approved in DA 8.2000.296.1. Foreshore Scenic Protection Area The proposal is satisfactory having regard to the objectives of clause 27 (foreshore scenic protection area). The works will not be visible from the harbour or surrounding foreshores.


Heritage The site does not contain a heritage item and is not within a heritage conservation area. The affected street tree in conjunction with other Cowles Road street trees are listed as a heritage item of local significance under Schedule 2 of the LEP. The Mosman Heritage Review 1996 identifies this item as having local aesthetic, scientific and social significance, and also being sited within a Natural Trust Conservation Area. The description and statement of significance reads:

Description “Willow Gum (Eucalyptus scoparia) has been used effectively in many Mosman streets, and is the most obvious and possible most often planted eucalypt used in the Municipality. These in Cowles Road between Military and Belmont Roads provide a fine, graceful and distinctive streetscape. Pruning of the trees for overhead wires has been carried out sensitively, and has had a minimum impact due to the generally open crown of this species, and its ability to recover from this treatment.” Significance “A distinctive and memorable streetscape created by the planing of white-stemmed Willow Gum, whose ability to cope with heavy pruning makes them a desirable species to use where overhead powerlines would otherwise be a management problem.”

Clause 33(1) of MLEP 1998 requires Council’s consent to demolish, move or alter a heritage item. Clause 33(3) requires that when determining a development application for such works, Council:

“(a) must take into consideration the extent to which the carrying out of the proposed development would affect the heritage significance of the heritage item or heritage conservation area, and

(b) must not grant consent until it has considered a statement of heritage impact that identifies and assesses the impact of the proposal on the heritage significance of the item and its setting, or on the heritage conservation area, and

(c) may decline to grant consent to the application until it has considered a

heritage assessment to enable the Council to fully assess the levels of heritage significance of the item and its setting, or of the heritage conservation area.”

The street trees in Cowles Road are nearing the end of their life expectancy. A replacement tree planting scheme has been implemented. As per comments from Council’s Landscape Designer (see Section 6.0) once the driveway is constructed the tree will be destabilised, further reducing its already short life expectancy. The loss of the tree will bring forward an inevitable adverse heritage impact. From a preliminary assessment, such a loss appears likely to be acceptable. However, as per clause 33(3)(b), final conclusions and Council’s consent cannot be granted until such time as a statement of heritage impact (as defined under the MLEP 1998) has been submitted. The applicant has been requested to provide this information. Pending receipt, review and endorsement from Council’s Heritage Advisor, it is recommended that the General Manager be granted delegated authority to approve the application.


5.2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.2.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Landscaping Objectives O1 and O2 of Section 4.4 read:

“O1 To have the existing canopied and vegetated landscape character of Mosman townscape areas protected and enhanced.

O2 To have existing mature trees protected.”

The vehicular crossing and driveway approved under DA 8.2000.296.1 cannot be constructed without de-stabilising the tree. In the circumstances and given the tree’s limited life expectancy in any case (refer to sections 2.2 and 6.0), it is reasonable to allow the tree’s removal notwithstanding objectives O1 and O2 as described above. Two replacement trees in accordance with Council’s revised Street Tree Masterplan will assist in revitalising the landscape character of the area and help achieve overall landscaping objectives. Given that the tree had 5 years or less to live irrespective of any interference from the driveway, seeking recovery of part or all of the bond money would be unreasonable. Townscape Controls The site is located within the Belmont townscape. The leafy character of the area can be enhanced by replacement planting. 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations were taken into account with the original approval and dealt with by conditions of consent. The proposed modification does not necessitate change to any of these matters. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Landscape Designer raised no objection subject to conditions, and made the following comments:

“Council’s Tree Management Officer, Andrew Adamson, reported to Council on the 6 September 2004 regarding changes to the Street Tree Master plan for Cowles Road. Part of that report referred to the health of the remaining Eucalyptus scoparia in the street, one of which is directly outside 75 Cowles Road. His report stated that the trees are over mature and have been devastated by insect attack and ‘will all be progressively removed over the next five years as they die out.’ These trees have already been identified as requiring removal in the short term. In response to this gaps in the nature strip of Cowles Road were planted out last year as a means of lessening the visual impact as a result of their removal. Further disruption to the tree outside 75 Cowles Road will only hasten its need for removal and so should be removed now before it becomes a hazard. Regardless of any development on this site this tree would require removal on safety grounds within five years.


Approval for the removal of the tree is given. The tree is over mature, carrying a lot of deadwood and is leaning over the road. There is also no way the approved driveway can be constructed on an acceptable grade without severing several large woody roots which would de-stabilise the tree. Two Eucalyptus sideroxylon are to be planted as replacement trees in the council verge. The plants are to have a minimum rootball size of 75 litres and be maintained for six months to ensure they have established. The maintenance is to include, but not be limited to watering, staking and fertilising.”

7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 24 May and 8 June 2005. Five (5) submissions were received from or on behalf of the following properties: • 78 Cowles Road; • 77 Cowles Road; • 74 Cowles Road; • 74A Cowles Road; and • 69 Cowles Road. Matters raised within public submissions and commentary on those matters is summarised below: This application is a cunning ploy by the developer trying to force the removal of a

mature tree. Of course they knew perfectly well the tree would be in the way of the garage entrance when the design was set. The fact that they can even trick the Council into considering this proves a widely held view that the Council really has no ‘principles’. It is the Council’s duty to enforce its own rules and regulations.

I must protest strongly to the removal of the magnificent tree subject of this modification. Surely Council and the builder were aware of it when plans were submitted and the DA approved. By reversing the plans, this murder of a splendid tree would not have been necessary.

Comment: As outlined at section 2.1 the DA as lodged and approved was done in good faith and in reliance of an arborist report at the time which indicated the tree could be retained. Circumstances since this time including exploratory excavation have revealed the full extent of roots in the driveway area and have made it evident that the tree could not be preserved without significant destabilisation. Furthermore, the willow gums in Cowles Road as a whole have been acknowledged to have a limited life expectancy and have been endorsed for replacement under Council’s Street Tree Masterplan. Removal of the tree now will bring forward its inevitable removal by a few years only and will avoid a hazard of limb drop. In the circumstances, it is difficult to rationally support an attack on either the applicant’s motives or Council’s principles. Upon application of the building, it was specified that the tree would stay, but

obviously, when you see what has been designed and built, the top balconies will have a view of the city skylights and Harbour Bridge if the tree goes! The tree gives beauty and shelter from the afternoon sun, if removed, air conditioning will have to be installed to make it liveable, which isn’t very environmentally friendly. Be it on the Council’s heads if another tree goes before time.

Comment: There is no proposal before Council to install air conditioning. Views enjoyed by the upper level of the dwelling are not a deciding factor in terms of the proposal’s compliance with planning policies. Nonetheless, it is fair to assume that upon the growth of the two


replacement trees, whatever views to the city and bridge that do exist are likely to be less than present views. Council has spent a lot of money planting the street council trees. The tree adds a

softness to the streetscape which would be detrimental to the area if removed. Comment: The money spent on new trees is in recognition of the old trees nearing the end of their life. The removal or demise of old trees may be unfortunate but is unavoidable. Replacement trees planted under the street tree masterplan and those required under proposed conditions will assist revitalising the landscape character of the street. If the developer wants removal of the tree approved on the basis that it will make

access to the garage easier, he would have known this before a brick was laid, and I believe if Mosman Council were to modify the DA as requested, it would raise serious questions about the processes you have in place. It is widely acknowledged that the Mosman municipality has very few tree-lined streets, and Cowles Road has always been one of the few exceptions. Over the last few years several trees have been removed and the tree in front of no. 75 is one of the finest left. Its removal would totally change the nature of the street, and would certainly detract from the outlook I currently enjoy.

Comment: The circumstances leading to the current application have been previously discussed. In terms of outlook and the character of the street, change is inevitable having regard to the limited life expectancy of the remaining willow gums. Council has proactively attempted to counter the loss of the trees by planting new street trees which will ultimately reinvigorate the landscape character of the street. 8.0 CONCLUSION For the reasons given in this report, removal of the street tree seems the only practical outcome for the site. Replacement trees can be conditioned to enhance the streetscape character and help realise Council’s desired future for the area as described in the Street Tree Masterplan. This having been said, clause 33(3)(b) of the LEP mandates that a statement of heritage impact be considered prior to consent being granted. Pending the submission of such a report and endorsement from Council’s heritage advisor, it is recommended that the General Manager be granted delegated authority to approve the application. If following consideration of the heritage impact statement, the removal of the tree cannot be supported, the matter will be referred back to Council for further consideration. Finally, as an incidental recommendation, it is recommended that the listing of the street trees as a heritage item under the MLEP be reviewed in Council’s forthcoming review of the LEP given that they have a limited lifespan. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant and owners are Giacomo and Anthony Anzellotti. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services recommends that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION A. Subject to a statement of heritage impact as required by clause 33(3)(b) of the

Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 being received and endorsed by Council’s Heritage Advisor for the removal of the tree, Council grant the General Manager delegated authority under section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 to approve


the application pursuant to section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 subject to the following:

A1. Deleting conditions 3.1, 3.2, 5.1 and 5.2 A2. Addition of the following new condition:

8.12 Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, two Eucalyptus

sideroxylon are to be planted as replacement trees in the council verge of Cowles Road. The plants are to have a minimum rootball size of 75 litres and be maintained for six months to ensure they have established. The maintenance is to include, but not be limited to watering, staking and fertilising.

B. That the listing of Cowles Road street trees as a heritage item under schedule 2 of

the Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 be reviewed as part of Council’s overall review of the LEP with a view towards deleting them as an item given their limited life expectancy.



EP/176 51 Moruben Road DA NUMBER: 8.2004.490.1 PROPOSAL: Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house and

garage REPORTING OFFICER: George Youhanna, Senior Town Planner LODGEMENT DATE: 16/12/04 (Downtime 107 days) OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

LOCALITY MAP

B

129

DP 306691

DP

3329

08

DP 380137

BA

28

DP 654380

19

SP 39652

SP 4029

SP 4003

SP 56975

0

BA

C1

1

DP 901181

DP 918414

DP 924291

31

DP 112359

DP

3097

56

DP 3235

DP 5

11SP

220

33 1

DP

4021

D P456041

DP

4021

DP 966579

32

1

PT2

1

DP 11383925

2324

26

1A

SP 8899

DP 651993

SP 67434

DP 4021

18DP 660429

DP 1003193

DP 507811

D P585803D P602239

DP 931012

2

TB

1

4

D P106346

DP 655192

3

DP 658728

SP 48767

A

21

6461

60

616161616161

62

575555

53

59

5456

5858

A

59

53

48A

4951

4747 48

5052

47

57

1210

8

1614

20

6444444

2

32323232323232323232323434343434

31 - 33

34

6

32A

MO

RU

BEN

ST

AVE

STAN

LEY

RAW

SON

AWABA

RAWSON LANE (M12)


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The proposal involves demolition of the existing single garage and construction of a double garage, a ground floor addition, a first floor addition and minor landscaping works. The site has a primary frontage to Moruben Road and a rear boundary to Rawson Street. Height poles were erected to indicate the proposed ridge height and dormer window height and objections were received relating primarily to view loss from the properties on the western side of Rawson Street. The proposal was amended to comply with the 8.5m height limit and to reduce view impacts. View loss objections remain but they now primarily relate to the height of the garage and the mature height of proposed landscaping rather than the dwelling. Subject to a condition to alter proposed landscaping, the amended proposal is satisfactory with regard to view loss and is recommended for approval.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the western side of Moruben Road, between Awaba Street and Rawson Lane. The site is generally rectangular in shape (slightly irregular) with frontages of 17.68m to Moruben Road and 17.795m to Rawson Street. The site falls approximately 5.8m to the east at an average gradient of 15%. The rear yard area is approximately 2.2m below the Rawson Street footpath level and is accessed via existing concrete stairs. The site presently contains a single storey brick cottage, with a detached single garage fronting Rawson Street. Surrounding development predominantly consists of dwelling houses and multiple dwelling buildings. 2.0 BACKGROUND In response to concerns raised by objectors and Council, the applicant erected height poles and subsequently submitted amended plans which reduced the height of the building to comply with the 8.5m building height control and reduced the height of the garage roof. NB: The height poles as erected reflect the earlier (higher) plans. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of: • Demolition of the existing single garage; • Construction of a double garage fronting Rawson Street; • Ground floor extension at the rear of the existing building, including a family room

beneath the garage, a kitchen/meals area, and a paved patio area; • First floor addition, containing bedroom/W.I.R., ensuite, study, sitting room and balcony; • Replacement of the existing boundary paling fence to Rawson Street with a 1.8m

masonry fence; and • Refurbishment of existing stairs providing access to Rawson Street. No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 1a.


4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Mosman Residential Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan • Mosman Transport Development Control Plan • Mosman Section 94 Contributions Plan – Open Space 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 NUMERIC CONTROLS SUMMARY TABLE LEP Controls Control Proposed Compliance

Site Area 700m² 673.4m2 NA


Wall Height 7.2m 7.2m Yes

Number of Storeys 2 storeys 2 storeys Yes

Gross Floor Area

Existing 181m2 N/A

Proposed 179.9m2 N/A

Total 360.9m2 N/A


Landscaped Area 303.8m2 320m2 Yes

DCP Controls Control Proposed Compliance

Setbacks

First floor - north

Ground floor - south

First floor - south

1500mm

900mm

1500mm

6000m

900mm

900mm

Yes

Yes

No

Parking

Garage / carport width

No minimum reqd.

6m

2 spaces

6m

Yes

Yes

Fencing height 1.8m 1.8m Yes



>2 hours

Yes

5.2 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.2.1 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards The applicant has submitted an objection under the provisions of SEPP No.1 to the floor space ratio limit of 0.5:1. The submission can be summarised as follows:


Objectives of FSR limit in the LEP and RDCP: • To control the scale of development so that it is compatible with the housing

characteristics of the locality, and • To limit excavation of sites and retain natural ground levels for the purpose of

landscaping and containing urban runoff, and • To minimise bulk and scale of new development. • Building bulk shall be distributed to minimise overshadowing to neighbours, streets

and open space; • Building forms should enable a sharing of views with surrounding residences and

permit views from public streets open spaces; and • Building form shall be compatible with the prevailing development pattern and

character in terms of overall shape and articulation of form Arguments in support: • Scale of development is compatible with housing characteristics of locality; • Natural ground line will be retained, as the bulk of the development is located over

the existing house; • No trees will be required to be removed; • Site coverage will be reduced so there is no anticipated change to runoff

conditions; • Bulk and scale minimised due to attic style second storey, and will not overshadow

neighbours or street; • The floor space which exceeds the FSR control is generally contained in the roof

space and the undercroft of the garage, and deleting these areas to comply with the FSR control would not reduce the bulk and scale of the development;

• The building form maximises the sharing of views, with the pitched roof retaining the views between rooves. The retention of the 5.2m northern side setback retains a generous view corridor; and

• The attic style second storey addition, and the shape and articulation of the building is consistent with the existing house and the prevailing development pattern.

Comment – A SEPP 1 objection is required only in relation to the provisions of Clause 14 of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998, and not in relation to the Mosman Residential Development Control Plan. The proposed FSR of 0.536:1 is based on a gross floor area of 360.9m². The proposed FSR equates to an area of 25m² in excess of the permissible gross floor area of 335.9m². With regard to the specific objectives contained in Clause 14, the following comments are made:

1. It is agreed that the proposed scale of development is compatible with the housing characteristics of the locality. The proposed building is 2 storeys and a maximum of 8.5m in height, and the proposed setbacks and landscaped area are satisfactory;

2. The proposal satisfies the objective of limiting excavation of sites and retaining natural ground levels for the purpose of landscaping and containing urban runoff; and

3. It is agreed that the proposed bulk and scale of the amended proposal has been minimised, despite numerical non-compliance with the FSR control. It is incorrect and misleading, however, to attribute the location of excess floor space to a particular area such as the attic or sub-garage area, as the entire gross floor area determines the FSR. In any event, the proposed development is satisfactory with regard to FSR, with specific regard to the proposed building height, setbacks, landscaped area and


architectural treatment, which must be considered together with FSR when assessing the building envelope.

The objection under SEPP 1 is well founded and is supported. 5.2.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The proposal would not have an adverse visual impact on the harbour, and is satisfactory with regard to the provisions of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No.23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours. 5.2.3 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 2(a1). The proposed works are ancillary to the use of the site for a dwelling house and are permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at clause 11. The development satisfies zone objectives. Height The amended design complies with both the 8.5m building height limit and the 7.2m wall height limit. The ridge height is predominantly below 8.5m, and the proposed second storey is located within a pitched roof form featuring two dormer windows and seven skylights. The height and roof form of the proposed garage has also been amended, and is now assessed as satisfactory and compatible with the Rawson Street streetscape. Floorspace Ratio Satisfactory as per earlier comments under SEPP 1. Landscaped Area The proposed landscaped area of 320m² complies with the required area of 303.8m², and is satisfactory. Foreshore Scenic Protection Area The proposal would not have an adverse visual impact on the foreshore scenic protection area, and is satisfactory in this regard. Heritage The site does not contain a heritage item and is not within a heritage conservation area. The site is within immediate proximity of two (2) heritage items, being Moruben Road and No. 47 Moruben Road (‘Cora Lynn’), being a dwelling with local heritage significance. The proposed development will not have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of either of these items.


5.3 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.3.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Siting and Scale As discussed in relation to FSR, the proposed siting and scale of the proposal is satisfactory with regard to height, setbacks, landscaping and FSR. The proposed setbacks are generally well in excess of the required setbacks, particularly the side setback from the northern boundary. The non-complying southern setback relates to a 2m wide dormer window, which is satisfactory with regard to impact on surrounding dwellings. The propose garage setback is satisfactory and in keeping with the setbacks of other garages in Rawson Street. Views and Landscaping The proposed development will result in the partial loss of views of the harbour and Middle Head from adjoining properties to the west. The extent of view loss has been reduced in the amended design which has reduced the height of the building to comply with the 8.5m height limit and has deleted the two (2) chimneys entirely. In response to the notification of the amended plans, objections were received from the neighbouring properties on the western side of Rawson Street, including Nos. 6, 8 and Units 1, 2 and 4 of 10 Rawson Street (discussed in detail later in this report). The concerns relate primarily to the effect of the garage roof and landscaping on views. The objectives contained in Section 4.3 Views, in Mosman Residential Development Control Plan are as follows:

O1. The have opportunities for public vistas and public views from streets and public places protected and enhanced. O2. To have the value of existing views from private dwellings recognised and encourage view sharing through building design, location and landscape design. O3. To have sharing of views whilst not restricting the reasonable development potential of a site.

The modified second storey addition design is satisfactory with regard to view loss from dwellings in Rawson Street. The proposed double garage has been reduced in height by 400mm-800mm from the original design. The garage now features a hipped, tiled roof, approximately 4.3m above street level. The wall height of the garage is approximately 2.3m above street level. The garage is located in the south-western corner of the site, and is partially screened when viewed from properties to the west by two (2) existing street trees in Rawson Street. With regard to the location of the living room and landscaping on the property at No. 8 Rawson Street in relation to the street trees and the proposed garage, the proposal is satisfactory with regard to view loss. The proposed garage will not have an adverse impact on views available from the dwellings at No. 10 Rawson Street. The proposal is also satisfactory with regard to the views available from No. 6 Rawson Street. The issue of tree selection and view loss has been raised by the owners of No. 8 Rawson Street. The submitted landscape plan indicates that two (2) Elaeocarpus reticulatus (Blueberry Ash) are to be planted in the recessed areas in the western boundary wall,


fronting Rawson Street. The mature height of Blueberry Ash is approximately 8m, and it is claimed that these trees will obscure the harbour views currently available to the north of the subject dwelling. It is agreed that an alternate species with a lower mature height would be appropriate with regard to view sharing as described in Mosman Residential Development Control Plan. A suitable condition of consent will be applied. Streetscape and Building Design The proposal has a maximum height of 8.5m, and retains a pitched roof form with sufficient articulation and an appropriate and compatible architectural treatment with regard to surrounding development in Moruben Road. The proposed alterations and additions are satisfactory with regard to impact on the streetscape in Moruben Road. The proposed garage includes a pitched roof, which is consistent with the predominant roof form in the area. The reduced garage roof height and reconfigured roof form are satisfactory with regard to streetscape and compatibility with surrounding development, including other garages in Rawson Street. The proposed 1800mm high masonry wall on the Rawson Street boundary includes two (2) recessed areas for landscaping in order to screen the wall. The proposal is satisfactory with regard to the streetscape in Rawson Street. Car Parking and Access The proposed double garage has been modified by reducing the roof height and reconfiguring the roof to a hipped roof form. The height of the roof has been reduced by approximately 400mm to 800mm, and is considered to be compatible and sympathetic to the main dwelling, and not the dominant feature on the site when viewed from Rawson Street. Further, the existing street trees in Rawson Street provide a level of screening, and would soften the visual impact of the structure. The proposed double garage is satisfactory with regard to the proposed width of 6m, and the internal dimensions. In this instance, the proposed single garage door is satisfactory due to the location of the street tree in relation to the driveway. Two (2) separate doors would increase the difficulty of manoeuvring into and out of the garage. Privacy The proposal is considered satisfactory with regard to impact on the privacy of adjoining properties, with regard to window locations and dimensions. The proposal is also considered satisfactory with regard to on-site privacy, specifically in relation to the proposed condition requiring the two (2) Blueberry Ash trees to be substituted with plants with a lower mature height. The neighbouring dwellings on the western side of Rawson Street are over 30m from the rear yard of No. 51 Moruben Road, and overlooking into the rear yard area is not possible from the ground floor living areas of these dwellings. A limited degree of overlooking is possible from the upper levels of these dwellings, which are generally bedrooms. Substitution of the proposed Blueberry Ash trees with a species limited to a mature height of 3m would provide adequate privacy whilst not unreasonably interfering with views. Overshadowing The proposal would not adversely affect adjoining properties, particularly the dwelling at No. 49 Moruben Road, with regard to overshadowing.


Townscape Controls The site is located within the Balmoral townscape. The desired future character objectives for the Balmoral townscape are as follows: Maintain:

• The sense of dramatic entry to Balmoral and views to the harbour and foreshore area;

• And protect views between buildings and from public walkways and streets; • The front yard character of Redan Street (West) and Stanley Avenue (north of Awaba

Street); • Original architectural detail and finishes, where possible; • The architectural diversity of the area and limit bulky mega houses with horizontal

emphasis across allotments. Encourage

• Ground level additions to the rear of dwelling houses which respect the scale, form and proportion of the host building eg. gable roofs, timber windows and verandahs;

• Facades of larger houses that are well modulated so that their form and scale relate to the existing streetscape and topography and are not dominating when viewed from the harbour and neighbouring properties;

• A variety of roofscapes that complement the streetscape and do not restrict public views in identified areas or impact upon the heritage significance of buildings;

• Traditional roofing materials and discourage reflective metal finishes; • The dwelling house character, as well as greater housing choices in medium density

areas; • Face brickwork and discourage single colour render finishes of buildings and

excessive glazing; • Low style open fences which allow views/vistas; • Parking behind the front of the building; avoid garages and carports to the front.

The amended design is satisfactory with regard to the desire future character objectives for the Balmoral townscape. 5.3.2 Mosman Transport Development Control Plan Satisfactory as per comments under Car Parking and Access of the MRDCP. 5.3.3 Mosman Section 94 Contributions Plan – Open Space The application involves one additional room capable of use as a bedroom, necessitating a section 94 contribution of $ 3,127.98. 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, fire safety, fire upgrades, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, compliance with the Home Building Act, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Landscape Designer made the following comments:


"The proposal does not involve the removal of any trees."

Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection subject to conditions 7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 4 January 2005 and 19 January 2005. Amended plans ere notified between 24 May 2005 and 8 June 2005. Six (6) submissions (objections) were received from or on behalf of the following properties in relation to the initial notification: • 6 Rawson Street; • 8 Rawson Street; • 1/10 Rawson Street, • 2/10 Rawson Street • 3/10 Rawson Street • 4/10 Rawson Street Five (5) submissions (objections) were received from or on behalf of the following properties in relation to the re-notification: • 6 Rawson Street; • 8 Rawson Street; and • 1/10 Rawson Street • 2/10 Rawson Street • 4/10 Rawson Street Additionally, four (4) submissions in support of the application were received from the following properties in relation to the re-notification: • 49 Moruben Road • 50 Moruben Road • 53 Moruben Road • 3/10 Rawson Street Matters raised within public submissions (objections) on the amended design, and commentary on those matters is summarised below: Proposed landscaping in western boundary wall recesses will obscure harbour views

Comment: It is agreed that the selected species of Blueberry Ash will at mature height (8m) partly obscure the views currently available in the view corridor to the north of the subject dwelling. As previously discussed, it is appropriate to substitute the two (2) proposed Blueberry Ash trees with a species with a lower mature height (maximum of 3m height). A suitable condition of consent will be applied. The steeply pitched garage roof will unnecessarily affect views and dominate the

streetscape Comment: The proposed garage roof form has been amended as previously discussed, by reducing the roof height and reconfiguring the roof from a Dutch gable form to a simple hipped roof form, reducing the height by approximately 400mm to 800mm. The roof pitch is


27º (originally 32º), and is considered to be compatible and sympathetic to the main dwelling, and is not the dominant feature on the site when viewed from Rawson Street. With regard to view loss, as previously discussed the proposed garage will not adversely affect views available from the living areas of dwellings in Rawson Street. The garage roof will block the view of Middle Head available from the living room of

No. 6 Rawson Street; Comment: The amended garage design will not adversely affect the views available from the living room of the dwelling at No. 6 Rawson Street, and is satisfactory in this regard. 8.0 CONCLUSION The proposal is satisfactory subject to conditions. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicants and owners are Garry & Lorraine Sladden. The estimated value of works is $830,700. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services recommends that the site be inspected, and from 8 Rawson Street. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION A. That the objections made under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to the

development standards relating to floor space ratio in Clause 14 of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 are well founded, and in this case varying the standard to permit the proposed development is acceptable for the following main reasons: (a) The proposal meets the objectives of the development standard; (b) The design of the proposal appropriately responds to the constraints of the

site and the context of surrounding development; (c) The area of non-compliance will not cause significant detrimental impacts on

the foreshore or from adjoining properties; (d) Requiring compliance with the standard would unreasonably constrain the

development and the design response; and (e) The proposal is satisfactory with regard to building envelope controls,

including height, setbacks and landscaping. B. That Development Application No. 8.2004.490.1 be approved subject to the following

conditions: APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION




Project 01042, Drawing ADA-02

10 May 2005 Noel Bell, Ridley Smith & Parrtners


10 May 2005 Noel Bell, Ridley Smith & Partners









Landscape Plan – Project No.102, Revision 01

21/02/05 Peter Fudge Garden Design

Survey Plan 2/01/01 Garvin Morgan & Company

Document title Date of document

Prepared by

Geotechnical Assessment – Additions to dwelling and swimming pool construction & Further Geotechnical Assessment

14 December 2004 & 31 March 2005

Keighran Geotechnics

2. The swimming pool indicated on the landscape plan is not approved as part of this

development consent. The pool and all associated works are to be deleted from the Construction Certificate plans.







Landscape Plan

4. A landscape plan prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect or Landscape Consultant to a scale of 1:100 or 1:200 and conforming to Council's Residential


Development Control Plan and relevant conditions of this Consent, must be submitted to Council’s or the Accredited Certifier’s satisfaction with the Construction Certificate application.

The plan must include the location of all existing and proposed landscape features and delineate trees to be retained, removed or transplanted. The Plan must also show existing and proposed finished ground levels and 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. Consideration within the design should be given to the scale of planting in proportion to the development, consistency with the landscape character of the area and the views, solar access and privacy of neighbouring development.

The two (2) Elaeocarpus reticulatus (Blueberry Ash) located in the recessed areas on the western boundary wall shall be replaced with a suitable native species with a maximum mature height of 3m.





Retaining Walls



8. The rainwater re-use tank is to be connected to the house and at a minimum used for flushing of toilets and washing machine purposes. A detailed design is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application. Only rainwater from the downpipes and gutters is allowed to enter the tank. The tank is to be fully sealed to prevent any surface run off from entering the tank.

Sydney Water

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


details please refer to Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92.


Driveway



Utility Services


Long Service Levy


Security Deposit

14. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $4000 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good of any damage caused to Council property and to ensure the satisfactory completion of any works required to be undertaken outside the property boundary. A request for a refund of unused funds (less an inspection fee if Council is not the PCA) may be made following the completion of all works, both inside and outside the property boundary, and an inspection of the site by Council.


















Home Building Act




Act, (b) in the case of work to be done by the holder of an owner-builder permit under

that Act, the name and permit number of the owner-builder.



















Demolition


24. Where asbestos material shall be removed or disturbed as a result of any proposed demolition, alteration or addition, all work must be carried out by a person licensed


under Chapter 10 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001 and undertaken in accordance with the requirements of clause 29 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996. All asbestos to be removed must be disposed of at a tip recommended by the NSW Environment Protection Authority and under no circumstances shall be re-used or sold.









Site Work Hours











Dust Control

30. Appropriate measures (e.g. fine water spray) shall be employed during demolition, excavation and construction works to prevent the emission of dust and other impurities into the surrounding environment. All such measures shall be co-ordinated with site sedimentation controls to ensure polluted waters do not leave the site.

Council Property


Drainage

32. Stormwater shall be directed to the drainage easement. All drainage works shall be constructed in accordance with Council’s “Guidelines For Stormwater Drainage Systems”.

Driveway

33. The redundant driveway shall be reinstated with kerb, footpath and suitably landscaped. Materials must be in accordance with Mosman Council’s “Specification For Concrete Kerb & Gutter, Footpaths, Vehicle and Kerb Crossings & Concrete Converters”.

34. The levels at the boundary alignment of the property along the Rawson Street frontage shall be defined by the existing levels.


35. The finished external surface materials, including colours and texture of any building and/or hard paved areas, shall blend with the surrounding environment and shall be non-reflective.



Tree Preservation

37. All street trees and trees on private property that are protected under Mosman Council’s Tree Preservation Order 2003, shall be retained except where Council's prior written consent has been obtained, or where after approval of the relevant Construction Certificate, trees stand within the envelope of approved buildings or


within the alignment of approved permanent paved vehicular access roads and parking areas.

Water Conservation


Energy Efficiency


Survey Reports

40. To ensure that siting, height and view loss objectives are achieved, a Compliance Certificate shall be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the pouring of a concrete floor for each level confirming that boundary setbacks and finished floor levels are in accordance with the approved plans. In the case of roof structures the level of the roof ridge must be confirmed prior to the fixing of the roof cladding.

Lighting

41. To maintain amenity for adjoining properties, all external lighting installed shall comply with Australian Standard 4282 – 1997 ‘Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting’.

Toilet Facilities


Waste Management

43. Building materials shall be re-used, recycled or disposed of in accordance with the Waste Management Plan submitted with the application.







Approved Plans






any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the building; • Smoke alarms prior to any occupation certificate being issued in relation to the

building; • Final inspection after the building work has been completed and prior to any


Rainwater Re-use Tanks

47. The proposed rainwater re-use tank and associated reticulation system to the house for domestic purposes shall be installed to the requirements of Sydney Water.

48. A licensed plumber should supervise all plumbing work. All work is to be undertaken in compliance of Sydney Water's "Guidelines for Rainwater tanks in Residential Properties" and "Rainwater Tanks, Information For Plumbers" and the NSW Code of Practice: Plumbing and Drainage.

49. Both the tank and the fittings must be labelled "RAINWATER, NOT SUITABLE FOR DRINKNG".

50. A first-flush-by-pass device must be installed allowing the first 1mm of initial runoff to bypass the tank.

51. In the occurrence of prolonged periods of rain any overflow from the rainwater tank should be discharged via an existing stormwater drainage system or to a Council approved device such as an onsite detention system. This pipeline must be covered with an insect proof mesh to prevent the breeding of mosquitoes.


52. To ensure reasonable acoustic amenity for surrounding properties is maintained any mechanical equipment associated with the rainwater re-use tank and associated reticulation system shall be located in a sound proof container and positioned so that there is no increase in noise level at any point on the boundary with another property, including a public place.








authority who carried it out. Rainwater Re-use Tanks 54. A compliance certificate must be submitted to Council which includes work-as-

executed details of the rainwater re-use system prepared suitably qualified person with experience and competence in the related field. Any variations to approved plans must be shown in red and supported by calculations.

55. To ensure that future owners are made aware of their responsibilities with respect to the Rain Water Re-Use Tank, a positive covenant shall be created on the title of the allotment requiring that the owner(s) maintain and keep in working order the Rain Water Re-Use Tank, unless otherwise approved in writing by Mosman Council.

The terms of the positive covenant shall read:

(i) In this Positive Covenant “Rain Water Re-Use Tank” shall mean the Rain Water Re-Use Tank approved by Mosman Municipal Council pursuant to Development Consent No. 8.2004.490.1 or any modification thereof approved by Mosman Municipal Council in writing.

(ii) The Registered Proprietors will at their own expense well and sufficiently maintain and keep in good and substantial repair and working order any Rain Water Re-Use Tank which exists from time to time on the land.

(iii) The Registered Proprietors shall not remove the Rain Water Re-Use Tank without the prior consent of Mosman Municipal Council.


(iv) The Registered Proprietors hereby agree to indemnify Mosman Municipal Council from and against all claims, demands, actions, suits, causes of action, sum or sums of money, compensation damages, costs and expenses which Mosman Municipal Council or any other person may suffer or incur as a result of any malfunction or non-operation of any such Rain Water Re-Use Tank arising from any failure of the Registered Proprietors to comply with the terms of this Covenant.

(v) The term “Registered Proprietors” shall include the Registered Proprietors of the land from time to time and all their heirs, executors, assigns and successors in title to the land and where there are two or more registered proprietors of the land the terms of this covenant shall bind all those registered proprietors jointly and severally.

PRIOR TO OCCUPATION







ADVICE / NOTES
















COUNCILLORS' ATTACHMENTS • A4 Plans • Photos of site and objector's views


EP/177 7 Dalton Road DA NUMBER: 8.2005.61.1 PROPOSAL: Review of determination for construction of a car space

forward of the front building line REPORTING OFFICER: Kelly Webb, Team Leader Assessments LODGEMENT DATE: 25 May 2005 (Downtime 0 days) OFFICER’S RECOMMENDATION: Change determination to approval

LOCALITY MAP

SP

SP 2

S

1PT

3P

T21

SP16

150

12

DP 1080103

81011

1

B

DP 942465

21

SP 2291 S

DP 973537

SP 22493

D P134544

SP 52261

DP 655679

1112

DP

5745

DP 655455

DP13A

1B 2

P 2

DP 605556

DP 831237

DP

6514

78

D

P10

1535

6

21 1

D

P

2118

54

D

P

5307

66

1 2

DP

5745

A

32

C 58B

DP 387774

SP 4

8

141

A A B142 B

D

P34

2905

D

P44

4904

D

P55

4238

9

21 11

7

D

P22

9170

DP 315615

DP

8576

86

2

2 11 10 9

DP 5745

53 54 55

8

2

7

DP 5745

19

DP 456076

2

DP

1344

90

1

3

DP 40307

4444

84

6610

0

38A38A

35

38 38A38A38A38A38A38A38A

102

41 39 37

40

44A

4442

47 45 43

2 58 56 54 52 50 48 46

9698

96969696

73

5355

5759

61

86

9488

9094

8692

11

2

10 84

9 7 5 3 1

6

13 11

394141

6

35

3712

10

10

25 21 19 17 1523

14 12

RD

ST

RD

ST

LN

DALTON

SPIT

AWABA


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Development Application No. 8.2005.61.1 for a double carport forward of the front building line and vehicle crossing was refused under delegated authority on 26 April 2005. The reasons for refusal included non-compliance Mosman LEP 1998 and Residential DCP 1999 specifically in relation to the bulk and scale of carport, width of the vehicle crossing, reduction of on-street parking, and inconsistency with the character of Dalton Road and the Killarney Estate Heritage Conservation Area. A Section 82A Review of this determination was subsequently lodged with amended plans for a double carspace. The amended plans were then further modified to a single carspace. The proposal for a single carspace complies with Mosman LEP 1998 and Residential DCP 1999 and is recommended for approval with conditions.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located on the northern side of Dalton Road, between the cul-de-sac of Dalton Road (adjoining Spit Road) and Cowles Road. The site is trapezoidal in shape with a frontage of 10.225m to Dalton Road. The site falls gently to the rear (north). The site presently contains a one storey detached dwelling house. Surrounding development consists of one and two storey detached dwelling houses. An aged care facility is located opposite the site on Dalton Road. The site is located within the Killarney Estate Heritage Conservation Area. 2.0 BACKGROUND Development Application No. 8.2005.61.1 for a double carport forward of the front building line and vehicle crossing was refused under delegated authority on 26 April 2005 for the following reasons:

1. With regard to Section 79C(1)(a), (b), (c) & (e), the proposal does not comply with Clause 33(3)(b) of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998, requiring consideration of a statement of heritage impact, and as such Council cannot grant consent to the development application.

2. With regard to Section 79C(1)(a), (b), (c) & (e), the proposal does not comply with the

objectives of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998, in particular Clause 2(h), as the proposal does not “protect and conserve the natural and built heritage of Mosman”.


zone objectives for the 2(a3) zone contained in Clause 11 of Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998, as the proposal does not “ensure that development is of a height and scale which complements existing buildings and streetscapes.


provisions of Mosman Residential Development Control Plan, and in particular Sections 4.2 Siting and Scale, 5.1 Streetscape and Building Design, 5.2 Car-parking and Access, 5.3 Heritage Items and Conservation Areas and Section 6.11 Ourimbah Townscape.


A Section 82A Review of this application was lodged on 25 May 2005 with amended plans showing the removal of the double carport and replacement with a double carspace. Following an assessment of the amended proposal, the applicant was advised that the proposal was still unacceptable as it did not comply with Mosman LEP 1998 and Mosman Residential DCP 1999, specifically in relation to the scale of hardstand area within the front yard, the width of hardstand area to boundary frontage, the width of the vehicle crossing, reduction of on-street parking and inconsistency with the character of Dalton Road and the Killarney Estate Heritage Conservation Area. On 5 July 2005, further amended plans were submitted for a single carspace. It is these plans which are the subject of this report. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal now consists of: • Construction of a single carspace (3.8m wide x 5.2m length) forward of the front building

line; • Partial demolition of existing sandstone retaining wall and fence adjoining front boundary

and its re-use for support walls and steps; and • Vehicle crossing to Dalton Road. No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. The Building Code of Australia classification for the proposal is Class 10b. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 82A and 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Mosman Residential Development Control Plan • Notifications Development Control Plan • Mosman Draft Transport Development Control Plan 5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 NUMERIC CONTROLS SUMMARY TABLE LEP CONTROLS CONTROL PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

Site Area 450m2 326m2 N/A

Gross Floor Area

Existing 132.4m2 N/A

Floorspace Ratio 0.5 : 1 0.41 : 1 (no change) N/A

Landscaped Area

Proposed 79.4m2 94m2 Yes



Setbacks

South (Dalton Road)

West

East

On merit

On merit

On merit

0m

5.0m

1.4m

Yes

Yes

Yes

Parking

Carspace Width

No minimum

4.1m

1 space

3.8m (37% frontage)

Yes

Yes 5.2 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.2.1 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The proposal is satisfactory having regard to the objectives and guidelines of SREP23. 5.2.2 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 2(a3). The proposed works are ancillary to the use of the site for a dwelling-house and are permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at clause 11. The development satisfies zone objectives. Section 82A of the Act enables Council to change or confirm its earlier determination. The proposal as lodged is permissible pursuant to section 82A requirements, it being noted that: (a) the earlier determination was not for an application relating to Crown development,

designated, state significant or integrated development; (b) the application was lodged within 12 months of the earlier determination; (c) notwithstanding amendments that have been made, the proposal is substantially the

same development as that described in the original application; (d) the application was notified in accordance with Council's Notification DCP; (e) no submissions were received; and (f) there has not been a previous section 82A review request for the application. Landscaped Area The proposal complies with the minimum landscaped area required in clause 15. The proposal also complies with the objectives of this clause as the reduced area of the single carspace provides the opportunity for landscape planting within the front yard to maintain and enhance the landscape character of the residential area and a general dominance of landscape over buildings. Foreshore Scenic Protection Area The proposal is satisfactory having regard to the objectives of clause 27 (foreshore scenic protection area). The works will not be visible from the harbour or surrounding foreshores. Excavation The proposal involves minimal excavation.


Heritage The site does not contain a heritage item and is not within immediate proximity of a heritage item. The site is within the Killarney Estate Heritage Conservation Area. The Statement of Significance for the Killarney Estate Heritage Conservation Area reads:

“ The Killarney Estate Heritage Conservation Area is one of the most interesting conservation areas in Mosman, which, because of the modest scale and the first-glance ordinariness of the street, can be easily overlooked. The compelling aesthetic interest lies in the several different, repetitive designs of small houses that can be seen. The historical significance of the area lies first in the architectural and townscape unity, which was furthered by rapid development following the 1910 subdivision and sale of the ‘Killarney’ land and secondly in the fact that Dalton Road was Mosman’s first to be formed in concrete. (Mosman Heritage Review 1996)”

Clause 33(3)(b) states that in relation to heritage conservation areas, Council “must not grant consent until it has considered a statement of heritage impact that identifies and assesses the impact of the proposal on the heritage significance of the item and its setting , or on the heritage conservation area…” The applicant has submitted a document titled “Environmental Impact Statement” in support of the amended proposal which makes reference to the heritage impact of the works. It should be noted that this document is not an environmental impact statement for the purposes of the Act, and should more correctly be titled “Statement of Environmental Effects”. It should also be noted that the applicant makes reference to lodging a SEPP1 to vary MLEP 1998, however this is invalid as the proposal does not seek to vary a development standard of MLEP 1998. Given the minor scale of the works, a more comprehensive heritage impact statement prepared by a qualified heritage consultant is unnecessary. In relation to the heritage impact of the works, the applicant states that • The car space does not deplete or taint the existing structure or streetscape • Uses sympathetic materials • Respects the original design and keeps the original fabric intact The amended proposal for a single carspace will result in some visual degradation of the streetscape, however less than the previous proposals for a double carport and double carspace. The proposal will have a limited and acceptable impact on the heritage significance of the conservation area. Comments from Council’s Heritage Advisor are included in 6.0 of this report below. 5.3 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.3.1 Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (MRDCP) Car Parking and Access Section 5.2 provides the following objectives and guidelines in relation to car parking and heritage conservation areas -

O1 To have the siting of car-parking structures respect the character of the streetscape.


O2 To have carports and garages designed to be in sympathy with the residential building without becoming the dominant feature on the site.

O3 To have the width of street vehicular crossings and driveways limited

(depending on site frontage) to minimise visual impact, to maximise on street parking space, and allow opportunities for street planting.

P5 Where a garage/carport cannot be provided at the side or rear of a dwelling

house or semi, a hardstand area forward of the building alignment which is integrated into the landscape character of the front yard is preferred.

P8 In some exceptional circumstances, carports forward of the building alignment

may be considered in heritage conservation areas only where: • It is a single carport; • It does not exceed 3m or 20% of the width of the block frontage, whichever

is the lesser; • Is located close to the side property boundary; • Does not significantly affect the landscaped front garden; • Is within a varied streetscape that currently has carports forward of the

building alignment; • It does not significantly detract from the heritage significance of the area;

and • It complies with the other provisions of P7.

P10 Garages, carports (excluding conservation areas) and driveways must not

exceed 40% of the block frontage or up to 6 metres, whichever is the lesser, depending on frontage size. Vehicular crossings should not be more than 3m in width to minimise the loss of on street parking.

P11 The minimum dimension for a car parking space is 5.5m x 2.6m.

The proposal complies with the above provisions. Although the proposal is for a car space, the intent of O2, P8 and P10 should be considered in relation to this structure. The character of Dalton Road is primarily comprised of one and two-storey dwellings with landscaped front gardens and simple picket or stone fences. Some older single and double garages located at nil setback to the street boundary are apparent, however these appear to have been existing for some time. Other dwellings contain car structures integrated into the dwelling design, or a single carspace within the front building setback. The proposal for a single carspace within the front building setback is consistent with this character. The width of the carspace occupies 37% of the south (front) boundary, and does not dominate the front yard. The proposal provides the opportunity for planting within the front yard to maintain the landscaped character of Dalton Road. The proposed vehicular crossing is approximately 3.4m at the kerb, which exceeds the minimum 3.0m dimension for vehicular crossings. A consent condition will require that this crossing be reduced to 3.0m maximum. The proposed location of the crossing also results in an on-street space of slightly less than 6.0m between the proposed crossing and the existing vehicular crossing of no. 9 Dalton Road. This can be rectified by relocating the angle of the proposed driveway and crossing to provide a 6.0m on-street space. A consent condition is recommended in this regard. The proposed length of the car space (5.2m) does not comply with the minimum required (5.5m), however sufficient width is available within the front yard to accommodate the vehicle overhang. The width of the carspace (3.8m) is greater than the minimum required (2.6m)


and this is acceptable given that the carspace is slightly raised above the level of the front lawn, and adequate area is provided to facilitate persons getting into and out of the vehicle. Siting and Scale / Streetscape and Design / Townscape Sections 4.2 and 5.1 provide the following objectives and guidelines relevant to this proposal

O6 To have a scale of development which is not excessive and is consistent with the existing or desired future character of the area. (Section 4.2)

O1 To have development of a sale and appearance which is in keeping with the

street and neighbourhood character. (Section 5.1) Section 6.11 provides the following desired future character objectives for the Ourimbah Townscape -

Maintain:

• The architectural integrity of buildings • The heritage significance of the conservation areas.

Encourage:

• “Street addresses” by minimizing garage widths and developments which present a house front character to the street.

• The location of garages and carports behind the building line where possible The proposal complies with the above provisions. Refer to discussion above. 5.3.2 Mosman Transport Development Control Plan Satisfactory as per comments under Section 5.3.1 "Car Parking and Access". 5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, fire safety, fire upgrades, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, compliance with the Home Building Act, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Heritage Advisor made the following comments:

“This proposal while resulting in some visual degradation in the streetscape will have far less impact than the previous application. I would suggest that a sandstone border be provided to the concrete stand area to reduce its visual impact or the use of another material for the hard stand, i.e. brick, bitumen, stone or stamped concrete.”

Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection subject to conditions. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The Section 82A review application was notified between 27 May and 13 June 2005. No submissions were received. There had not been any submissions to the original application.


8.0 CONCLUSION The proposal as amended is now satisfactory having regard to relevant state and local planning policies. It is therefore recommended that Council change its determination and approve the application. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant is Paul Carrick & Associates. The owners are A and S Melocco. The estimated value of works is unknown. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services does not recommend that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION That pursuant to section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Council change its determination and approve Development Application No. 8.2005.61.1 subject to the following conditions: APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION


Plan Nos. Date Of Plan Prepared By Sheets 1, 2 And 3 (Each Revision C)

July 2005 Paul Carrick Associates

10942 23 February 2005 Hammond Smeallie & Co Pty Ltd PRIOR TO THE RELEASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE









Retaining Walls


Sydney Water



Driveway



Streetscape 8. To be sympathetic to the heritage conservation area, a sandstone border is to be

provided to the concrete stand area to reduce its visual impact, or alternatively, a different materials is to be used for the hard stand area (i.e. brick, bitumen, stone or stamped concrete). Details are to be provided with the Construction Certificate Application.



Utility Services


Long Service Levy


Security Deposit

11. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $1,000 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good of any damage caused to Council property and to ensure the satisfactory completion of any works required to be undertaken outside the property boundary. A request for a refund of unused funds (less an inspection fee if Council is not the PCA) may be made following the completion of all works, both inside and outside the property boundary, and an inspection of the site by Council.













Home Building Act




Act,




























Site Work Hours






Council Property



Drainage

24. Stormwater shall be directed to the street gutter. All drainage works shall be constructed in accordance with Council’s “Guidelines For Stormwater Drainage Systems”.

Driveway

25. The levels at the boundary alignment of the property along the Dalton Road frontage shall be defined by the existing levels.

26. To preserve on street parking, the width of the kerb crossing shall be reduced to 3m (excluding transition wings on each side).

27. To preserve on-street parking, the beginning of the western wing of the driveway on 7 Dalton Road is to be located 6.0 metres from the end of the eastern wing of the existing driveway on 9 Dalton Road.



Tree Preservation


Toilet Facilities








Approved Plans





element; • Final inspection after the building work has been completed and prior to any











PRIOR TO OCCUPATION







ADVICE / NOTES







EP/178 Alexander Avenue (Croquet Lawn) DA NUMBER: 8.2005.39.1 PROPOSAL: Minor earthworks to increase size of existing croquet lawn

including demolition of an existing shed. REPORTING OFFICER: Mooki Consulting Pty Ltd LODGEMENT DATE: 14 February 2005 (Downtime 72 days) RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions.

LOCALITY MAP

P 10

5618

0

A

5

DP

4561

89

1

PT16

6

DP

1023

85

DP

171 1DP

94

D

10

07

DP

9

A 1

D

44

38 DP

9

DP

1070

963

DP

5417

52

1 2 1 1

DP

1000

417

DP

5312

65

1A

2

B

3

D

P

3412

96

DP 538994

D

P

4564

00

2

10

7178

DP

6 DP 115444

A B 26 1B A 32 BA

D

31D

44

SP 1

1 1

DP

1318

34

DP

4289

1

DP

9284

33

6

21

1

DP

7413

75

3

DP 4289

DP

1055

680

1

P 65

6294

1110 9 8

11

DP 4289 DP

6093

20

5

DP

9231

79

1

4

5

3

2

DP 900364

DP

9015

86

2

DP 923179

DP 456194

D

107

D

219

1

A 1

1

2B

SP 5

0

12

101

18 18

83 81 79 77 75

30

28A 242628 2032

939597 91 89 87 85

28A

13 119

101

34

107107107107107 105 103 99113

40 36

109111113113113113

5

57

515

117115

9

2A6

4 2

7 53 1

2B

5108

RDTH

E

ST

ALEXANDERAVE

MIDDLE HEAD


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The application involves changing existing ground levels at for former bowling green by slicing soil from the upper small size croquet lawn and filling the lower level. Other minor works include demolishing a shed, removing dwarf retaining walls and a concrete path. There are no planning issues of significance. A privacy screen will be conditioned to re-establish privacy currently afforded No. 20 Middle Head Road by the shed.

REPORT 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCALITY AND THE SITE The subject site is located at the eastern end of Alexander Avenue within Rawson Park. The part of the park which is the subject of this application is generally flat. Beyond the croquet lawn the area falls away to the north. The site presently contains three full size and one small croquet lawns, a croquet club house, two (2) green keeper and/or maintenance sheds, a sealed car parking area, Rawson Park Oval, grand stand and amenities building. Surrounding development consists of two and three storey detached dwellings and the Bradley Bushland Reserve. 2.0 BACKGROUND The development application was submitted on 14 February 2005 by the Mosman Croquet Club Incorporated. The owner of the site is the NSW Department of Lands who provided owner’s consent on 27 March 2004. There are no other relevant previous development applications that require consideration in relation to this proposal. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The proposal consists of: • extension of the undersized croquet lawn to a full size playing area by removing 50-

110mm of soil from the top of this existing lawn and using this soil to fill and level an existing sloping lawn area adjacent by up to 240mm; and

• demolition of an existing dilapidated shed located partially within the proposed croquet lawn extension area as well as dwarf retaining walls and a concrete footpath.

No concurrent approvals are sought under the Local Government Act 1993. 4.0 APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS The following planning policies and control documents are of relevance to the development and were considered as part of the Section 79C assessment and form the basis of the Section 5.0 Planning Assessment: • State Environmental Planning Policy No. 19 – Bushland in Urban Areas. • Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours • Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 • Notifications Development Control Plan • Rawson Park and Surrounds - Plan of Management


5.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 5.1 STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING INSTRUMENTS 5.1.1 State Environmental Planning Policy No. – Bushland in Urban Areas The part of the site accommodating the croquet lawn is located adjacent to the Bradley Bushland Reserve. The general aims of SEPP 19 relate to the preservation of bushland within urban areas having regard to their natural heritage, aesthetic value and recreational and educational benefits. The proposed works associated with this development application are located approximately 250 metres from the edge of the Bradley Bushland Reserve and will have no aesthetic or physical impacts on this pocket of Bushland. The proposal will therefore, not be contrary to the aims of SEPP 19. 5.1.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 23 – Sydney and Middle Harbours The area of the site subject to this development application cannot be viewed from Sydney or Middle Harbour. The minor earth works proposed will not significantly alter the site such that it may be viewed or potentially have visual impacts when viewed from these waterways. The proposal is therefore not contrary to the objectives of this policy. 5.1.3 Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998 (MLEP) Zoning and Permissibility The site is zoned 6(a) Public Recreation Zone. The works are defined as a recreation facility and are permissible with Council’s consent pursuant to the development control table at clause 23. The development satisfies the zone objectives as well as clause 24 special considerations for development in open space areas. Contaminated Sites The subject site does not propose to alter its existing use as a recreational field/lawn. There are no previous uses of this site that are known to have likely caused contamination that would affect the safe use of the site for recreational use. The proposed minor earthworks therefore will not require the site to be remediated to accommodate the current and unchanged use of the site. The proposal therefore achieves the objectives of clause 29 of the MLEP. Natural Watercourses There are no natural water courses passing through the area of the site, which is the subject of this application. However, as the proposed works will involve the disturbance of a large area of exposed soil, an adequate sedimentation and erosion plan will be required as a condition of consent to ensure that water quality within the catchment is maintained to an acceptable standard. Subject to conditions, the proposal will satisfy the objectives of clause 30 of the MLEP.


Excavation Although the proposal involves only minor excavation to a depth of 50mm, it will be over an area of approximately 707.25m2. Similarly and as above mentioned in the discussion on Natural Water Courses, any consent granted should be subject to a condition requiring a sedimentation and erosion plan to be provided to the satisfaction of Mosman Council or the Accredited Certifier. This plan must take into account the period that the soil will remain exposed in order to ensure, in particular, that there no adverse off site affects as a result of the revised levels of the site. The site does not involve the removal of any significant vegetation from the site. Furthermore, Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal and is satisfied that no special conditions will be required to be imposed in any consent with respect to drainage of the site. Subject to conditions, the proposal will satisfy the objectives of clause 31 of the MLEP. Heritage The site is identified as a heritage item and is partially located within the Bradley’s Head Road Conservation Area. Council’s heritage advisor has assessed the proposal and has determined that it will have no adverse impacts on the heritage significance of the site or the important aspects of the Heritage Conservation Area. The proposal therefore satisfies Part 9 of the MLEP. 5.2 DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 5.2.1 Rawson Park and Surrounds – Plan of Management The purpose of the Rawson Park Plan of Management (POM) is to ensure the public reserve is managed and maintained appropriately and to provide a guide for its future use and management. The croquet lawns and clubhouse are a recognised as recreational resource in the POM for Rawson Park. The POM lists a number of management objectives categorised in the areas of recreation, natural environment, heritage, visual and landscape, park facilities, services and infrastructure and management. The proposal meets the relevant objectives of these categories, noting that: • The proposal represents a significant improvement in the quality of an existing

recreational facility within the park without impacting on the remainder of the park; • The proposal will have no adverse environmental impacts; • Council’s heritage advisor has determined the proposal will have no impacts upon the

heritage significance of the park; and • The proposal will not significantly alter the scenic qualities of the park. The POM also outlines various management strategies and associated actions required to address specific issues associated with the Park. There are no specific issues or associated management strategies identified with respect to the croquet lawns. Therefore, the proposal is not inconsistent with this component with the POM. 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT REGULATION 2000 Applicable regulation considerations including demolition, compliance with the Building Code of Australia, PCA appointment, notice of commencement of works, sign on work sites, critical


stage inspections and records of inspection may be addressed by appropriate consent conditions in the event of an approval. 6.0 COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL DEPARTMENTS OR STATE AUTHORITIES Council’s Heritage Advisor raised no objection. Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection subject to conditions. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND SUBMISSIONS The application was notified between 30 May 2005 and 13 June 2005. Three submissions were received from or on behalf of the following properties: • 24 Middle Head Road (in support); • 1 Alexander Avenue; and • 20 Middle Head Road. Matters raised within public submissions and commentary on those matters is summarised below: Noise

Comment: The owner of the adjoining property at 1 Alexander Avenue objected to the proposal on the basis that the increase in size of the croquet lawn would result in an increase in nuisance noise. The proposal involves allocating some of the larger croquet lawn to the adjoining smaller lawn area. The proposal does not involve an increase in the overall size of the area currently accommodating the existing playing surfaces. The proposal also does not envisage that the participant capacity of these lawns will significantly increase. Given the above, it is concluded that the proposal will not give rise to an aural privacy issue that would warrant refusal. Privacy

Comment: Both the owners of the adjoining properties at 1 Alexander Avenue and 20 Middle Head Road have raised concerns in relation to visual privacy as a result of the proposal. The owner of 1 Alexander Avenue outlines in their submission that the proposal will increase the playing area adjacent to their common boundary. Whilst the playing area of the closest lawn adjacent to this adjoining property will be slightly condensed, it is not expected that this will result in any increase in the degree of loss of visual or aural privacy. However, it is noted in the submission from the owner of 1 Alexander Avenue is prepared to withdraw their objection if conditions as discussed with the croquet club’s president are imposed in the consent. These conditions include removing all existing seating located along the western boundary of the site, with the exception of one seat located toward the southern boundary, to be replaced with low level landscaping. It is not deemed necessary to provide the above mentioned conditions in any consent granted this application, given that the existing circumstances with respect to privacy in relation to 1 Alexander Avenue will not significantly change as a result of the proposal. However, if the croquet club see it fit to remove the seating and provide landscaping, then this may be undertaken without development consent.


The owner of an adjoining property to the north of the site at 20 Middle Head Road has requested that the privacy screen to be erected in place of an existing shed to be demolished, as mentioned in the Statement of Environmental Effects be required as a condition of any consent to ensure their current privacy. It is concurred with the adjoining property owner that a screen should be erected in order to retain the existing status with respect to privacy between the two properties. A condition has therefore been provided in the attached recommendation requiring the provision of a suitable privacy screen. 8.0 CONCLUSION The proposed upgrade of the existing croquet lawns represents a valued improvement to the croquet club that will be consistent with the management objectives of the Rawson Park Plan of Management. It has also been determined that the proposal will satisfy the relevant clauses within the MLEP, in particular, with respect to impacts upon the natural environment and the heritage values of the park. Although objections were raised from two of the immediate adjoining properties in relation to aural and visual privacy it is found that this proposal will not dramatically alter the current status of the use of these existing croquet lawns. Where appropriate, conditions have been provided to maintain existing levels of privacy. The assessment has demonstrated that the proposal is generally consistent with the relevant planning instruments, planning controls and management polices and it is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions. 9.0 APPLICATION DETAILS The applicant is Mosman Croquet Club Incorporated. The owner is the NSW Department of Lands. The estimated value of works is $20,000. 10. COUNCIL INSPECTION The Manager Development Services does not recommend that the site be inspected. MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES' RECOMMENDATION APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION


Plan Nos. Date of plan Prepared by Not numbered 27/01/05 U Curtis

Document title Date of document Prepared by Environmental Impact Statement

Undated No Author nominated






Dilapidation Report – Private Assets

3. The applicant shall supply Council with a dilapidation report for the adjoining properties at 20 and 24 Middle Head Road, which documents and photographs the condition of buildings and improvements within 5m of the common boundary on that property. The report will be held by Council and will be made available in any private dispute between the neighbours regarding damage arising from site and construction works.

Security Deposit

4. A cash deposit or bank guarantee to the value of $2,500 in favour of Council shall be provided for the making good any damage caused to Council property. A request for a refund of unused funds may be made following the completion of works and an inspection of the property by Council.



(i) the person benefiting from the consent has appointed a Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) by way of completing Form 7A (attached at the end of the consent);

(ii) in instances where Council is not the PCA, the PCA has, no later than 2 days before the building work commences, notified Council of his or her appointment by way of forwarding a completed copy of Form 7A and notified the person benefiting from the consent of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work by way of completing Form 7B (attached at the end of this consent). In instances where Council is the PCA, Council has completed Form 7B if necessary and forwarded it to the person benefiting from the consent.

(iii) the person benefiting from the consent, if not carrying out the work as an owner-builder, has (by way of completing Form 7C): • appointed a principal contractor for the building work who must be the holder




(iv) the person benefiting from the consent has given Council at least 2 days’ notice of the person’s intention to commence the erection of the building by way of completing Form 7D.







7. Temporary sedimentation and erosion controls shall be constructed prior to commencement of any site works in order to prevent the discharge of sediment from the site. The controls shall be designed and installed in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Environment and Conservation’s "Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction Manual Volume 1, 4th Edition March 2004”. Note: this document is now available from the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources.




9. Public liability insurance to the value of $5,000,000 must be taken out by the builder or owner to protect any person, firm or company from injury, loss or damage sustained as a consequence of the carrying out of site works, including all excavation, demolition and construction works. A copy of the policy must be provided to Council.





Demolition




12. A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any work site on which demolition work is being carried out:







Demolition


Dust Control

14. Appropriate measures (e.g. fine water spray) shall be employed during demolition, excavation and construction works to prevent the emission of dust and other impurities into the surrounding environment. All such measures shall be co-ordinated with site sedimentation controls to ensure polluted waters do not leave the site.

Privacy

15. A privacy screen must be erected so that it extends 1.5 metres in height above the top of the existing fence located adjacent to the site’s northern boundary, spaning the length of the rear boundary of the property at 20 Middle Head Road to ensure reasonable privacy for this adjoining property. Furthermore, appropriate landscaping must be provided that will cover this screen for additional privacy.

Waste Management

16. Building materials shall be re-used, recycled or disposed of in accordance with the Waste Management Plan submitted with the application.

Site Work Hours








Council Property




Toilet Facilities







Approved Plans





• At the commencement of site works; and • Final inspection after the work has been completed and prior to any

occupation certificate being issued.









authority who carried it out. Landfill

27. To ensure levels of fill are accurately completed, a report prepared by a registered surveyor must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority certifying that finished levels are in accordance with approved plans.


PRIOR TO OCCUPATION





ADVICE / NOTES














EP/179 Land and Environment Court Legal Expenses MOSPLAN REF: 04.02.02 REPORT BY: Colin McFadzean, Manager Development Services SUMMARY To update Council on litigation costs for development application matters. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Development Services recommends that the report be received. REPORT The purpose of this report is to keep Council up to date with development application related litigation costs incurred for the financial year. Costs incurred within the previous financial year for the same application have not been included. The costs include fees for Council’s solicitors and any expert witnesses engaged but do not account for time spent by Council staff either engaged in defending the appeal or in undertaking administrative tasks associated with the carriage of the appeal. In some cases, work has been carried out but Council has not yet been billed or not billed to the full extent.

Address File Number Proposal Recommendation Council Decision

Court Decision

Appeal Costs ($)

Note

1 Medusa Street 8.2004.183.1

3 dwellings and subdivision

Refuse Refuse Approved 24,056.85

10 Parriwi Road 8.2003.22.1 Multiple

dwellings Approve Refuse Consent Orders 23,404.95

11 Upper Avenue 8.2003.369.1 Addition to

dwelling Approve Refuse Consent orders 17,958.03

11A Little Street 8.2004.374.1 Dwelling Approve Approved Discontinued 660.00

15 Cyprian Street 8.2004.186.1 Fence Conditional

approval Conditional Approval Pending Nil to date

16 Illawarra Street 8.2003.75.2 Balcony Approve Refuse Approved 13,926.33

16 Illawarra Street 8.2003.75.3 Roofing Approve

Deemed refusal (conditions not agreed)

Consent Orders 12,584.17

16 Somerset Street

Building Certificate - Deck

Approve Approved Discontinued 5,233.21

18-20 Parriwi Road

8.2001.375.2 Alterations to multiple dwelling

Approve Approve Discontinued 1,160.06

2 Milner Street 8.2003.106.1 Dwelling

alterations Refuse Refuse Approved with changes 2,186.67 2

2A Cyprian Avenue 8.2003.258.2 Modifications

to dwelling Approve Refuse Consent Orders 13,525.62

3

20 Burran Avenue 8.2003.302.1 Privacy screen Refuse Refuse

Approved with significant changes

21,245.48

200 Spit Road 8.2003.195.2

Court S96 - delete conditions

N/A N/A Approval with changes 4,513.03

200 Spit Road

8.2003.195.1 Dwelling additions

Refusal Refuse Approve with changes

13,696.10 4



Court Decision

Appeal Costs ($)

Note

21 Boyle Street 8.2003.100.1 Garage works Approval Refuse Approved 15,648.52

22 Cobbittee Street

8.2003.395.2 Carport Refuse Approved Discontinued Nil to date

26 Iluka Road 8.2004.374.1 Dwelling

additions Conditional approval

Conditional approval

Conditional approval 9,449.46

27 Almora Street 8.2004.53.1 Dwelling

additions Conditional approval

Conditional approval Discontinued 6,449.16

27 Iluka Road

8.2003.36.1 Garage & inclinator

Refuse Refuse Pending Nil to date

27 Redan Street

8.2001.408.3 Modifications to approved dwelling

Approve Refuse Consent orders

8,094.22

28 Shadforth Street

8.2003.326.1 Dwelling additions Refuse Refuse Pending 6,000.00

29 Avenue Road 8.2004.153.1 Dwelling

additions Approve Approved Discontinued 550.00

3 Hopetoun Avenue 8.2000.174.1 Dwelling

additions Approve Approve Remitted to LEC 35,661.97 1

3 Middle Head Road 8.2004.44.1 Dwelling

additions Approve Refuse then s82A approval

Discontinued 4,798.89

3 Park Avenue 5.1993.226.3

Modify multiple dwelling

Refusal Refuse Pending Nil to date

30 Queen Street 8.2003.433.1 Dwelling Approve Approve Discontinued 4,219.56

30 Sirius Cove Road 8.2002.313.1

Demolition and new dwelling

Refuse Approve Discontinued 3,907.77

30 Sirius Cove Road 8.2002.313.2

Delete condition to allow study

Approve Approved Discontinued Nil to date

30-32 Julian Street 8.2004.515.1

Demo boatshed and dwelling

Pending Pending Pending Nil to date

30B Stanton Road

8.2004.396.1 Multiple dwelling additions

Deemed refusal Deemed refusal

Approved in part 17,889.26

33 Stanley Avenue 8.2003.459.1

Demolition and new dwelling

Approve Approve with conditions

Approved 37,517.19

39 Central Avenue

8.2003.423.1 Demolition and new dwelling

Deferred Commencement

Approve pending discontinuance

Approved 22,408.52

43 Muston Street 8.2005.73.1 Dwelling

additions Approve

Approve pending discontinuance

Pending Nil to date

507 Military Road 8.2004.239.1 Car showroom Approve Approved Discontinued 3,736.21

507 Military Road 8.2004.239.1 Tree

preservation Fine Advice on prosecution N/A Nil to date

53 Wyong Road 8.2000.195.2 Modify tree

heights Approve Refuse Discontinued 6,195.01

63-65 Parriwi Road

8.2003.167.1 Dwelling additions

Approve pending road sale

Approve pending road sale

Discontinued 6,207.21

67-69 Mandolong Road

8.2004.360.1 Multiple dwelling additions

Conditional approval

Conditional approval Discontinued 2,818.45

7 Mistral Avenue 8.2003.236.1 Hardstand &

turntable Refuse Refuse Discontinued 2,366.58

76 Middle Head Road 8.2003.284.2 Hotel

alterations Conditional approval

Conditional approval Pending Nil to date

8 Prince Albert Street

8.2004.480.1 Dwelling additions Approve Approved Discontinued 1,112.91



Court Decision

Appeal Costs ($)

Note

80 Holt Avenue 8.2003.312.1 Dwelling

additions Deemed refusal Deemed refusal Approval 6,166.08

87-89 Shadforth Street

8.2003.151.1 Child care centre Approve

Deemed refusal (conditions not agreed)

Approved 29,398.48

88 Belmont Road 8.2003.118.2 Carport Approve Refuse Consent

orders 16,169.94

TOTAL COSTS UP TO 30 JUNE 2005 400,915.89

BUDGET ALLOCATION FOR COURT COSTS 2004-2005 $400,000.00

Notes: 1 Court of Appeal matter following Council’s success in defending a Class 4 action of the

validity of DA & CC for the site. 2 Council awarded $5,000 costs from the applicant due to amended plans. 3 Council ordered to pay $7,000 in costs to the applicant. 4 Recommendation from Commissioner to Chief Judge that the applicant pays $8,063.59

to Council.


EP/180 Development Applications MOSPLAN REF: 04.02.02 REPORT BY: Manager Development Services, Colin McFadzean SUMMARY Development Applications that have been received and dealt with by Council’s Director Environment and Planning under the provisions of Section 378 (Delegated Authority) of the Local Government Act 1993. OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION The Manager Development Services recommends that the report be received. DIRECTOR'S REPORT

DA No. Address/Description Applicant 1. 8.2004.133.1 20 Brierley Street

Alterations and additions to existing dwelling house including garage and deck

Ms Kaye Damelian

2. 8.2004.232.1 7 Gurrigal Street (Refusal) Subdivision of strata into nine lots

David Securities Pty Ltd

3. 8.2004.378.1 1 Botanic Road Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of new two-storey dwelling and in-ground swimming pool

Pearson Gower & Associates Pty Ltd (on behalf of Ms Deborah Jermyn)

4. 8.2004.425.1 41 Dalton Road Alterations and additions to a semi-detached dwelling including a new deck and vergola

Mr A Eassey

5. 8.2004.434.1 23 Bullecourt Avenue (Deferred Commencement) Demolition of existing tennis court and construction of a two-storey dwelling, double garage, swimming pool and landscaping works

Linda James Designers

6. 8.2004.450.1 175 Spit Road Alterations and additions to dwelling including new in-ground swimming pool, external staircase and terrace to rear, internal alterations to dwelling, window changes and skylights, new roof, reconfiguration of garage, front boundary wall and tree removal

A Total Concept Landscape Architects

7. 8.2004.497.1 30 Queen Street New dwelling and in-ground swimming pool

Ms R Qiu

8. 8.2004.513.1 7 Arbutus Street Alterations and additions to a dwelling including a double garage with access to/from rear lane and pathway to dwelling

Ms Wendy Slonim

9. 8.2005.10.1 2/21 Royalist Road Alterations and additions to existing dwelling

Mr Robert Carr

10. 8.2005.26.1 24 Plunkett Road (Refusal) Installation of an in-ground swimming pool

Mr Trevor & Mrs Michele Mathews


DA No. Address/Description Applicant 11. 8.2005.32.1 11 Wolger Road

Demolition of an existing double garage and construction including landscape works, internal modifications and relocation and creation of new window and doors

MacCormick Simenian Architects

12. 8.2005.38.1 7 Pindari Avenue (Deferred Commencement)Alterations and additions to a dwelling house including conversion of garage to recreation room, construction of new garage and carport

Mr D Grant

13. 8.2005.54.1 17 Killarney Street Alterations and additions to dwelling including extension to west, demolition of existing carport and construction of a new carport with study above and lot consolidation

Mr D S and Mrs J C Smith

14. 8.2005.84.1 32 Gordon Street Replacement of a window on the southern façade of the dwelling

Jennifer Montgomerie

15. 8.2005.95.1 5 Milton Avenue Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house including additions to the rear, demolition of a garage, installation of a pool, erection of a double garage with loft

Ms Susan Blanche

16. 8.2005.110.1 12 Stanton Road Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house comprising of a new double garage and extension of living rooms

Corben Architects

17. 8.2005.121.1 12 Spit Road (Ground Floor) Change of use of premises to a restaurant (Subway) and advertising signs

Mr M Willis

18. 8.2005.126.1 4 Vista Street Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling including internal works to create a new kitchen and living area, laundry and bathrooms, a new carport and landscaping works

Mr A Hunter & Ms L Bedson

19. 8.2005.131.1 1/3 Royalist Road Conversion of existing garage into study/office and store room including new north facing windows and doors

Ms Julie Kelly

20. 8.2005.139.1 3/3 Pretoria Avenue Alterations and additions to existing multiple dwelling development including new tower to street frontage

Architecture of Spirit

21. 8.2005.138.1 31 Glover Street Erection of a double carport over an existing hardstand area

Mr Douglas & Mrs Laurie Sproule

22. 8.2005.146.1 1A Clifford Street Removal of existing entrance ramps and paths, construction of entrance stairs with glazed balustrades and new concrete paths

Owners Corporation SP 72235

23. 8.2005.155.1 Shop 2, 762-768 Military Road Use of premises as a retail clothing shop

Burke Pty Ltd

24. 8.2005.164.1 Shop 1, 762-768 Military Road Use of premise as a retail clothing shop

Eleven Eleven Design & Development Pty Ltd


DA No. Address/Description Applicant 25. 8.2005.172.1 30 Gordon Street

Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling house including demolition of internal walls and installation of three new windows on the southern facade

R-Draw (for Mr r & Mrs V Kornman)

26. 8.2005.183.1 13 Hopetoun Avenue Internal works including replacement of beams and columns and enlargement of existing skylight to the kitchen

Mr Chris & Mrs Kathy Harrop

27. 8.2005.187.1 Shop 3, 762-768 Military Road Use of premises as a retail fashion accessory store and advertising signage

Ms R Marshall

Reports to Ordinary Meeting of Council - Leonie Matthews Page 168

agenda template council - mosman council · reporting officer: danielle dunford, executive town...

Documents