Agenda: Development Control Committee
Date: Monday 5 March 2012
Time: 5.30 & 8.00 pm
Session: One & Two
Item: D1 to D3, R1 & D4
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx
Outline of Meeting Protocol & Procedure:
The Chairperson will call the Meeting to order and ask the Committee/Staff to present apologies
or late correspondence.
The Chairperson will commence the Order of Business as shown in the Index to the Agenda.
At the beginning of each item the Chairperson will ask whether a member(s) of the public wish
to address the Committee.
If person(s) wish to address the Committee, they are allowed four (4) minutes in which to do so.
Please direct comments to the issues at hand.
If there are persons representing both sides of a matter (eg applicant/objector), the objector
speaks first.
At the conclusion of the allotted four (4) minutes, the speaker resumes his/her seat and takes no
further part in the debate unless specifically called to do so by the Chairperson.
If there is more than one (1) person wishing to address the Committee from the same side of the
debate, the Chairperson will request that where possible a spokesperson be nominated to
represent the parties.
The Chairperson has the discretion whether to continue to accept speakers from the floor.
After considering any submissions the Committee will debate the matter (if necessary), and
arrive at a recommendation (R items which proceed to Full Council) or a resolution (D items for
which the Committee has delegated authority).
Recommendation only to the Full Council or to the Strategic and Corporate Committee
(“R” Items)
Specified developments, as may be determined and listed by the Council by resolution
taken from time to time.
Matters which involve broad strategic or policy initiatives within responsibilities of
Committee.
Matters requiring the expenditure of moneys and in respect of which no Council vote
has been made.
Matters not within the specified functions of the Committee.
Matters reserved by individual Councillors in accordance with any Council policy on
"safeguards" and substantive changes.
Delegated Authority (“D” Items)
To determine all development applications and related applications, which are not required to
be determined by the Council under Council’s adopted procedures for the call up of
applications except:
a) Applications for review of a determination under section 82A of the Environmental
Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (“the Act”) where the DCC determined the original
application.
b) Development applications for development on community land which may not be
delegated for determination under section 47E of the LG Act.
Committee Membership: 7 Councillors
Quorum: The quorum for a committee meeting is 4
Councillors.
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx
WOOLLAHRA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL
Notice of Meeting
27 February 2012
To: Her Worship The Mayor, Councillor Susan Wynne ex-officio
Councillors Sean Carmichael (Chair)
Nicola Grieve
Lucienne Edelman
Chris Howe
Ian Plater
Isabelle Shapiro
Malcolm Young
Dear Councillors
Development Control Committee Meeting – 5 March 2012
In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993, I request your
attendance at a Meeting of the Council’s Development Control Committee to be held in the
Thornton Room (Committee Room), ground floor level, 536 New South Head, Double
Bay, on Monday 5 March 2012 at 5.30pm.
Gary James
General Manager
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx
Additional Information Relating to
Committee Matters
Site Inspection
Other Matters
Woollahra Municipal Council
Development Control Committee 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx
Meeting Agenda
Session One – Commencing 5.30pm
Part One of Three Parts
Item
Subject
Pages
1
2
3
Leave of Absence and Apologies
Late Correspondence Note Council resolution of 27 June 2011 to read late correspondence in conjunction
with the relevant Agenda Item Declarations of Interest
Items to be Decided by this Committee using its Delegated Authority
D1 Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting held on 20 February 2012 1
D2 DA588/2011 – 12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper – 40cm extension
to the existing balconies of Units 2, 4 & 6 – 19/12/2011
*See Recommendation Page 19
2-31
D3 Register of Current Land and Environment Court Matters and
Register of Court Proceedings for Building Control, Environmental
Control & Health Control
*See Recommendation Page 32
32-40
Items to be Submitted to the Council for Decision
with Recommendations from this Committee
R1 DA282/1979 Part 2 – 9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay (Lyne Park) –
Section 96 Application – Proposed modification deletion of Condition
No. 6 of the development consent which restricts the rigging of
sailing boats to the area leased from Crown Lands by the Woollahra
Sailing Club to permit the rigging & unrigging of boats within
adjoining Council trust managed sections of Lyne Park – 6/7/2011
*See Recommendation Page 51
41-59
Woollahra Municipal Council
Development Control Committee 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx
Meeting Agenda
Session Two - Commencing at 8.00pm
Part Two of Three Parts
Item
Subject
Pages
D4 DA845/2008 – 751-755, 757 & 759 New South Head Road and 12 &
14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay – The adaptive use of 751-755 (former
car showroom) & No. 757 (former Post Officer) New South Head
Road, for a retail use as a Woolworths Supermarket & the demolition
of the pair of semi-detached dwellings at No. 12 & No. 14 Richmond
Road, to provide off-street car parking for 25 vehicles, with egress for
service vehicles via 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash) –
19/12/2008
*See Recommendation Page 142
60-268
Woollahra Municipal Council
Development Control Committee 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx
Meeting Agenda
Session Two - Commencing at 8.00pm
Part Three of Three Parts
Annexures 3 to 12
Item
Subject
Pages
D4 DA845/2008 – 751-755, 757 & 759 New South Head Road and 12 &
14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay – The adaptive use of 751-755 (former
car showroom) & No. 757 (former Post Officer) New South Head
Road, for a retail use as a Woolworths Supermarket & the demolition
of the pair of semi-detached dwellings at No. 12 & No. 14 Richmond
Road, to provide off-street car parking for 25 vehicles, with egress for
service vehicles via 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash) –
19/12/2008
269-424
Woollahra Municipal Council
Development Control Committee 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx 1
Item No: D1 Delegated to Committee
Subject: Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting held on 20 February 2012
Author: Les Windle, Manager - Governance
File No: See Council Minutes
Reason for Report: The Minutes of the Meeting of Monday 20 February 2012 were
previously circulated. In accordance with the guidelines for
Committees’ operations it is now necessary for those Minutes be
formally taken as read and confirmed.
Recommendation:
That the Minutes of the Development Control Committee Meeting of 20 February 2012 be
taken as read and confirmed.
Les Windle
Manager - Governance
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 1
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT
ITEM No. D2
FILE No. DA 588/2011/1
ADDRESS 12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper
SITE AREA 970m2
ZONING Residential 2(b)
PROPOSAL 40cm extension to the existing balconies of Units 2, 4 and 6
TYPE OF CONSENT Local development
COST OF WORKS $4,950
DATE LODGED 19 December 2011
APPLICANT/OWNER Strata Plan 17043
AUTHOR Mr S Taylor
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. LOCALITY PLAN
2. DELEGATIONS SUMMARY
Level of Delegation Recommendation of Report
The application is to be determined by the Development Control Committee as
it involves an increase in the encroachment into the Foreshore Building Line.
Approval.
subject site
objectors
north
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 2
3. PROPOSAL SUMMARY
The proposal involves a 40cm extension to the existing balconies of Units 2, 4 and 6 on the north
western side of each level of the building.
4. ISSUES SUMMARY
4.1 Submissions
Issue Conclusion Section
Visual privacy The balconies will result in a minor amount of additional overlooking.
The objectors requested obscure glazing or privacy screening.
16.5
Encroachment into FSBL There is an existing non-compliance of 23m and a proposed non-
compliance of 23.4m.
13.6
Loss of view The proposal will not have an adverse impact upon available views from
adjoining properties.
16.4
Dominance to users of
Lady Martins Beach
This issue relates primarily to the non-compliance with the foreshore
building line.
13.6
4.2 Primary Issues
Issue Conclusion Section
Visual privacy The balconies will result in a minor amount of additional overlooking. 16.5
Foreshore Building Line There is an existing non-compliance of 23m and a proposed non-
compliance of 23.4m.
13.6
4.3 SEPP 1 Objections
Clause in LEP Standard Departure from Control Conclusion
Clause 22 30m Foreshore
Building Line
The existing departure is 23m whereas the proposed
additions increase the departure to 23.4m.
Satisfactory
PROPERTY DETAILS AND REFERRALS
5. SITE AND LOCALITY
Physical
features
The site is located on the lower western side of Longworth Avenue, Point Piper. It has a frontage
to Sydney Harbour along its northern boundary with a sandstone retaining wall at sea level.
The total site area is 970m2. The southern frontage to Longworth Avenue is 19.505m in length,
the eastern side boundary is 50.245m in length, the western boundary is 63.195m in length and
the frontage to Sydney Harbour is 8.275m in length.
Topography
The street level is approximately RL 13, before falling dramatically in the streetside half of the
site by 8m. The area in which the building is located is built at approximately RL 3.
Existing
buildings
Located in the centre of the site is a four storey residential flat building comprising six dwellings
on the three lower levels and a car park on the uppermost level. Level access to Longworth
Avenue is available from the car park.
Environment The surrounding streetscape is characterised by a variety of multi-storey residential flat buildings
or varying age on medium sized allotments.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 3
6. RELEVANT PROPERTY HISTORY
Past
Applications
DA666/2008/1 proposed substantial alterations and additions to the existing residential flat
building, including providing additional off-street parking and construction of an additional
dwelling. The application was lodged on 13 October 2008 and withdrawn on 23 February 2009
as it was recommended for refusal.
DA345/2009/1 was approved by the Development Control Committee on 30 August 2010 and
involved the conversion of the existing upper floor level car park to a new 3-bedroom dwelling
(increasing the number of dwellings from six to seven), a new two-storey basement garage for ten
vehicles, with associated excavation and access to Longworth Avenue via a single car lift/hoist on
the eastern boundary and other minor works. Works have not been commenced.
7. REFERRALS
No referrals were required.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 79C
The relevant matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979 include the following:
1. The provisions of any environmental planning instrument
2. The provisions of any proposed instrument that is/has been the subject of public consultation
3. The provisions of any development control plan
4. Any planning agreement that has been entered into
5. Any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into
6. The regulations
7. Any coastal zone management plan
8. The likely impacts of that development:
i) Environmental impacts on the natural and built environments
ii) Social and economic impacts
9. The suitability of the site
10. Any submissions
11. The public interest
8. ADVERTISING AND NOTIFICATION
8.1 Submissions
In accordance with Parts 3 and 4 of the Woollahra Advertising and Notification DCP, the
application was notified and advertised from 11 to 25 January 2012. Submissions were received
from:
1. Robert and Bella Silverman of 2/10 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper
2. Joe Bongiorno of 3/14 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper
3. Stanley and Charmaine Roth of 162 Wolseley Road, Road, Point Piper
The objectors raised the following issues:
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 4
Loss of privacy
All of the objectors raised the loss of visual privacy as an issue. Additional privacy screening or
obscure glazing was offered as a solution to this issue by two of the objectors. This is discussed in
Section 16.5.
Encroachment into FSBL/Dominance to users of Lady Martins Beach
A minimum foreshore building line of 30m applies to the site.
The existing building has a non-compliance of 23m whilst the proposed extension to the balcony
will increase this non-compliance to 23.4m. The impacts associated with this addition are minimal
and do not warrant refusal of the application, as outlined in Section 13.6.
Loss of view
The 40cm extension to the balcony includes a glass balustrade. There is no significant issue with
regard to view loss, as outlined in Section 16.4.
8.2 Statutory Declaration
In accordance with Clause 4.5 of the Woollahra Advertising and Notification DCP, the applicant
has completed the statutory declaration dated 27 January 2012 declaring that the site notice for DA
588/2011/1 was erected and maintained during the notification period in accordance with the
requirements of the DCP.
9. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY 1: DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS
SEPP 1 provides flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of
development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any
particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects
specified in Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) of the Act.
The applicant submitted a SEPP 1 objection for Clause 22 of Woollahra LEP 1995 in relation to the
30m foreshore building line applicable to residential flat buildings. This is discussed in Section
13.6.
10. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY 65: DESIGN QUALITY OF
RESIDENTIAL FLAT DEVELOPMENT
SEPP 65: Design Quality of Residential Flat Development applies to all new residential flat
buildings, the substantial refurbishment/redevelopment of existing residential flat buildings or the
conversion of an existing building to a residential flat building. A residential flat building, in this
instance, comprises three or more storeys and four or more self-contained dwellings.
The works do not constitute substantial refurbishment or redevelopment. As such, SEPP 65 is not
applicable.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 5
11. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY (BUILDING SUSTAINABILITY
INDEX: BASIX) 2004
Not applicable.
12. SYDNEY REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN (SYDNEY HARBOUR
CATCHMENT) 2005
The provisions of Clauses 13, 25 and 26 of this instrument and the accompanying DCP for SREP
(Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 require Council to consider the visual impact that a
development proposal will have upon Sydney Harbour and adjoining foreshore areas and the likely
impact upon available views to and from Sydney Harbour.
The aims of the SREP, as outlined in Clause 2, are as follows:
a) To ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are
recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained as an outstanding natural asset, and a
public asset of national and heritage significance, for existing and future generations
b) To ensure a healthy, sustainable environment on land and water
c) To achieve a high quality and ecologically sustainable urban environment
d) To ensure a prosperous working harbour and an effective transport corridor
e) To encourage a culturally rich and vibrant place for people
f) To ensure accessibility to and along Sydney Harbour and its foreshores
g) To ensure the protection, maintenance and rehabilitation of watercourses, wetlands, riparian
lands, remnant vegetation and ecological connectivity
h) To provide a consolidated, simplified and updated legislative framework for future planning
The subject site has an immediate frontage to Sydney Harbour and the existing building is visible
from Sydney Harbour.
The matters of consideration in Clause 25 relate to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of
the scenic quality of foreshores and waterways, and are as follows: -
a) The scale, form, design and siting of any building should be based on an analysis of:
(i) The land on which it is to be erected
(ii) The adjoining land
(iii) The likely future character of the locality
The scale and form of the development remains acceptable. The addition is largely indiscernible
when viewed from Sydney Harbour.
b) Development should maintain, protect and enhance the unique visual qualities of Sydney
Harbour and its islands, foreshores and tributaries
The proposal involves the enlargement of the balconies on all three levels but does not involve an
increase in the extent of glazing to each balcony. When viewed from Sydney Harbour, the proposal
remains largely unchanged and is acceptable.
c) The cumulative impact of water-based development should not detract from the character of
the waterways and adjoining foreshores
The character of Sydney Harbour is not affected.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 6
The matters of consideration in Clause 26 relate to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of
views, and are as follows: -
a) Development should maintain, protect and enhance views (including night views) to and from
Sydney Harbour
b) Development should minimise any adverse impacts on views and vistas to and from public
places, landmarks and heritage items
c) The cumulative impact of development on views should be minimised
Public and private views are not affected, as discussed in Section 16.4.
Accordingly, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the provisions of Clauses
13, 25 and 26 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 and Clause 5.6 of the DCP for SREP
(Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.
13. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995
13.1 Clause 1.1(2): Aims and Objectives of Woollahra LEP 1995
The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives of the Woollahra LEP 1995.
13.2 Clause 8(5): Aims and Objectives of the Zone
The proposal is permissible and is consistent with the aims and objectives of the Residential 2(b)
zone.
13.3 Clause 11: Floor Space Ratio
Clause 11 limits development to a maximum floor space ratio of 0.625:1 for a residential flat
building.
Site Area: 970m
2 Existing Proposed Control Complies
Floor Space Ratio 1.27:1
(1,237m2)
No change 0.625:1
(606m2)
No change
The floor space ratio is unchanged as the balconies remain less than 20m2
per unit.
13.4 Clause 12: Height of Buildings
Clause 12 limits development to a maximum height of 9.5m.
Existing Proposed Control Complies
Overall Height 12.13m Works to 8.6m 9.5m YES
The proposal complies with the maximum building height prescribed by Clause 12.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 7
13.5 Clause 19: Harbour Foreshore Scenic Protection Area
Clause 19 requires Council to consider the likely impact of any proposed development upon the
Harbour Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (HFSPA). The proposed works are minor in nature and
remain acceptable when viewed from Sydney Harbour.
13.6 Clause 22: Foreshore Building Line
Clause 22 specifies a minimum foreshore building line of 30m.
Existing Proposed Control Complies
Foreshore Building Line –
RFB 7.0m 6.6m 30.0m NO
The applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 –
Development Standards in relation to the non-compliance with Clause 22, which reads as follows:
The proposal will create a 400mm addition to the existing balconies.
Having regard to the objectives of the FSBL standard, it is considered that:
The proposal is a minor addition (400mm) to the width of the existing balcony only
There is no threat to ecology or rock platform
The existing building is within the FSBL
There is no significant impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties from loss of
views or privacy
The alterations and additions will result in a more attractive building when viewed from
the harbour and beach
The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment
2005)
It is considered that non-compliance with the foreshore building line standard is acceptable
and appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
The variation is supported for the following reasons:
The development is appropriate in this location
The development does not undermine the underlying objectives of the standard
The non-compliance does not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts
on the amenity of the surrounding area in general or on the amenity of nearby
residential properties in particular
The scale of the proposal, notwithstanding the non-compliance, is compatible with
surrounding development
The general bulk and scale of the building remains unchanged
There will be no significant impact on views and streetscape character
Pursuant to the provisions of SEPP No. 1, the applicant objects to the strict adherence to the
above development standards.
The following assessment of the SEPP 1 objection applies the questions established in Winten
Property Group Limited v North Sydney Council.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 8
These questions remain the principal tests to establish whether or not a SEPP 1 Objection is well
founded, however, the more recent principles arising from Wehbe v Pittwater Council are applied to
inform the assessment.
1. Is the planning control in question a development standard?
The planning control in question is the foreshore building line standard set by Clause 22 of
Woollahra LEP 1995. As such, any variation of the standard requires a SEPP 1 objection, as has
been prepared in this case.
2. What is the underlying purpose of the standard?
The objectives of the foreshore building line standard in Clause 22AA are:
a) To retain Sydney Harbour’s natural shorelines
b) To provide larger foreshore setbacks at the points and heads of bays in recognition of their
visual prominence
c) To protect significant areas of vegetation and, where appropriate, provide areas for future
planting which will not detrimentally impact on views of the harbour and its foreshores,
d) To protect the amenity of adjoining lands in relation to reasonable access to views and
sunlight
e) To preserve the rights of property owners to maintain an encroachment on the foreshore
building line by an existing main building
f) To protect rock platforms and the intertidal ecology
3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in
particular, does the development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects
specified in s.5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPA Act?
The aim of the Policy is set out at Clause 3 and seeks to ―provide flexibility in the application of
planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict
compliance with those standards would be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the
attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979.
In Wehbe v Pittwater Council, Commissioner Preston stated:
“An objection under SEPP 1 may be well founded and be consistent with the aims set out in
clause 3 of the Policy in a variety of ways. The most commonly invoked way is to establish
that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary because the
objectives of the development standard are achieved not withstanding non-compliance with
the standard.”
Accordingly, the following assessment considers the objection made by the applicant against the
provisions of Clause 22 of Woollahra LEP 1995 and whether or not it is established that the
objectives of the development standard are achieved irrespective of the non-compliance:
The shoreline, extent of vegetation and rock platforms are unaffected
There is a significant existing non-compliance of more than 76%. The proposed modification
to the balconies is limited to a 40cm addition, which increases the non-compliance to 78%. It
is largely indiscernible when viewed from Sydney Harbour and will not affect the visual
prominence of the building
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 9
The setback from the MHWM on the eastern side of the residential flat building is less than
5m, which is significantly less than the western side where the proposed balconies will be
located
There is no foreseeable impact upon users of Lady Martins Beach, which is a public beach
and listed as a heritage item
The encroachment (approximately 5m-7m) remains consistent with the other Harbour front
residential flat buildings, including the adjoining property to the east at 14 Longworth Avenue
(approximately 2.3m-7m) and 16 Longworth Avenue (approximately 5.7m-9.2m)
The amenity of adjoining properties, in terms of access to views and sunlight, remains
acceptable
As a result of this assessment it is considered that, notwithstanding the non-compliance with the
development standard, the underlying objectives founding that standard are achieved by the
proposed development.
The Land and Environment Court have established that it is insufficient merely to rely on absence
of environment harm to sustain an objection under SEPP 1. This position was confirmed in Wehbe
v Pittwater Council. The following assessment considers whether the objection demonstrates that
strict application of the development standard would hinder the attainment of the objects of the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Section 5(a) of the Act prescribes the objects relevantly as to encourage:
i) The proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources,
including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages
for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better
environment
ii) The promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land
iii) The protection, provision and co-ordination of communication and utility services
iv) The provision of land for public purposes
v) The provision of co-ordination of community services
vi) The protection of the environment, including the protection and conservation of native
animals and plants, including threatened species, populations and ecological communities
vii) Ecologically sustainable development
viii) The provision and maintenance of affordable housing
It is considered that, in the circumstances of the case, the strict application of the development
standard would hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act, as the proposal results in the
enlargement of the existing balconies and achieves compliance with the minimum private open
space requirements (as outlined in Section 5.3 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003). This is achieved in a
manner that does not have an adverse impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties.
It maintains a suitable level of amenity to public land and does not have an effect upon the
ecological community within Sydney Harbour. It is undertaken in a manner that is perceived to
represent the orderly and economic use of the land in an area that has other larger balconies
maximising the outlook to Sydney Harbour.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 10
4. Is compliance with the standard unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the
case?
The foregoing analysis has found that notwithstanding the non-compliance with the foreshore
building line standard, the proposed development achieves the underlying objectives of that
standard. Consequently it is considered that the SEPP 1 objection has established that compliance
with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.
5. Is the objection well founded?
The objection advanced by the applicant that compliance with the foreshore building line standard
is well founded on the basis that its strict application would hinder the attainment of the objects of
the Act and that the proposed development achieves the underlying objectives of the standard
notwithstanding the non-compliance.
13.7 Clause 25: Water, Wastewater and Stormwater
Clause 25 requires Council to take into consideration the provision of adequate stormwater drainage
and the provision of adequate water and sewerage services. The proposal is acceptable.
13.8 Clause 27: Development in the Vicinity of a Heritage Item
Clause 27 requires Council to consider the likely impact of a proposed development upon
surrounding heritage items in the vicinity of the subject site.
Located along the foreshore of the subject site is Lady Martins Beach, which is listed as a heritage
item under Schedule 5 of Woollahra LEP 1995. The residential flat building at 7 Longworth
Avenue (Santa Barbara) is also listed as a heritage item.
The proposed works are minimal in nature and will have no adverse impact in terms of Clause 27 of
Woollahra LEP 1995.
14. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS
None applicable.
15. SYDNEY HARBOUR FORESHORES AND WATERWAYS AREA DCP
15.1 Ecological Assessment
The proposed development would not result in the loss of mature trees or rock outcrops within the
foreshore.
15.2 Landscape Assessment
The proposed development will not have an adverse impact upon the landscape character of the site.
15.3 Water based and Land/Water Interface Development
The NSW Office of Water were not required to be consulted given the extent and location of works.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 11
15.4 Design Guidelines for Land-based Development
The proposal would satisfy the relevant criteria prescribed by the DCP.
16. WOOLLAHRA RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2003
16.1 Section 4.5: Desired Future Precinct Character
Site Area: 970m
2 Existing Proposed Control Complies
Building Footprint –
RFB
56.1%
(544.3m2)
56.2%
(545.6m2)
35%
(339.5m2)
NO
Side Boundary Setback (east)
Ground Floor
First Floor
Second Floor
8.9m
8.9m
8.9m
8.9m
8.9m
8.9m
2.5m
2.5m
5.2m
YES
YES
YES
Side Boundary Setback (west)
Ground Floor
First Floor
Second Floor
1.0m
1.0m
1.0m
1.0m
1.0m
1.0m
2.5m
2.5m
5.2m
NO
NO
NO
Building Footprint
C 4.5.3 limits residential flat buildings to a maximum building footprint of 35% (339.5m²). The
proposal involves a 1.3m2 increase in building footprint, which is indiscernible and has no adverse
implications upon the amenity of adjoining properties.
Side Setbacks
C 5.2.5 requires development to be setback from the side boundaries by 2.5m, increased on a pro
rata basis by 0.5m for each metre (or part thereof) that the building height adjacent to the boundary
exceeds 6.0m.
The addition to the balconies will result in a non-compliance of between 1.5m and 4.2m. It is
consistent with the existing side boundary and will not lead to an undue level of overlooking, view
loss of shadowing. Further, the addition is minor in nature and is of an appropriate scale such that
the development remains appropriate when viewed from Sydney Harbour and adjoining properties.
Alterations and Additions to Post WWII Residential Flat Buildings
C4.5.6 requires alterations and addition to have regard to their highly visible location, views from
public spaces, environmentally sustainable design, architectural integrity and materials and finishes.
The proposal involves relatively minor works that will not affect the overall, appearance or integrity
of the building. It is therefore satisfactory with regard to the above.
Conclusion
The proposal is therefore acceptable with regard to Section 4.5 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 12
16.2 Section 5.2: Building Size and Location
Site Area: 970m
2 Existing Proposed Control Complies
Rear Setback 3.0m 2.6m Approx 10.0m NO
Rear Setback
C 5.2.3 stipulates that buildings have a minimum rear setback of 25% (10m) of the average site
length. (Note: The rear boundary of the property does not align with the MHWM.)
At 3.0m, the existing non-compliance is significant whilst the proposal will reduce the rear setback
by 0.4m to 2.6m. It is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons:
The shoreline, extent of vegetation and rock platforms are unaffected
The 40cm addition to each level is largely indiscernible when viewed from Sydney Harbour
and will not affect the visual prominence of the building
The encroachment remains consistent with the Harbour front setback of the adjoining
property to the east at 14 Longworth Avenue
The amenity of adjoining properties, in terms of access to views, privacy and sunlight,
remains acceptable
The usability of the rear yard is unchanged
The proposal is therefore acceptable with regard to Section 5.2 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
16.3 Section 5.3: Open space and landscaping
Site Area: 970m
2 Existing Proposed Control Complies
Deep Soil Landscaping –
RFB
Approximately
100m2
0.7m2 reduction
40%
(398.8m2)
NO
Private Open Space (Unit 2)
Total Area
Minimum dimension
7.2m
2m
8.5m2
2.4m
8m²
2m
YES
YES
Private Open Space (Unit 4)
Total Area
Minimum dimension
7.2m
2m
8.5m2
2.4m
8m²
2m
YES
YES
Private Open Space (Unit 6)
Total Area
Minimum dimension
7.2m
2m
8.5m2
2.4m
8m²
2m
YES
YES
Deep Soil Landscaping
C 5.3.1 requires a deep soil landscaped area of 40% (398.8m²) of the site area. The proposal
involves a 0.7m2 reduction in deep soil landscaping due to the extension of the balconies. The actual
amount of grass will remain unchanged.
Nevertheless, the change is minimal and does not affect stormwater management or landscape
character as viewed from Sydney Harbour. No objection is raised.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 13
Private Open Space
C5.3.5 stipulates that for residential flat buildings, each dwelling located above ground level is to be
provided with private open space in the form of a balcony, verandah or uncovered roof terrace
which has a minimum area of 8m2 and a minimum dimension of 2m. The proposed extensions will
now ensure compliance with C5.3.5.
Landscape Design
C5.3.8 and C5.3.9 notes that the location of private open space should take advantage of the outlook
and natural features of the site; utilise a northerly aspect where available, maintain privacy and solar
access and address surveillance. The proposal reinforces the outlook towards Sydney Harbour
whilst maintaining adequate privacy between properties.
Conclusion
The proposal is acceptable with regard to Section 5.3 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
16.4 Section 5.5: Views
Public views
C5.5.2-C5.5.5 requires Council to consider building form and location, setbacks, roof form and
landscaping when assessing public views. The proposal does not have an adverse impact upon any
public views.
Private views
C5.5.6 requires building forms to enable a sharing of views, particularly from the main habitable
rooms.
The owner of 2/10 Longworth Avenue (adjoining property to the west) objected to the proposed
development on the basis of view loss.
In assessing the reasonableness or otherwise of the degree of view loss, this report has had regard to
the case law established by Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140 (paragraphs 23-
33) which has established a four step assessment of view sharing. The steps are as follows:
The assessment of the views affected
The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than
land views. Iconic views (eg. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued
more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, eg a
water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in
which it is obscured.
The view is of Sydney Harbour and includes Shark Island and the northern foreshore.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 14
Consideration from what part of the property the views are obtained
The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example,
the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from
front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from standing or sitting position
may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The
expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic.
The view is obtained from the lounge room and adjoining balcony.
The extent of the impact
The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the
property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more
significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued
because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in
many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if
it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss
qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.
The proposal will eliminate a minor amount of the view of the waters of Sydney Harbour. However,
this is dependant upon where one is standing or sitting within the property and as glass balustrades
are proposed, one is able to look through the glass balustrade. When noting the existing expansive
views and the extent of view loss, the overall impact is negligible.
The reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact
The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A
development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than
one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or
more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a
complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the
applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of
neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development
would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.
The Court poses two questions in Tenacity Consulting vs Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140. The
first question relates to whether a non-compliance with one or more planning controls results in
view loss.
The second question posed by the Court relates to whether a more skilful design could provide the
same development potential whilst reducing the impact on views.
There is a non-compliance with the foreshore building line. However, given the negligible amount
of view loss, Council is not of the view that the 40cm addition to the balcony warrants refusal of the
application. Views across the subject balconies are still maintained, including through the glass and
the remainder of the view of Sydney Harbour is unaffected.
Conclusion
The proposal is therefore acceptable with regard to the concept of view sharing and Section 5.5 of
the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 15
16.5 Section 5.8: Acoustic and Visual Privacy
Acoustic privacy
The size of the balconies has been increased by 1.3m2. This is considered to be a minor increase in
usability of the space but not sufficient to warrant concern in relation to the provision of acoustic
privacy to adjoining properties.
Visual Privacy
C 5.8.6 requires balconies, terraces, decks, roof terraces and other like areas within a development
are suitably screened to prevent direct views into habitable rooms or private open space of adjoining
and adjacent dwellings. C5.8.7 seeks to eliminate windows and balconies of an upper-level dwelling
overlooking the private open space of a lower level dwelling within the same development.
The attached photographs (below) have been taken from the edge of the uppermost level, which is
considered to be the worst case scenario. There is presently a low level of privacy between
properties due to the minimal side setbacks, lack of landscaping along side boundaries, height of
development in the area and the desire to maximise outlooks from each respective unit. Given the
harbour front location, an element of overlooking is largely inevitable.
To 14 Longworth Avenue
Outlook to 14 Longworth Ave from balcony extension Outlook to 14 Longworth Ave from existing balcony
It is evident from the photographs above that there will be some additional sightlines from the
balcony in an eastern direction due to the projection of the balcony further from the building.
However, it is acceptable for the following reasons:
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 16
The additional overlooking is minimal when considered comparatively with the overall extent
of existing privacy between the properties. A bedroom window within each unit overlooks
directly to the adjoining property to a greater extent than the proposed balcony extension
The above photographs are the worst case scenario
The proposal now achieves compliance with the minimum private open space control
The balconies are not excessive in size and typical of other balconies in the area
To 10 Longworth Avenue and 162 Wolseley Road
Outlook to the west (including objector’s property)
The existing level of privacy afforded to the west is very minimal as the balconies are concentrated
to the western side of the building and the building itself does not limit sightlines in the way it does
to the east. As such, a 40cm extension to the existing balcony has little impact and is acceptable.
Conclusion
Objectors have requested obscure glazing to the balustrade or privacy screening. However, it is
considered unnecessary in this instance as the extent of additional overlooking is insignificant such
to warrant the enclosure of the balcony and impose undue enclosure of the occupant’s only area of
private open space.
The proposal is therefore acceptable with regard to Section 5.8 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
16.6 Section 5.11: Harbour Foreshore Development
C5.11.3 requires the use of complimentary and compatible materials. Excessive use of glass
resulting in glare is not permitted.
The proposal involves the enlargement of the balconies on all three levels but does not involve an
increase in the extent of glazing to each balcony. In this regard, the proposal is acceptable with
regard to Section 5.11 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 17
16.7 Section 5.14: Inter-war Flat Buildings
Inter war flat buildings relate to residential flat buildings constructed between 1918 and 1950. The
proposal is acceptable with regard to Section 5.14 of the Woollahra RDCP 2003.
17. WASTE NOT DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2010
The Waste Not DCP is applicable to all development and seeks to establish waste minimisation and
sustainable waste management during demolition and construction phases and throughout the on-
going use of the building. The proposal is acceptable.
18. ACCESS DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 2004
For all new Class 1A dwellings, The Access DCP encourages visitor accessibility and adaptability.
The subject dwelling is a Class 1 dwelling. The proposal remains satisfactory with regard to the
intent of the Woollahra Access DCP.
19. SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTION PLANS
Not applicable.
20. APPLICABLE ACTS/REGULATIONS
None applicable.
21. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL
All likely impacts have been addressed elsewhere in the report, or are considered to be satisfactory
and not warrant further consideration.
22. THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE
The site is suitable for the proposed development.
23. THE PUBLIC INTEREST
The proposal is in the public interest.
24. CONCLUSION
The proposal is acceptable against the relevant considerations under Section 79C.
25. DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Under Section 147 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 there have been no
disclosure statements regarding political donations or gifts made to any Councillor or gifts made to
any council employee submitted with this development application by either the applicant or any
person who made a submission.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 18
RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979
THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development
Application No. 588/2011 for a 40cm extension to the existing balconies of at Units 2, 4 and 6/12
Longworth Avenue, Point Piper, subject to the following conditions:
A. General Conditions
A.1 Conditions
Consent is granted subject to the following conditions imposed pursuant to section 80 of the
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (―the Act‖) and the provisions of the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (―the Regulation‖) such conditions
being reasonable and relevant to the development as assessed pursuant to section 79C of the
Act. Standard Condition: A1
A.2 Definitions
Unless specified otherwise words have the same meaning as defined by the Act, the
Regulation and the Interpretation Act 1987 as in force at the date of consent.
Applicant means the applicant for this Consent.
Approved Plans mean the plans endorsed by Council referenced by this consent as amended
by conditions of this consent.
AS or AS/NZS means Australian Standard® or Australian/New Zealand Standard®,
respectively, published by Standards Australia International Limited.
BCA means the Building Code of Australia as published by the Australian Building Codes
Board as in force at the date of issue of any Construction Certificate.
Council means Woollahra Municipal Council
Court means the Land and Environment Court
Local native plants means species of native plant endemic to Sydney’s eastern suburbs (see
the brochure titled ―Local Native Plants for Sydney’s Eastern Suburbs published by the
Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils).
Stormwater Drainage System means all works, facilities and documentation relating to:
The collection of stormwater,
The retention of stormwater,
The reuse of stormwater,
The detention of stormwater,
The controlled release of stormwater; and
Connections to easements and public stormwater systems.
Owner means the owner of the site and successors in title to the site.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 19
Owner Builder has the same meaning as in the Home Building Act 1989.
PCA means the Principal Certifying Authority under the Act.
Principal Contractor has the same meaning as in the Act or where a principal contractor has
not been appointed by the owner of the land being developed Principal Contractor means the
owner of the land being developed.
Professional Engineer has the same meaning as in the BCA.
Public Place has the same meaning as in the Local Government Act 1993.
Road has the same mean as in the Roads Act 1993.
SEE means the final version of the Statement of Environmental Effects lodged by the
Applicant.
Site means the land being developed subject to this consent.
WLEP 1995 means Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995
Work for the purposes of this consent means:
the use of land in connection with development,
the subdivision of land,
the erection of a building,
the carrying out of any work,
the use of any site crane, machine, article, material, or thing,
the storage of waste, materials, site crane, machine, article, material, or thing,
the demolition of a building,
the piling, piering, cutting, boring, drilling, rock breaking, rock sawing or excavation of
land,
the delivery to or removal from the site of any machine, article, material, or thing, or
the occupation of the site by any person unless authorised by an occupation certificate.
Note: Interpretation of Conditions - Where there is any need to obtain an interpretation of the intent of any
condition this must be done in writing to Council and confirmed in writing by Council. Standard Condition: A2
A.3 Approved Plans and supporting documents
Those with the benefit of this consent must carry out all work and maintain the use and works
in accordance with the plans and supporting documents listed below as submitted by the
Applicant and to which is affixed a Council stamp ―Approved DA Plans‖ unless modified by
any following condition. Where the plans relate to alterations or additions only those works
shown in colour or highlighted are approved.
Reference Description Author/Drawn Date(s)
A2001, A2002, A2004, A2005 Architectural Plans Prescott Architects 6 December 2011
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 20
Note: Warning to Accredited Certifiers – You should always insist on sighting the original Council stamped
approved plans. You should not rely solely upon the plan reference numbers in this condition. Should
the applicant not be able to provide you with the original copy Council will provide you with access to its
files so you may review our original copy of the approved plan.
Note: These plans and supporting documentation may be subject to conditions imposed under section 80A(1)(g)
of the Act modifying or amending the development (refer to conditions which must be satisfied prior to
the issue of any Construction Certificate.)
Standard Condition: A5
B. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the demolition of any building or
construction
B.1 Construction Certificate required prior to any demolition
Where demolition is associated with an altered portion of, or an extension to an existing
building the demolition of any part of a building is "commencement of erection of building"
pursuant to section 81A(2) of the Act. In such circumstance all conditions in Part C and Part
D of this consent must be satisfied prior to any demolition work. This includes, but is not
limited to, the issue of a Construction Certificate, appointment of a PCA and Notice of
Commencement under the Act.
Note: See Over our Dead Body Society Inc v Byron Bay Community Association Inc [2001] NSWLEC 125.
Standard Condition: B1
C. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the issue of any construction certificate
C.1 Soil and Water Management Plan – Submission & Approval
The principal contractor or owner builder must submit to the Certifying Authority a soil and
water management plan complying with:
a) ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2001; and
b) ―Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction‖ published by the NSW
Department of Housing 4th Edition‖ ('The Blue Book').
Where there is any conflict The Blue Book takes precedence. The Certifying Authority must
be satisfied that the soil and water management plan complies with the publications above
prior to issuing any Construction Certificate.
Note: This condition has been imposed to eliminate potential water pollution and dust nuisance.
Note: The International Erosion Control Association – Australasia http://www.austieca.com.au/ lists consultant
experts who can assist in ensuring compliance with this condition. Where erosion and sedimentation
plans are required for larger projects it is recommended that expert consultants produce these plans.
Note: The ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖ publications can be
down loaded free of charge from http://www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au/ .
Note: Pursuant to clause 161(1)(a)(5) of the Regulation an Accredited Certifier may satisfied as to this matter Standard Condition: C25
C.2 Structural Adequacy of Existing Supporting Structures
A certificate from a professional engineer (Structural Engineer), certifying the adequacy of
the existing supporting structure to support the additional loads proposed to be imposed by the
development, must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 21
Note: This condition is imposed to ensure that the existing structure is able to support the additional loads
proposed.
Standard Condition: C35
C.3 Professional Engineering Details
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required by clause 139 of the
Regulation, must include detailed professional engineering plans and/or specifications for all
structural, electrical, hydraulic, hydro-geological, geotechnical, mechanical and civil work
complying with this consent, approved plans, the statement of environmental effects and
supporting documentation.
Detailed professional engineering plans and/or specifications must be submitted to the
Certifying Authority with the application for any Construction Certificate.
Note: This does not affect the right of the developer to seek staged Construction Certificates.
Standard Condition: C36
C.4 Stormwater Discharge to Harbour (Clause 25(2) WLEP 1995)
The developer must obtain written approval from the NSW Maritime Authority to discharge
stormwater from the subject property directly into Sydney Harbour. Standard Condition: C50
D. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the commencement of any development
work
D.1 Compliance with Building Code of Australia and insurance requirements under the
Home Building Act 1989
For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Act, the following conditions are prescribed in
relation to a development consent for development that involves any building work:
a) that the work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building
Code of Australia,
b) in the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires
there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that
such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be
carried out by the consent commences.
This condition does not apply:
a) to the extent to which an exemption is in force under the Home Building Regulation
2004,
b) to the erection of a temporary building.
In this condition, a reference to the BCA is a reference to that code as in force on the date the
application for the relevant construction certificate is made.
Note: This condition must be satisfied prior to commencement of any work in relation to the contract of
insurance under the Home Building Act 1989. This condition also has effect during the carrying out of all
building work with respect to compliance with the Building Code of Australia.
Note: All new guttering is to comply with the provisions of Part 3.5.2 of the Building Code of Australia. Standard Condition: D1
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 22
D.2 Site Signs
The Principal Contractor or owner builder must ensure that the sign/s required by clauses
98A and 227A of the Regulation is/are erected and maintained at all times.
Clause 98A of the Regulation provides:
Erection of signs
For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Act, the requirements of subclauses (2) and (3) are prescribed
as conditions of a development consent for development that involves any building work, subdivision
work or demolition work.
A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision `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 the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a telephone
number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and
c. stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.
Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being
carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.
This clause does not apply in relation to building work, subdivision work or demolition work that is
carried out inside an existing building that does not affect the external walls of the building.
This clause does not apply in relation to Crown building work that is certified, in accordance with section
116G of the Act, to comply with the technical provisions of the State’s building laws.‖
Clause 227A of the Regulation provides:
Signs on development sites
If there is a person who is the PCA or the principal contractor for any building work, subdivision work or
demolition work authorised to be carried out on a site by a development consent or complying development
certificate:
Each such person MUST ensure that a rigid and durable sign showing the person’s identifying particulars
so that they can be read easily by anyone in any public road or other public place adjacent to the site is
erected in a prominent position on the site before the commencement of work, and is maintained on the
site at all times while this clause applies until the work has been carried out.
Note: Clause 227A imposes a penalty exceeding $1,000 if these requirements are not complied with.
Note: If Council is appointed as the PCA it will provide the sign to the principal contractor or owner builder
who must ensure that the sign is erected and maintained as required by Clause 98A and Clause 227A of
the Regulation. Standard Condition: D12
D.3 Erosion and Sediment Controls – Installation
The principal contractor or owner builder must install and maintain water pollution, erosion
and sedimentation controls in accordance with:
a) The Soil and Water Management Plan if required under this consent;
b) ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2001; and
c) ―Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction‖ published by the NSW
Department of Housing 4th Edition‖ ('The Blue Book').
Where there is any conflict The Blue Book takes precedence.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 23
Note: The International Erosion Control Association – Australasia (http://www.austieca.com.au/) lists
consultant experts who can assist in ensuring compliance with this condition. Where Soil and Water
Management Plan is required for larger projects it is recommended that this be produced by a member of
the International Erosion Control Association – Australasia.
Note: The ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖ publications can be
down loaded free of charge from www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au.
Note: A failure to comply with this condition may result in penalty infringement notices, prosecution, notices
and orders under the Act and/or the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 without any
further warning. It is a criminal offence to cause, permit or allow pollution.
Note: Section 257 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 provides inter alia that ―the
occupier of premises at or from which any pollution occurs is taken to have caused the pollution‖
Warning: Irrespective of this condition any person occupying the site may be subject to proceedings
under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 where pollution is caused, permitted or
allowed as the result of their occupation of the land being developed. Standard Condition: D14
D.4 Building - Construction Certificate, Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority,
Appointment of Principal Contractor and Notice of Commencement (s81A(2) of the Act)
The erection of the building in accordance with this development consent must not be
commenced until:
a) A construction certificate for the building work has been issued by the consent
authority, the council (if the council is not the consent authority) or an accredited
Certifier, and
b) The person having the benefit of the development consent has:
Appointed a principal certifying authority for the building work, and
Notified the principal certifying authority that the person will carry out the
building work as an owner-builder, if that is the case, and
c) the principal certifying authority has, no later than 2 days before the building work
commences:
Notified the consent authority and the council (if the council is not the consent
authority) of his or her appointment, and
Notified the person having the benefit of the development consent of any critical
stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the
building work, and
d) The person having the benefit of the development consent, if not carrying out the work
as an owner-builder, has:
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 principal certifying authority 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
Given at least 2 days’ notice to the council of the person’s intention to commence
the erection of the building.
Note: building has the same meaning as in section 4 of the Act and includes part of a building and any structure
or part of a structure.
Note: new building has the same meaning as in section 109H of the Act and includes an altered portion of, or an
extension to, an existing building.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 24
Note: The commencement of demolition works associated with an altered portion of, or an extension to, an
existing building is considered to be the commencement of building work requiring compliance with
section 82A(2) of the Act (including the need for a Construction Certificate) prior to any demolition
work. See: Over our Dead Body Society Inc v Byron Bay Community Association Inc [2001] NSWLEC
125.
Note: Construction Certificate Application, PCA Service Agreement and Notice of Commencement forms can
be downloaded from Council’s website www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au .
Note: It is an offence for any person to carry out the erection of a building in breach of this condition and in
breach of section 81A(2) of the Act. Standard Condition: D15
D.5 Notification of Home Building Act 1989 requirements
a) For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Act, the requirements of this condition are
prescribed as conditions of a development consent for development that involves any
residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989.
b) 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:
In the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be appointed:
- the name and licence number of the principal contractor, and
- the name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part 6 of that
Act,
In the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:
- the name of the owner-builder, and
- if the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder permit under that
Act, the number of the owner-builder permit.
c) If arrangements for doing the residential building work are changed while the work is in
progress so that the information notified under subclause (2) 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.
d) This clause does not apply in relation to Crown building work that is certified, in
accordance with section 116G of the Act, to comply with the technical provisions of the
State’s building laws. Standard Condition: D17
E. Conditions which must be satisfied during any development work
E.1 Compliance with Building Code of Australia and insurance requirements under the
Home Building Act 1989
For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Act, the following condition is prescribed in
relation to a development consent for development that involves any building work:
a) That the work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building
Code of Australia,
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 25
b) In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires
there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that
such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be
carried out by the consent commences.
This condition does not apply:
a) To the extent to which an exemption is in force under clause 187 or 188, subject to the
terms of any condition or requirement referred to in clause 187 (6) or 188 (4) of the
Regulation, or
b) To the erection of a temporary building.
In this clause, a reference to the BCA is a reference to that Code as in force on the date the
application for the relevant construction certificate is made.
Note: All new guttering is to comply with the provisions of Part 3.5.2 of the Building Code of Australia.
Standard Condition: E1
E.2 Compliance with Australian Standard for Demolition
Demolition of buildings and structures must comply with Australian Standard AS 2601—
1991: The Demolition of Structures, published by Standards Australia, and as in force at 1
July 1993. Standard Condition: E2
E.3 Critical Stage Inspections
Critical stage inspections must be called for by the principal contractor or owner builder as
required by the PCA, any PCA service agreement, the Act and the Regulation.
Work must not proceed beyond each critical stage until the PCA is satisfied that work is
proceeding in accordance with this consent, the Construction Certificate(s) and the Act.
critical stage inspections means the inspections prescribed by the Regulations for the
purposes of section 109E(3)(d) of the Act or as required by the PCA and any PCA Service
Agreement.
Note: The PCA may require inspections beyond mandatory critical stage inspections in order that the PCA be
satisfied that work is proceeding in accordance with this consent.
Note: The PCA may, in addition to inspections, require the submission of Compliance Certificates, survey
reports or evidence of suitability in accordance with Part A2.2 of the BCA in relation to any matter
relevant to the development. Standard Condition: E5
E.4 Hours of Work –Amenity of the neighbourhood
a) No work must take place on any Sunday or public holiday,
b) No work must take place before 7am or after 5pm any weekday,
c) No work must take place before 7am or after 1pm any Saturday,
d) The following work must not take place before 9am or after 4pm any weekday, or
before 9am or after 1pm any Saturday or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday;
i) Piling;
ii) Piering;
iii) Rock or concrete cutting, boring or drilling;
iv) Rock breaking;
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 26
v) Rock sawing;
vi) Jack hammering; or
vii) Machine excavation,
e) No loading or unloading of material or equipment associated with the activities listed in
part d) above must take place before 9am or after 4pm any weekday, or before 9am or
after 1pm any Saturday or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday.
f) No operation of any equipment associated with the activities listed in part d) above must
take place before 9am or after 4pm any weekday, or before 9am or after 1pm any
Saturday or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday
g) No rock excavation being cutting, boring, drilling, breaking, sawing , jack hammering
or bulk excavation of rock, must occur without a 15 minute break every hour.
This condition has been imposed to mitigate the impact of work upon the amenity of the
neighbourhood. Impact of work includes, but is not limited to, noise, vibration, dust, odour,
traffic and parking impacts.
Note: The use of noise and vibration generating plant and equipment and vehicular traffic, including trucks in
particular, significantly degrade the amenity of neighbourhoods and more onerous restrictions apply to
these activities. This more invasive work generally occurs during the foundation and bulk excavation
stages of development. If you are in doubt as to whether or not a particular activity is considered to be
subject to the more onerous requirement (9am to 4pm weekdays and 9am to 1pm Saturdays) please
consult with Council.
Note: Each and every breach of this condition by any person may be subject to separate penalty infringement
notice or prosecution.
Note: The delivery and removal of plant, equipment and machinery associated with wide loads subject to RTA
and Police restrictions on their movement out side the approved hours of work will be considered on a
case by case basis.
Note: Compliance with these hours of work does not affect the rights of any person to seek a remedy to
offensive noise as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the Protection of
the Environment Operations (Noise Control) Regulation 2000.
Note: EPA Guidelines can be down loaded from http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/noise/nglg.htm .
Note: see http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/resources/ci_build_sheet7.pdf Standard Condition: E6
E.5 Erosion and Sediment Controls – Maintenance
The principal contractor or owner builder must maintain water pollution, erosion and
sedimentation controls in accordance with:
a) The Soil and Water Management Plan required under this consent;
b) ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2001; and
c) ―Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction‖ published by the NSW
Department of Housing 4th Edition (―The Blue Book‖).
Where there is any conflict The Blue Book takes precedence.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 27
Note: A failure to comply with this condition may result in penalty infringement notices, prosecution, notices
and orders under the Act and/or the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 without any
further warning. It is a criminal offence to cause, permit or allow pollution.
Note: Section 257 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 provides that ―the occupier of
premises at or from which any pollution occurs is taken to have caused the pollution‖.
Warning: Irrespective of this condition any person occupying the site may be subject to proceedings under the
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 where pollution is caused, permitted or allowed as the result
of the occupation of the land being developed whether or not they actually cause the pollution. Standard Condition: E15
E.6 Placement and use of Skip Bins
The principal contractor or owner builder must ensure that all waste storage containers,
including but not limited to skip bins, must be stored within the site unless:
a) Activity Approval has been issued by Council under section 94 of the Local
Government Act 1993 to place the waste storage container in a public place, and
b) Where located on the road it is located only in a positions where a vehicle may lawfully
park in accordance with the Australian Road Rules to the extent they are adopted under
the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999.
Note: Waste storage containers must not be located on the footpath without a site specific activity approval.
Where such site specific activity approval is granted a 1.5m wide clear path of travel is maintained free of
any trip hazards. Standard Condition: E21
E.7 Dust Mitigation
Dust mitigation must be implemented in accordance with ―Dust Control - Do it right on site‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils.
This generally requires:
a) Dust screens to all hoardings and site fences.
b) All stockpiles or loose materials to be covered when not being used.
c) All equipment, where capable, being fitted with dust catchers.
d) All loose materials being placed bags before placing into waste or skip bins.
e) All waste and skip bins being kept covered when not being filled or emptied.
f) The surface of excavation work being kept wet to minimise dust.
g) Landscaping incorporating trees, dense shrubs and grass being implemented as soon as
practically possible to minimise dust.
Note: ―Dust Control - Do it right on site‖ can be down loaded free of charge from Council’s web site
www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au or obtained from Council’s office.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 28
Note: Special precautions must be taken when removing asbestos or lead materials from development sites.
Additional information can be obtained from www.workcover.nsw.gov.au and www.epa.nsw.gov.au .
Other specific condition and advice may apply.
Note: Demolition and construction activities may affect local air quality and contribute to urban air pollution.
The causes are dust, smoke and fumes coming from equipment or activities, and airborne chemicals when
spraying for pest management. Precautions must be taken to prevent air pollution. Standard Condition: E23
F. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to any occupation or use of the building (Part
4A of the Act and Part 8 Division 3 of the Regulation)
F.1 Occupation Certificate (section 109M of the Act)
A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building
(within the meaning of section 109H (4) of the Act) unless an occupation certificate has been
issued in relation to the building or part.
Note: New building includes an altered portion of, or an extension to, an existing building.
Standard Condition: F1
G. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the issue of any Subdivision Certificate
Nil.
H. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate
(s109C(1)(c))
Nil.
I. Conditions which must be satisfied during the ongoing use of the development
Nil.
J. Miscellaneous Conditions
Nil.
K. Advisings
K.1 Criminal Offences – Breach of Development Consent & Environmental laws
Failure to comply with this development consent and any condition of this consent is a
criminal offence. Failure to comply with other environmental laws is also a criminal offence.
Where there is any breach Council may without any further warning:
a) Issue Penalty Infringement Notices (On-the-spot fines);
b) Issue notices and orders;
c) Prosecute any person breaching this consent; and/or
d) Seek injunctions/orders before the courts to restrain and remedy any breach.
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 29
Warnings as to potential maximum penalties
Maximum Penalties under NSW Environmental Laws include fines up to $1.1 Million and/or
custodial sentences for serious offences.
Warning as to enforcement and legal costs
Should Council have to take any action to enforced compliance with this consent or other
environmental laws Council’s policy is to seek from the Court appropriate orders requiring
the payments of its costs beyond any penalty or remedy the Court may order.
This consent and this specific advice will be tendered to the Court when seeking costs orders
from the Court where Council is successful in any necessary enforcement action.
Note: The payment of environmental penalty infringement notices does not result in any criminal offence being
recorded. If a penalty infringement notice is challenged in Court and the person is found guilty of the
offence by the Court, subject to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, a criminal
conviction is recorded. The effect of a criminal conviction beyond any fine is serious. You can obtain
further information from the following web sites:
http://www.theshopfront.org/documents/ConvictionsCriminalRecords.pdf and the Attorney General’s
www.agd.nsw.gov.au. Standard Advising: K1
K.2 Builders Licences and Owner Builders Permits
Section 81A of the Act requires among other matters that the person having the benefit of the
development consent, if not carrying out the work as an owner-builder, must appointed a
principal contractor for residential building work who must be the holder of a contractor
licence.
Further information can be obtained from the NSW Office of Fair Trading website about how
you obtain an owner builders permit or find a principal contractor (builder):
http://www.dft.nsw.gov.au/building.html .
The Owner(s) must appoint the PCA. The PCA must check that Home Building Act
insurance is in place before the commencement of building work. The Principal Contractor
(Builder) must provide the Owners with a certificate of insurance evidencing the contract of
insurance under the Home Building Act 1989 for the residential building work. Standard Condition: K5
K.3 Workcover requirements
The Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 No 40 and subordinate regulations, codes of
practice and guidelines control and regulate the development industry.
Note: Further information can be obtained from Workcover NSW’s website:
http://www.workcover.nsw.gov.au/Industry/Construction/default.htm or through their head office:
Location: Workcover NSW, 92-100 Donnison Street, GOSFORD 2250 Postal address: WorkCover
NSW, Locked Bag 2906, LISAROW 2252, Phone (02) 4321 5000, Fax (02) 4325 4145. Standard Condition: K7
12 Longworth Avenue, Point Piper Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
DA 588/2011/1 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D2.doc 30
K.4 Building Standards - Guide to Standards and Tolerances
The PCA does not undertake detailed quality control inspections and the role of the PCA is
primarily to ensure that the development proceeds in accordance with this consent,
Construction Certificates and that the development is fit for occupation in accordance with its
classification under the Building Code of Australia. Critical Stage Inspections do not provide
the level of supervision required to ensure that the minimum standards and tolerances
specified by the ―Guide to Standards and Tolerances©‖ ISBN 0 7347 6010 8 are achieved.
The quality of any development is a function of the quality of the principal contractor’s or
owner builder’s supervision of individual contractors and trades on a daily basis during the
development. The PCA does not undertake this role.
The NSW Office of Fair Trading have published a ―Guide to Standards and Tolerances©‖
ISBN 0 7347 6010 8. The guide can be obtained from the Office of Fair Trading by calling
13 32 20 or by Fax: 9619 8618 or by post to: Marketing Branch, PO Box 972, Parramatta
NSW 2124.
The Guide can be down loaded from:
http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/pdfs/corporate/publications/dft242.pdf
Council, as the PCA or otherwise, does not adjudicate building contract disputes between the
principal contractor, contractors and the owner. Standard Condition: K6
Mr Simon Taylor Mr David Waghorn
ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER
Woollahra Municipal Council
Development Control Committee 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx 2
Item No: D3 Delegated to Committee
Subject: Register of Current Land and Environment Court Matters and
Register of Court Proceedings for Building Control,
Environmental Control & Health Control
Author: Patrick Robinson, Manager – Development Control
Timothy Tuxford, Manager – Compliance
Council, at its meeting of 17 August 1994 resolved in the following terms:
THAT the Register of current Land and Environment Court Matters for Development
Applications presented in the Development Applications Summary be transferred to the
Development Control Committee to be considered at each meeting.
Further, the Development Control Committee at its meeting of 29 March 2010 resolved in the
following terms:
THAT a 'Register of Court Proceedings for Building Control, Environmental Control and
Health Control' be presented to the Development Control Committee at least once a month to
highlight the prosecution activities being undertaken by Council's Compliance section.
Please find attached a copy of the current registers.
Recommendation:
A. THAT the attached register of current Land and Environment Court Matters for
Development Applications be received and noted.
B. THAT the attached register of Court Proceedings for Building Control, Environmental
Control and Health Control be received and noted.
Patrick Robinson
Manager Development Control
Timothy Tuxford
Manager Compliance
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
1
SECTION 96 APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT
ITEM No.
R1
FILE No.
DA282/1979/2
ADDRESS:
9 Vickery Avenue (Lyne Park), Rose Bay
EXISTING CONSENT: New clubhouse for the Woollahra Sailing Club
DATE OF CONSENT: 25 May 1981
PROPOSED
MODIFICATION:
The deletion of Condition 6 of the development consent which
restricts the rigging of sailing boats to the area leased from Crown
Lands by the Woollahra Sailing Club to permit the rigging and
unrigging of boats within adjoining Council trust managed sections
of Lyne Park.
DATE S96 LODGED: 06/07/2011
CONSENT AUTHORITY
Council
APPLICANT: Woollahra Sailing Club
OWNER: Crown Land (NSW Government). Woollahra Council is the Trust
Manager of the adjoining sections of Lyne Park that are the subject
of the proposal.
AUTHOR: D Booth-Senior Assessment Officer
1. SUMMARY
Reason for report
As the subject s96 Application involves an intensification of an existing use of community land of
more than 10% (42%), the matter is required to be determined by the full Council (in accordance
with the provisions of s47E Development of Community Land of the Local Government Act 1993)
as an R-item via the Development Control Committee.
Issues
Excessive proposed area of use of the Council trust managed, publicly accessible section of
Lyne Park; and
Unauthorised use.
Objections
Nil.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
2
Recommendation
The proposed modification to the development consent is recommended for conditional
retrospective approval as subject to conditions:
It is considered to be consistent with the relevant provisions of SREP (Sydney Harbour
Catchment) 2005, WLEP 1995, Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area DCP 2005
and the Lyne Park Plan of Management;
The consent, as proposed to be modified, is considered to be substantially the same as that
originally granted;
The amenity of the public domain or adjoining properties will not be adversely affected to
such an extent that refusal is justified; and
Retrospective consent for the unauthorised use is facilitated by the provisions of s96 and
s109A (1) (b) of the Environment Planning and Assessment Act.
LOCALITY PLAN
Area currently leased by the
Woollahra Sailing Club from
Crown Lands
(approx.. 3630 m2)
North
Locality
Plan
2. DESCRIPTION OF THE ORIGINALLY APPROVED PROPOSAL
DA 282/1979 for a new 8.4 m high clubhouse for the Woollahra Sailing Club was granted consent
by the full Council on 25 May 1981. Condition 6 of the consent states:
6. The rigging of boats being restricted to that area formerly leased by the Woollahra Sailing
Club.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
3
3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION
The deletion of Condition 6 of the development consent to permit the rigging and unrigging of
sailing boats beyond the area currently leased by the Woollahra Sailing Club onto adjoining
northern and eastern Council managed sections of Lyne Park totalling approximately 1530 m2 of
additional land area; an increase of approximately 42%. A plan of the proposed areas is attached as
Annexure 1.
The Woollahra Sailing Club has been using the adjoining northern and eastern sections of the
Council trust managed, publicly accessible portion of Lyne Park for the rigging and unrigging of
sailing boats without authorisation including the manoeuvring and parking of associated vehicles
and trailers.
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND LOCALITY
The Woollahra Sailing Club currently exclusively leases an area of approximately 3630 m2 of the
eastern section of Lyne Park under a Special Lease from Crown Lands which consists of a two-
storey brick clubhouse, four single-storey boat storage structures and open boat storage/rigging
areas. Vehicular access to the site is via Vickery Avenue to the south.
Council trust managed, publicly accessible sections of Lyne Park adjoin the Woollahra Sailing Club
leased area on all sides. On the opposite (southern) side of Vickery Avenue are the Rose Bay Scouts
Club and the Rose Bay RSL Club.
Proposed additional areas
(approx. 1530 m2)
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
4
5. REFERRALS
Council's Team Leader-Open Space & Recreation Planning has provided the following comments
in relation to the proposal:
The Woollahra Sailing Club has a lease with Crown Lands under Special Lease 1980/1 and are a
stated user in the Lyne Park PoM 2003. The applicant seeks the removal of Condition 6 of the
Development Consent dated 26 May 1981 which restricts the rigging of boats by Woollahra Sailing
Club.
Lyne Park is valued for its recreational opportunities including water and land based sports and
open grassed areas where the community can partake in active and passive recreation. Lyne Park is
also a major Sydney Harbour Foreshore area with the Regional Trail 4.2 of the Regional
Recreation Trails Framework (Sydney CBD to Gap Harbour Foreshore) passing through the park
along the foreshore. At the south eastern end of the park the pathway adjoins the Woollahra Sailing
Club and links the park to the Rose Bay shops. Council will be upgrading the pathway which is still
dependent on funding opportunities.
Should the approval be granted to utilise sections of Lyne Park for rigging purposes it should not
open up the opportunity for more intensification of the leased area for storage purposes. The
grassed area inside the Club’s boundary was originally designed for rigging purposes however
with the intensification of storage and the development of the Club this is now not the case.
Furthermore, Council is in the process of upgrading the Lyne Park playground which will extend
into the open space abutting the Woollahra Sailing Club and existing playground. This area is part
of the open space requested by the Woollahra Sailing Club for utilisation for rigging purposes. This
Area currently leased by
the Woollahra Sailing
Club from Crown Lands
(approx.. 3630 m2)
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
5
area will be unavailable for rigging purposes and means that the area requested will be minimised
to the open space left after the playground extension.
Lyne Park Plan of Management
The Lyne Park Plan of Management states that leases and licences can be approved and must be in
compliance with Crown Land objectivities for land dedicated for public recreation. It is necessary
that any new leases or licences are subject to relevant development approvals being granted and
appropriate agreements being entered into between Council and lessees and licensees subject to
Ministers Consent.
Council's Team Leader-Open Space & Recreation Planning considers the proposal to be satisfactory
subject to the following conditions relating to the use of sections of the Council trust managed,
publicly accessible portion of Lyne Park in order to maintain sufficient area for the expansion of the
existing playground, to maintain adequate foreshore access and to physically protect the parkland:
Use of Lyne Park
The Woollahra Sailing Club Club must consider the publics’ general and uninterrupted use of the
park and pathways as a thoroughfare. The Club must at all times keep the pathways clear and free
of boats and infrastructure. Any major events hosted by the Woollahra Sailing Club which would
impact upon Lyne Park, other than the normal rigging/unrigging of sailing boats in the approved
areas, are required to be approved by Council.
The club shall only use the areas of Lyne Park for the rigging/unrigging of sailing boats as
specified by the hatched areas in the diagram below:
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
6
Vehicles in Lyne Park
No vehicles are permitted to enter the Vickery Avenue entry to Lyne Park. All vehicle entry shall be
via the driveway off Vickery Avenue and not through Lyne Park.
Storage of Boats in Lyne Park
Storage of boats within Lyne Park is not permitted unless prior written approval has been obtained
by Council’s Open Space and Trees Department.
Protection of Parkland
Any damage caused to Lyne Park associated with the rigging/unrigging of boats shall be repaired
and made good by the Applicant to Council specification.
21. Council Park Staff
The applicant is required to follow any instruction made by a Council Staff member in relation to
Lyne Park and the approved rigging/unrigging areas.
22. License Agreement
The Applicant must enter into a license agreement with Council to utilise Lyne Park if Development
Consent is granted. An initial one year term would be available as a trial and reviewed thereafter.
The license agreement would outline specific regulations and conditions relating to the utilisation
of Lyne Park by the Woollahra Sailing Club. In this respect, contact should be made with Council’s
Property Officer, Mr Anthony Sheedy on 9391 7019. The Council reserves the right to vary or re-
determine the annual rental payable under the license in accordance with the approved
modifications.
These conditions are implemented via Conditions 17-22 of the recommended modifications to the
consent.
Condition 22, stipulating the permitted rigging/unrigging areas, reduces the proposed total area
from 1530 m2 (a proposed increase of approximately 42%) to approximately 800 m
2 (a
recommended increase of approximately 22%). The areas permitted for the rigging of boats under
this condition maintain the existing public pedestrian access through Lyne Park and to the harbour.
The referral response is attached as Annexure 2).
ASSESSMENT UNDER S96
6.1 S96 (2) Other modifications
As the proposed modification (current unauthorised use) involves significant adverse public access
and vehicle associated damage impacts upon the Council trust managed, publicly accessible portion
of Lyne Park, the subject s96 application is deemed to fall within this category.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
7
6.2 Substantially the same development
The proposed modification to the development consent is the first. The development consent, as
proposed to be modified, is considered to be substantially the same as the originally approved
development.
6.3 Threatened species
It is considered that the rigging of boats on the grassed areas of Lyne Park will not impact adversely
upon any threatened species.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C
The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979 as required by Section 96 (3) of the Act are assessed under the following
headings:
7.1 SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 and Sydney Harbour Foreshores and
Waterways Area DCP 2005
The following provisions of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 are relevant to the proposal:
Clause 22 Public access to, and use of, foreshores and waterways
Clause 22 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 requires Council to consider impacts upon
public pedestrian access along the foreshore and access to the harbour for recreational purposes.
Clause 24 Interrelationship of waterway and foreshore uses
Clause 24 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 requires Council to consider issues of
equitable use of the waterway including use by passive recreation craft, minimising congestion of
traffic along the foreshore and minimising conflict between the various uses along the foreshore.
Clause 25 Foreshore and waterways scenic quality
Clause 25 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 requires Council to consider the visual
impact that a development proposal will have upon Sydney Harbour and adjoining foreshore areas.
Clause 26 Maintenance, protection and enhancement of views
Clause 26 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 requires Council to consider the impact that
a development proposal will have upon available views to and from Sydney Harbour.
Clause 29 Consultation required for certain development applications
Clause 29 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 requires Council to take into consideration
any submission received from the Foreshores and Waterways Planning and Development Advisory
Committee in relation to the proposal.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
8
The Committee considered the matter on 23 September 2011 and recommended that Council take
into consideration the impact of the proposal upon public access to the pedestrian pathway along the
foreshore and all relevant matters under the Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area DCP
2005 (see Annexure 3).
Subject to the above-mentioned Conditions 17-22 recommended by Council's Team Leader-Open
Space & Recreation Planning, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to the above-
mentioned matters for consideration. These recommended conditions will achieve the following
with regard to the public open space section of Lyne Park:
Reduce the proposed area from 1530 m2 (a proposed increase of approximately 42%) to
approximately 800 m2
(a recommended increase of approximately 22%). The areas permitted for
the rigging and unrigging of boats under this condition maintain the existing public pedestrian
access through Lyne Park and to the harbour;
Prevent the entry of vehicles;
Prevent the storage of boats; and
Require any damage to be repaired.
8. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995
8.1 Permissibility of use and objectives of WLEP 1995 and zone (Clause 8(5))
Lyne Park is zoned 6 Open Space-General Recreation. A recreational area is a permissible use
under the zoning. The subject proposal is considered to fall within the definition of recreational
area which includes:
(c) an area used for sporting activities or sporting facilities.
The following objectives of the zone are relevant to the assessment to the proposed modifications:
(a) To identify existing publicly and privately owned land used or capable of being used for
recreational purpose.
(d) Enable development for the purpose of public and private recreation and community facilities
sympathetic to the environmental characteristics of the land and surrounding areas.
(e) To protect the visual and environmental attributes of the foreshores.
Subject to the above-mentioned Conditions 17-22 recommended by Council's Team Leader-Open
Space & Recreation Planning, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.
8.2 Clause 19 Harbour Foreshore Scenic Protection Area
Clause 19 requires Council to consider the visual impact of the proposed modification upon Sydney
Harbour. Subject to the above-mentioned Conditions 17-22 recommended by Council's Team
Leader-Open Space & Recreation Planning, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this
regard.
8.3 Clause 24 Land adjoining public open space
Clause 24 requires Council to consider the impact of the proposed modification upon the amenity of
any adjoining public open space area and whether it is in conflict any plan of management of that
public open space.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
9
The Lyne Park Plan of Management states that leases and licences can be approved and must be in
compliance with Crown Land objectivities for land dedicated for public recreation. It is necessary
that any new leases or licences are subject to relevant development approvals being granted and
appropriate agreements being entered into between Council and lessees and licensees subject to
Ministers Consent.
Subject to the above-mentioned Conditions 17-22 recommended by Council's Team Leader-Open
Space & Recreation Planning, the proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.
8.4 Clause 27 Development in the vicinity of heritage items
Clause 27 of Woollahra LEP 1995 requires Council to take into consideration the impact of a
development proposal upon the heritage significance of any Heritage Item in the vicinity of the
development proposal. The site is in the vicinity of heritage items, being the Norfolk Island Pines
on Vickery Avenue. The proposed modifications will not have any adverse impact on the heritage
significance of the heritage listed trees.
9. Enforcement Policy (Unauthorised Use)
The Woollahra Sailing Club has been using the adjoining northern and eastern sections of the
Council trust managed, publicly accessible portion of Lyne Park for the rigging and unrigging of
sailing boats without authorisation including the manoeuvring and parking of associated vehicles
and trailers.
Council has discretion in deciding whether to take any one or more of the following enforcement
action on the basis of the available evidence and the circumstances of the individual case (there is
photographic evidence of the unauthorised use):
• Take no action;
• Counsel the alleged offender;
• Issue a formal letter of warning;
• Commence criminal proceedings; and
• Commence civil proceedings.
Subject to compliance with the recommended conditions of consent, it is recommended that no
further action be taken in the absence of any significant adverse environmental impact.
With regard to disciplinary action, Part B of the recommendation facilitates the referral of the
matter to Council's Manager-Compliance to take appropriate action under Part 6 of the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Retrospective consent for the unauthorised use is facilitated by the provisions of s109A (1) (b) of
the Environment Planning and Assessment Act which states:
109A Uses unlawfully commenced
(1) The use of a building, work or land which was unlawfully commenced is not rendered lawful
by the occurrence of any subsequent event except:
(a) the commencement of an environmental planning instrument which permits the use
without the necessity for consent under this Act being obtained therefor, or
(b) the granting of development consent to that use.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
10
Further, the Council's solicitors had advised that case law has established that Council is able to
grant retrospective approval to s96 applications for development that has already been carried out if
it is acceptable on merit and is substantially the same as the original development consent. It is
considered that subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the unauthorised use satisfies
both considerations and therefore it is recommended that Council approve the use retrospectively.
10. SUBMISSIONS
The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Advertising and
Notifications DCP. No objections had been received.
11. CONCLUSION
The proposed modification has been assessed under the provisions of s79 C and s96 of the
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 and is considered to be satisfactory, subject to
conditions.
12. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to s96 of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act, 1979
A. THAT Council, as the consent authority, modify development consent to Development
Application 282/1979/2 for a new clubhouse for the Woollahra Sailing Club on land at 9
Vickery Avenue (Lyne Park), Rose Bay, in the following manner:
The deletion of Condition No. 6
addition of the following conditions:
17. Use of Lyne Park
The Woollahra Sailing Club Club must consider the publics’ general and uninterrupted use of
the park and pathways as a thoroughfare. The Club must at all times keep the pathways clear
and free of boats and infrastructure. Any major events hosted by the Woollahra Sailing Club
which would impact upon Lyne Park, other than the normal rigging/unrigging of sailing boats
in the approved areas, are required to be approved by Council.
The club shall only use the areas of Lyne Park for the rigging/unrigging of sailing boats as
specified by the hatched areas in the diagram below:
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
11
18. Vehicles in Lyne Park
No vehicles are permitted to enter the Vickery Avenue entry to Lyne Park. All vehicle entry
shall be via the driveway off Vickery Avenue and not through Lyne Park.
19. Storage of Boats in Lyne Park
Storage of boats within Lyne Park is not permitted unless prior written approval has been
obtained by Council’s Open Space and Trees Department.
20. Protection of Parkland
Any damage caused to Lyne Park associated with the rigging/unrigging of boats shall be
repaired and made good by the Applicant to Council specification.
21. Council Park Staff
The applicant is required to follow any instruction made by a Council Staff member in
relation to Lyne Park and the approved rigging areas.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
12
22. License Agreement
The Applicant must enter into a license agreement with Council to utilise Lyne Park if
Development Consent is granted. An initial one year term would be available as a trial and
reviewed thereafter. The license agreement would outline specific regulations and conditions
relating to the utilisation of Lyne Park by the Woollahra Sailing Club. In this respect, contact
should be made with Council’s Property Officer, Mr Anthony Sheedy on 9391 7019. The
Council reserves the right to vary or re-determine the annual rental payable under the license
in accordance with the approved modifications.
B. THAT this matter be referred to the Manager – Compliance to take appropriate action under
Part 6 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in accordance with Council’s
Enforcement Policy for failure to obtain Council approval prior to the unauthorised use of the
adjacent (to the area leased by the Woollahra Sailing Club from Crown Lands) northern and
eastern sections of the Council Trust managed, publicly accessible portion of Lyne Park for
the rigging of sailing boats and associated manoeuvring and parking of vehicles and trailers.
Mr D Booth Mr N Economou
SENIOR ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER
ADVISINGS
1. Appeal
Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to
contact David Booth, Senior Assessment Officer on (02) 9391 7119.
However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you
are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34
Conference, site hearings and the use of Court Appointed Experts, instead of a full Court
hearing.
This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case
through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all
parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to
agree, in writing, to the Court appointed commissioner having the full authority to completely
determine the matter at the conference.
2. Lyne Park Plan of Management
The Lyne Park Plan of Management states that leases and licences can be approved and must
be in compliance with Crown Land objectivities for land dedicated for public recreation. It is
necessary that any new leases or licences are subject to relevant development approvals being
granted and appropriate agreements being entered into between Council and lessees and
licensees subject to Ministers Consent.
DA 282/1979/2 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
9 Vickery Avenue, Rose Bay 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\R1.docx
13
ANNEXURES
1. Plan of proposed rigging/unrigging areas.
2. Council's Team Leader-Open Space & Recreation Planning’s comments.
3. Foreshores and Waterways Planning and Development Advisory Committee’s comments.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 1
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION ASSESSMENT REPORT
ITEM No. D4
FILE No. DA 845/2008
PROPERTY DETAILS
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, and 12 and 14
Richmond Road, Rose Bay
Lot & DP No.: LOT: 5 SEC: 1 DP: 976493
LOT: 1 SEC: 1 DP: 776799
LOT: 7 SEC:1 DP: 976493
LOT: 89 DP: 1086615
LOT: 2 DP: 776799
Side of Street: South Eastern
Site Area (m²): 2132.6
Zoning: General Business 3(a)
PROPOSAL The adaptive use of No. 751-755 (former car showroom) and No.
757 (former Post Office) New South Head Road for a retail use as a
Woolworths supermarket, and the demolition of the pair of semi-
detached dwellings at No. 12 and No. 14 Richmond Road to
provide off-street car parking for 25 vehicles, with egress for
service vehicles via 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash).
TYPE OF CONSENT:
Local
APPLICANT:
Fabcot Pty Ltd
OWNER:
Lenjade Pty Ltd
DATE LODGED:
19/12/2008 (original)
24/06/2009 (first amendment)
23/08/2010 (second amendment)
26/08/2011 (third amendment)
25/11/2011 (fourth amendment)
AUTHOR: Mrs E Killey
DOES THE APPLICATION INVOLVE A SEPP 1 OBJECTION? YES NO
1. RECOMMENDATION PRECIS
The application is recommended for approval because, subject to conditions, it:
1. is satisfactory with regard to the relevant matters for consideration stipulated under Section 79C
of the EP & A Act 1979 including the provisions of Woollahra LEP 1995 and the Rose Bay
Centre DCP, and
2. will not adversely effect the amenity of adjoining properties and the public domain such that
refusal is justified.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 2
2. PROPOSAL PRECIS
The proposed development consists of the adaptive use of No. 751-755 (former car showroom) and
No. 757 (former Post Office) New South Head Road for a retail use as a Woolworths supermarket,
and the demolition of the pair of semi-detached dwellings at No. 12 and No. 14 Richmond Road to
provide the associated off-street car parking for 25 vehicles, with egress for service vehicles via 759
New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash).
Condition A.1 requires the deferred commencement of the development until a right of
carriageway is created upon the title of 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car wash) benefiting
the subject site.
3. LOCALITY PLAN
Subject
Site
Objectors
North
Locality Plan
4. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL
On 19 December 2008, the original application was lodged, which comprised of the adaptive use of
No. 751-755 (former car show room) and No. 757 (former Post Office) New South Head Road for a
retail use as a Thomas Dux greengrocers, and the demolition of the pair of semi-detached dwellings
at No. 12 and No. 14 Richmond Road to provide the associated off-street car parking for 28
vehicles, with egress for service vehicles via 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash).
167 letters of objections were received.
6 petitions of objection were received containing approximately 3187
signatures.
7 letters of support were received.
No. 12 -14 (proposed
car park).
No. 751-755
(former car
show room).
No. 12 -14
proposed car
park
No. 759 (Crystal
car wash – providing egress
for service
vehicles).
No. 757
(former Post
Office).
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 3
On 24 June 2009, amended plans were received which included the following revisions:
A greater retention of the original fabric of the heritage listed former Post Office.
Modifications to the rear addition.
The provision of an acoustic barrier to the roof top plant equipment.
The retention of the existing entry and steps to the former Post Office.
On 23 August 2010, amended plans were received which included the following revisions:
A change in the proposed tenancy from a Thomas Dux Greengrocer to a Woolworths
supermarket.
Additional deep soil landscaping within the car park area, resulting in the loss of three car
parking spaces (25 car parking spaces retained).
Modifications to the southern corner of the rear addition to reduce the height by 2.3m.
A greater retention of the original fabric of the heritage listed former Post Office. Comprising of:
The retention of the existing roof form.
A greater retention of the south western and south eastern elevations.
The re use of the entry doors.
The retention of the existing floor.
The full or partial retention of the existing window openings.
On 26 August 2011, amended plans were received which included the following revisions:
The provision of acoustic fences to the eastern and western side boundaries of the proposed car
parking area. The acoustic fences comprise of a 1.8m high vertical fence on the boundary with a
canopy extending into the subject site at an angle of 40 degrees to the horizontal (a total height
of 3.1m). The acoustic fences are constructed of a steel frame structure, sound absorbent lining,
vertical colourbond panels and a clear polycarbonate sheet canopy.
Acoustic measures to the loading dock comprising of: rubber impact flooring, 3m high vertical
insulation to the loading dock walls, perforated reinforced foil faced glass wool to the loading
dock ceiling, and an awning to the loading dock entry.
Acoustic measures to the roof top plant comprising of: timber batten panelling and acoustic
treatment to the plant room walls.
On 25 November 2011, amended plans were received which included the following revisions:
The provision of revised acoustic fences to the eastern and western side boundaries of the
proposed car parking area. The acoustic fences comprise of:
Two 1.81m high acoustic fences on the boundary with a canopy extending into the
subject site at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal (a total height of 3.1m).
A 2.11m high acoustic fence adjacent to the boundary with a canopy extending into the
subject site at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal (a total height of 3.4m).
A 2.5m high acoustic fence located on the boundary.
Two 1.8m-2.5m acoustic fences located on the boundary.
The acoustic fences are constructed of a steel frame structure, sound absorbent lining,
and vertical colourbond panels. The canopies are constructed of clear polycarbonate
sheeting.
The enlargement of the area of the roof top plant from approximately 45m2 to 109m
2, an increase
of 64m2. The provision of a timber screen wall to the plant area with an RL of 12.630.
The modification of the disabled car parking space to comply with the relevant Australian
Standard.
It should be noted, that all sets of amended plans were renotified in accordance with Council‘s
Advertising and Notification Development Control Plan.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 4
The amended proposal comprises of:
The adaptive use of No. 751-755 (former car showroom) and No. 757 (former Post Office) New
South Head Road for a retail use as a Woolworths Supermarket.
The connection of the former Post Office and car showroom through the introduction of a
recessed addition which extends to the rear of the existing buildings and incorporates a first floor
rear mezzanine storage area.
The demolition of the pair of semi-detached dwellings at No. 12 and No. 14 Richmond Road to
provide a car park area containing 25 off street car parking spaces, associated landscaping and a
single customer entry and exit point to Richmond Road.
The proposed supermarket would comprise of a trading area containing cashiers, shelving,
refrigeration units, food displays, fruit and vegetable displays, and a back of house area which
includes preparation, loading, service, storage, staff, and plant areas.
The statement of environmental effects states that the proposed supermarket would have a gross
floor area of 1363.5m2. The floor area is broken down as follows:
Trading floor area 812.3m2.
Ground floor back of house area 235.8m2.
First floor mezzanine storage area 144.1m2.
First floor staff area 171.3m2.
The floor area calculations have been verified by Council staff. It is noted that the architectural
plans incorrectly identify the trading floor area as 1025m2.
Associated landscaping.
Associated signage.
The proposed trading hours are 7am to 10pm Monday to Sunday (seven days a week).
All customer vehicle movements (entry and exit) are proposed via Richmond Road.
All service vehicle movements are proposed to enter via Richmond Road and exit through a
shared driveway at Crystal Carwash onto New South Head Road. Condition A.1 requires the
deferred commencement of the development until a right of carriageway is created upon the title
of 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car wash) benefiting the subject site.
The acoustic report, prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011, identifies that the proposed
service deliveries comprise of: Monday to Sunday an average of 8.6 deliveries each day.
The acoustic report, prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011, identifies that the proposed
waste collection would occur between 9am and 3pm. There would be an average of 10.5 waste
collections per week.
In accordance with the advice dated 04 May 2011, prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes on
behalf of the applicant, the maximum size delivery vehicle would be a 8.8m long medium rigid
truck.
A covered loading dock is proposed to the rear of the building.
Acoustic barriers are proposed to the eastern and western side boundaries of the proposed car
park.
5. SUMMARY
Reasons for report Issues Submissions
The DA does not satisfy the criteria for
determination under staff delegation:
The proposal involves construction
works to a Heritage Item.
The proposal has a stated cost of
works which is greater than three
million dollars.
Public interest.
Traffic and parking.
Building envelope.
Retail frontage width.
Deep soil landscaping.
Solar access.
Acoustic.
Signage.
Urban design.
Village and streetscape character.
Heritage impacts.
Objector‘s concerns.
167 letters of objections were
received.
6 petitions of objection were
received containing
approximately 3187 signatures.
7 letters of support were
received.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 5
6. ESTIMATED COST OF WORKS
Council adopted (DCC 6 June 2005) administrative changes for determining DA fees based on the
estimated cost of work. Where the estimated cost of work is greater than $750,000 or where the
applicant‘s estimate is considered to be neither genuine or accurate, the applicant has to provide a
Quantity Surveyor‘s report.
A Quantity Surveyor‘s report was provided with this DA which estimates the cost of the proposed
development at $3,900,000.00.
7. DESCRIPTION OF SITE OF LOCALITY
THE SITE AND LOCALITY
Physical features
The site comprises of the following allotments:
751-755 New South Head Road which comprises of a former car show room.
757 New South Head Road which comprises of the heritage item former Post Office with a
parking area and outbuildings to the rear.
12 and 14 Richmond Road which comprise of a pair of semi-detached dwellings.
759 New South Head Road, which comprises of Crystal Car Wash, would provide egress for
service vehicles.
The site (excluding Crystal Car Wash) has an area of 2132.6m2. The north western frontage to New
South Head Road is a length of approximately 32m. The southern frontage to Richmond Road is a
length of approximately 11.4m.
No. 12 -14 Richmond Road
(proposed car park)
No. 757
(former Post
Office)
No. 751-755
(former car
show room)
No. 759 (Crystal
car wash –
providing egress for service
vehicles only)
11 -19
Newcastle St.
21 Newcastle St Street
23 Newcastle St.
10 Richmond Rd.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 6
Topography
The subject site is relatively flat. The only vegetation is a small lawn area to the front of 12 and 14
Richmond Road. The remainder of the site comprises of buildings, concrete, or bitumen
hardstanding. The site has two vehicular accesses from New South Head Road; one which is
located between the former Post Office and former car show room, and a second which provides
vehicular access into the former car showroom building. There is a further vehicular access point
from Richmond Road.
Existing
buildings and
structures
The site comprises of the following buildings and structures:
751-755 New South Head Road which comprises of a former car show room. The building is a
two storey rendered building with a single storey addition to the rear.
757 New South Head Road, which comprises of the former Post Office, is listed as a heritage
item within the Woollahra Local Environmental Plan (WLEP). The former Post Office is a
single storey brick building with a hipped Marseille tiled roof. There are a number of single
storey outbuildings to the rear of the former Post Office.
12 and 14 Richmond Road are a pair of single storey semi-detached dwellings.
Environment
The subject site is located within a 3(a) General Business zone. The site is surrounded by a mix of
commercial premises, residential flat buildings, and residential dwelling houses.
The adjoining properties to the east consist of:
759 New South Head Road, which is occupied by the Shell service station integrated with the
Crystal Car Wash.
11-19 Newcastle Street, which is occupied by a 4 storey mixed development.
21 Newcastle Street, which is occupied by a 3 storey residential flat building.
23 Newcastle Street, which is occupied by a 3 storey mixed development.
The adjoining properties to the west consist of:
10 Richmond Road, which is occupied by a 2 storey residential flat building.
745-749 New South Head Road, which is occupied by a 3 storey residential flat building.
8. PROPERTY HISTORY
PROPERTY HISTORY
Current use The former use of the subject site comprised of:
A car show room.
A Post Office.
Two residential dwellings.
Egress for service vehicles from the subject supermarket is proposed across Crystal Car Wash
(no. 759 New South Head Road). The car wash approved hours of use are restricted to Monday –
Friday 7.00am to 7.00pm and Weekends and Public Holidays 8.00am to 7.00pm.
Condition A.1 requires the deferred commencement of the development until a right of
carriageway is created upon the title of 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car wash) benefiting
the subject site.
Previous relevant
applications
DA 598/2006 was approved by the Development Control Committee (DCC) on 03 September
2007, for the demolition of the outbuildings to the rear of the former Post Office, and the
demolition of the pair of semi-detached dwellings at No.12-14 Richmond Road, and the use of
this area as a car park. The statement of environmental effects identified that the car park was to
provide interim car parking comprising of 31 spaces to be used by customers of Crystal Car
Wash/Shell service station and the Westpac Bank Building. The proposed car park was proposed
as an interim use of the subject site pending the future re-development of the subject site and
adjoining sites.
Conditions imposed upon the consent included:
C.2 Requiring existing street parking to be retained, adequate sight lines to be provided and the
approval of the Woollahra Traffic Committee to ensure that the entry/exit movements to/from the
carpark via Richmond Road are enforced.
I.4 The hours of use were restricted to Monday –Friday 7.00am to 7.30pm and
Weekends and Public Holidays 8.00am to 7.30pm.
This consent has not been enacted.
Pre-DA None.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 7
Requests for
additional
information
07 January 2009:
Preliminary Acid Sulphate Investigation (Received 18.03.09).
Stormwater Management Plan (Received 18.03. 09).
Flood Study (Received 18.03. 09).
Construction Management Plan (Not required subject to condition).
Landscape Plan (Received 18.03. 09).
31 March 2009:
Further acoustic investigation (Received 27.05.09).
13 May 2009:
Amended plans to address concerns relating to urban design, traffic, heritage,
building envelope and acoustics. (Received 24.06.09).
08 September 2009:
Turning circle diagram (Received 10.09.09).
25 September 2009:
Amended plans to address heritage, acoustic, traffic, landscaping, building envelope
issues (Received 23.08.10).
22 September 2010:
Further acoustic investigation (Received 28.09.10).
22 October 2010:
Further acoustic investigation (Received 30.11.10).
05 January 2011:
Further acoustic investigation (Received 04.02.10).
28 April 2011:
Turning circle diagram for a 8.8m truck (Received 04.05.11).
On street car parking diagram indicating the impact of the proposal upon the car
parking to New South Head Road (Received 04.05.11).
24 May 2011:
Further acoustic investigation (Received 27.05.11).
09 August 2011:
A service delivery schedule (Received 19.08.11).
22 August 2011:
Amended plans to address concerns relating to acoustics. (Received 26.08.11).
30 August 2011:
Further acoustic investigation. (Received 12.10.11).
20 and 23 September 2011:
Traffic and parking detail clarification . (Received 23.09.11).
17 October 2011:
Further acoustic investigation. (Received 17.10.11).
19 and 31 October and 11 November 2011:
Further acoustic investigation. (Received 25.11.11).
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 8
Amended plans/
Replacement
Application
See section 4 above.
Land & Environment
Court appeal
None.
9. REFERRALS
9.1 The following table contains particulars of internal referrals.
INTERNAL REFERRALS
Referral Officer Comment Annexure
Development Engineer
Council's Development Engineer has determined that the proposal is
satisfactory subject to the following conditions: A.1, A.4, A.5, C.2, C.3,
C.4, C.6, C.7, C.13, C.14, C.15, C.16, D.2, D.3, D.4, D.5, D.6, D.8, E.3,
E.7, E.8, E.9, E.10, E.13, E.17, F.3, F.4, F.6, G.1, H.4, H.5, H.6, I.5, and
I.6 .
2
Landscaping Officer
Council's Landscaping Officer has determined that the proposal is
satisfactory subject to the following conditions: A.4, B.5, B.6, B.7, C.3,
C.9, C.12, E.22, E.23, F.2, H.1, H.3, and I.8.
3
Environmental Health
Officer
Council's Environmental Health Officer has determined that the proposal is
satisfactory subject to the conditions recommended by the Council
appointed independent acoustic expert. The following conditions relate to
acoustic mitigation conditions: A.4, B.8, B.9, C.2, C.4, C.14, C.18, C.19,
C.20, C.21, F.6, F.7, F, 8, I.1, I.2, I.3, I.4, I.5, I.13, I.14, I.15, I.16, and,
I.18
The following conditions relate to all other environmental health issues
conditions: A.4, B.3, B.4, C.5, C.17, E.6, E.18, E.19, E.20, E.21, E.25,
F.5, and I.11 .
4
Heritage Officer Council's Heritage Officer has determined that the proposal is satisfactory
subject to the following conditions: B.2, C.2, and E.24.
5
Urban Design Planner Council's Urban Design Planner has determined that the proposal is
satisfactory subject to the following condition: C.2.
6
Fire Safety Officer Council's Fire Safety Officer has determined that the proposal is satisfactory
subject to the following conditions: C.22 and I.10.
7
Advertising and
Signage Officer
Council's advertising and Signage Officer has determined that the proposal
is satisfactory subject to the following conditions: C.2 and I.7.
8
9.2 The following table contains particulars of external referrals.
EXTERNAL REFERRALS
External Referral
Body
Reason for
referral
Comment
Roads and Traffic
Authority
s.138 of the
Roads Act 1993
The RTA stated that:
„no new driveway is provided to New South Head Road. Therefore the
development does not require referral to the RTA as an „integrated
development‟ or concurrence under Section 138 of the Roads Act.
However, the RTA has reviewed the development application and provides
the following advisory comments:
1. It is noted that service vehicles will egress the site via the adjacent car
wash development site. This is not ideal as it creates vehicular conflict
with the adjacent car wash operation. In addition, if the adjacent car
wash is under separate ownership in the future, this exit facility could
be denied. This issue should be addressed to Council satisfaction.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 9
EXTERNAL REFERRALS
External Referral
Body
Reason for
referral
Comment
2. The largest vehicle entering and existing the subject site, as well as
manoeuvrability through the site, shall be in accordance with
AUSTROADS. In this regard, a swept path plan shall be submitted to
Council illustrating compliance with this requirement.
3. Off streetparking shall be designed in accordance with AS2890.1-
2004 and AS 2890.2-2002.
The full referral response is attached as Annexure 9.
The advisory comments have been considered as part of the assessment.
Conditions: A.1, C.14, and C.13 of the recommendation require:
The deferred commencement of the development until a right of
carriageway is created upon the title of 759 New South Head Road
(Crystal Car wash) benefiting the subject site. The right of carriageway
must enable service vehicles to egress the site in accordance with
drawing 1 ‗8.8m Medium Rigid Vehicle Swept Paths‘, dated 02 May
2011, prepared by Colston, Budd, Hunt and Kafes Pty Ltd.
A Transport Delivery Management Plan to be submitted to and
approved in writing by Council.
The off streetparking to be designed in accordance with AS2890.1-
2004 and AS 2890.2-2002.
9.3 Council Commissioned Independent Peer Reviews
Both the applicant and objectors have provided acoustic and traffic reports. These reports reached
conflicting conclusions in relation to the impacts of the proposal.
In response, Council staff commissioned a peer review of: the DA submission including the
accompanying specialist reports, the objectors‘ traffic and acoustic reports, and the Council‘s
internal referral responses. The independent acoustic peer was carried out by Mr Louis Challis of
Challis Consulting Pty Limited. The independent traffic peer review was carried out by Mr Graham
Pinder of Traffix, Traffic and Transport Planners.
Independent Acoustic Peer Review
The independent acoustic peer review, prepared by Mr Challis, concluded that the proposal in its
initial form was unsatisfactory. In response to the concerns raised by Mr Challis, amended
architectural plans and a new acoustic report were submitted on 25 November 2011. Following a
review of the amended plans and new acoustic report, Mr Challis confirmed that the proposal was
satisfactory with regards to acoustic impacts subject to a number of conditions. These conditions
form part of the recommendation. The full independent acoustic peer review responses are attached
as Annexure 10.
Independent Traffic Peer Review
The independent traffic peer review, prepared by Mr Pinder, concluded that the proposal was
satisfactory with regards to traffic and parking impacts subject to a number of conditions. These
conditions form part of the recommendation. The full independent traffic peer review response is
attached as Annexure 11.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 10
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C
The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings:
10. STATE/REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS AND LEGISLATION
10.1 SEPPs
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 (SEPP 55)
Under clause 7 (1) (a) of SEPP 55-Remediation of Land, consideration has been given as to whether
the land is contaminated. A Stage 1 Preliminary Site Investigation provided with DA 598/2006/1
indicated that the land contains contamination and required further consideration under clause 7(1)
(b) and (c) of SEPP 55.
Clause 7(1) (b) and (c) requires that where the land is contaminated, Council must be satisfied that
the land is suitable in its contaminated state or will be suitable after remediation for the purpose for
which the development is proposed. If the land requires remediation Council must be satisfied that
the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.
Council‘s Environmental Health Officer has reviewed the proposal and confirmed that Clause 7 (1)
(a), (b) and (c) of SEPP No. 55 could be addressed by conditions of consent requiring:
An assessment of groundwater quality, and the field investigations and results of the ground
water sampling being forwarded to Woollahra Council prior to the commencement of any
demolition, excavation, or construction works (Condition B.3).
Any new information which comes to light during demolition or construction works in relation
to site contamination being notified to Woollahra Council (Condition E.19).
Any proposed disposal of soil from the site must be tested and classified in accordance with the
provisions of both the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the NSW EPA
Guidelines: Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non-Liquid Wastes
(1999) (Condition E.21).
The principal contractor must maintain water pollution, erosion and sedimentation controls.
(Condition E.25).
Subject to these conditions the proposal is satisfactory with regards to SEPP 55.
State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) (Infrastructure) 2007
Schedule 3 of the Infrastructure SEPP sets out the traffic generating developments which must be
referred to the RTA. The proposed commercial premises has a greater floor area than 1,000m2 and
site vehicle access (for service vehicles exiting the site) is provided from New South Head, which is
a Classified State Road. Accordingly the development has been referred to the NSW Roads and
Traffic Authority (RTA).
The RTA determined that the proposal does not require RTA approval or concurrence as the
proposal does not create a new driveway to New South Head Road. The RTA have provided a
number of advisory comments, which have been considered as part of the assessment. The full RTA
referral response is attached as Annexure 9. The issues raised in the RTA referral response are
addressed by conditions A.1, C.14, and C.13 of this recommendation.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 11
State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 64-Advertising and Signage
Council must not grant development consent to an application to display advertising signage unless
it is satisfied:
a) that the signage is consistent with the objectives of the Policy as set out in clause 3(1)(a), and
b) that the signage the subject of the application satisfies the assessment criteria specified in
Schedule 1.
The objectives of the SEPP are to ensure that signage:
(i) is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, and
(ii) provides effective communication in suitable locations, and
(iii) is of high quality design and finish.
The proposal incorporates the following signage:
New South Head Rd elevation
A flush wall sign, with approximate dimensions of 3500mm x 700mm, located above the
entry doors on the former Post Office building, displaying the word ―Woolworths‖ and the
Woolworths logo.
An awning fascia sign on the former car showroom building, displaying the word
―Woolworths‖ and the Woolworths logo on the outer ends of the awning and each awning
return.
A flush wall sign, with approximate dimensions of 3000mm x 500mm, located on the first
floor facade, displaying the word ―Woolworths‖ and the Woolworths logo.
New graphic inset panels to the windows to the front elevation of the former Post Office
South East elevation
A flush wall sign, with approximate dimensions of 4300mm x 3800mm, located on the rear
wall adjacent to the loading dock, displaying the word ―Woolworths‖ and the Woolworths
logo.
North West elevation
A flush wall sign, with approximate dimensions of 3500mm x 2000mm located on the side
wall (ground floor) of the former car showroom, featuring the Woolworths logo and the
words ―Rose Bay‖.
An under awning sign, with approximate dimensions of 2000mm x 400mm located under
the side entrance to north west elevation, displaying the word ―Woolworths‖ and the
Woolworths logo.
A flush wall sign, with approximate dimensions 1200mm x 1200mm located adjacent to the
rear entrance, featuring the Woolworths logo and the words ―Rose Bay‖.
A flush wall sign to the loading dock, featuring the words ―Loading Dock‖.
The proposal was referred to Council‘s Signage Officer – Michelle Easton who has determined that
the proposal is satisfactory subject to conditions C.2 and I.7 of the recommendation. The full
referral response is attached as Annexure 8.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 12
The relevant assessment criteria specified in Schedule 1 of the SEPP are as follows:
1 Character of the area
is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality
in which it is proposed to be located?
2 Special areas
does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive
areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways,
rural landscapes or residential areas?
Condition C.2, forms part of the recommendation, which requires the deletion of the flush wall
sign and the new graphic inset panels to the windows to the front elevation of the heritage item
former Post Office. Subject to this condition, the proposed signage is compatible with the existing
and desired future character of the locality and the heritage significance of the former Post Office.
3 Views and vistas
does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?
does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?
The subject signage does not obscure or compromise existing private or public views and does not
dominate the skyline.
4 Streetscape, setting or landscape
is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or
landscape?
does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?
does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or
locality?
Subject to condition C.2, the proposed signage would have a satisfactory streetscape outcome.
5 Site and building
is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or
building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?
does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?
does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building,
or both?
Subject to condition C.2, the proposed signage is compatible with the site and subject building.
6 Associated devices and logos with advertisements and advertising structures
have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part
of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 13
The subject signage is considered to be satisfactory in this regard.
7 Illumination
would illumination result in unacceptable glare?
would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?
would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of
accommodation?
can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?
is the illumination subject to a curfew?
Condition I.7 of the recommendation, prohibits the illumination of any signage between 10pm and
7am. Subject to this condition of consent the proposal is satisfactory in relation to illumination.
8 Safety
would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?
would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?
would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring
sightlines from public areas?
The proposed signage is satisfactory in terms of traffic and pedestrian safety.
Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposed signage is consistent with the objectives of
the Policy as set out in clause 3(1)(a), of the State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 64-
Advertising and Signage.
10.2 REPs
SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 and accompanying DCP
The provisions of this instrument and the accompanying DCP for SREP (Sydney Harbour
Catchment) 2005 require Council to consider the visual impact that a development proposal will
have upon Sydney Harbour and adjoining foreshore areas, and the likely impact upon available
views to and from Sydney Harbour.
The proposal will not have any adverse visual impact upon Sydney Harbour and adjoining foreshore
areas, and will not adversely affect views to and from the Harbour. As such, the proposal is
considered to be satisfactory with regard to the provisions of this instrument.
10.3 Section 94 contribution
Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) contains provisions
that allow Council to impose conditions of consent on a development application to require the the
payment of a monetary contribution or both, in order to meet demand for public amenities and
public services the demand for which would be generated by the proposed development. The
Woollahra Section 94 Contributions Plan 2002 applies to the proposal.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 14
Car parking contributions
The proposal provides 25 off street car parking spaces and creates 3 new on street car parking
spaces.
On 23 March 2010, the Parking Development Control Plan 2003 (Parking DCP 2011) came into
force. The Parking DCP 2011 repeals the current car parking plan, the Woollahra Development
Control Plan For Off-Street Car Parking Provision and Servicing Facilities 1995.
The notable difference between the two documents is that the Parking DCP 1995 has a supermarket
car parking generation rate of 4.6 spaces per 100m2 and the Parking DCP 2011 has a car parking
generation rate of 3.5 spaces per 100m2. The car parking requirement under the Parking DCP1995
is 44 car parking spaces, whereas the car parking requirement under the Parking DCP 2011 is 34 car
parking spaces. The proposal provides 25 off street carparking spaces and creates 3 new on street
car parking spaces. This represents a shortfall of 6 car parking spaces under Parking DCP 2011 as
opposed to a shortfall of 16 car parking spaces under the Parking DCP 1995.
It is acknowledged that the savings and transition arrangements of the Parking DCP 2011 (clause
1.6) state that outstanding development applications shall be assessed under the Woollahra
Development Control Plan for Off-Street Car Parking and Servicing Facilities 1995 (Parking DCP
1995). However, the Parking DCP 2011 has undergone extensive public consultation and provides a
review of Council‘s existing parking requirements, and where appropriate, provides amendments to
ensure that Council‘s objectives for car parking are achieved. Given that the Parking DCP 2011
provides up to date policies which reflect Council‘s current objectives, notwithstanding clause 1.6,
it is appropriate to give considerable weight to the provisions contained within the Parking DCP
2011.
Furthermore, the Contributions Plan also provides for a degree of flexibility in levying
contributions. Clause 3.14 of the Contributions Plan states as follows:
The provisions of this Plan are intended to achieve consistent and equitable levying of new
development that generates increased demand for public facilities. Council recognises,
however, that there may be circumstances where payment of the full contribution assessed in
accordance with the provisions of the Plan would not be appropriate because of the
development history of the property or the extent to which a development proposal would
achieve an adopted planning objective. In these circumstances, Council may reduce or waive
the contribution that would otherwise be required.
Under cl 3.14, the Council is authorised to reduce the contribution otherwise specified by the Plan
having regard to the extent to which a development proposal 'would achieve an adopted planning
objective.'
The Parking DCP 2011 sets out an 'adopted planning objective' with respect to the car parking
requirements for developments such as that proposed which differs considerably in relation to this
development compared to that specified by the earlier Parking DCP 1995. Applying cl 3.14 of the
Contributions Plan, Council may reduce the contribution required in respect of the parking deficit as
calculated under the Parking DCP 1995, having regard to the extent to which the proposed
development achieves the 'adopted planning objective' with respect to on-site parking as set out in
the Parking DCP 2011.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 15
Condition C.3 requires a car parking contribution, under Council's Section 94 Contributions Plan
2002, in accordance with the car parking requirements contained within the Parking DCP 2011. The
car parking contribution is $112,560.00, which comprises of 6 car spaces at $18,760/space.
Civic Improvement contribution
A civic improvement contribution under Council's Section 94 Contributions Plan 2002 is required
under Condition C.3. The civic improvement contribution is calculated at $14 per m2 of additional
floor area. With an additional gross floor area of 395.5m2 this equates to $5,537.00
10.4 Other legislation
None relevant.
11. WOOLLAHRA LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1995
11.1 Aims and objectives of the land use zone (Clause 8(5))
The proposed use is permissible under the General Business 3(a) zone.
The objectives of the General Business 3(a) Zone are:
(a) to define the main commercial areas within the Council's area which provide for a wide
range of retail and commercial uses, ancillary light industrial uses, entertainment,
social and recreational uses, tourist accommodation and residential development mixed
with non-residential uses,
(b) to encourage employment generating uses in accessible localities,
(c) to allow for residential development in the form of mixed development so as to
encourage urban consolidation and promote the vitality of business centres, and
(d) to control the physical and functional characteristics of business centres in order to
minimise their impact on neighbouring residential lands.
The following comments are made with regards to the objectives of the General Business 3(a)
Zone:
The proposal would improve the provision of retail uses within the Rose Bay Centre by
providing a new supermarket. Furthermore the proposal would provide up to 20-30 additional
full and part time employment positions.
Some impact upon the residential amenity of the neighbouring residential lands inevitable.
However, subject to conditions, the proposal adequately minimises the impact of the proposed
commercial use upon neighbouring residential lands. This is discussed in greater detail within
the remainder of the report.
11.2 Transitional Zones:
A zone interface occurs between the subject site (zoned 3(a) General Business Zone) and the
properties to the south which front Richmond Road (zoned 2(b) Residential Zone). Consideration
has been given to the planning principle set out in the Seaside Property Developments Pty Ltd v
Wyong Shire Council [2004] NSW LEC 117 (30 March 2004). This states that:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 16
„As a matter of principle, at a zone interface as exists here, any development proposal in one
zone needs to recognise and take into account the form of existing development and/or
development likely to occur in an adjoining different zone. In this case residents living in the
2(b) zone must accept that a higher density and larger scale residential development can
happen in the adjoining 2(c) or 2(d) zones and whilst impacts must be within reason they can
nevertheless occur. Such impacts may well be greater than might be the case if adjacent
development were in and complied with the requirements of the same zone. Conversely any
development of this site must take into account its relationship to the 2(b) zoned lands to the
east, south-east, south and south-west and the likely future character of those lands must be
taken into account. Also in considering the likely future character of development on the other
side of the interface it may be that the development of sites such as this may not be able to
achieve the full potential otherwise indicated by applicable development standards and the
like.
The northern side of Richmond Road is zoned General Business. In accordance with the planning
principle above, the residents living on the southern side of Richmond Road, within the 2(b)
residential zone, must accept that commercial uses are permissible within the subject site. However,
the proposal must take into account the residential zoning to the south and any impacts must be
reasonable. The following comments are made with regards to the zone interface:
The siting and design of the building and ancillary structures ensure that the proposed built
form would not result in any unreasonable visual impacts to the neighbouring properties
located within the residential 2(b) zone.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent which relate to signage, landscaping and
heritage conservation, the proposal would have a satisfactory streetscape outcome.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal would maintain reasonable
acoustic privacy to the neighbouring residential properties. The recommended conditions
require:
- Compliance with the DA Acoustic Assessment, prepared by Aecom, dated 23
November 2011.
- Noise objectives during demolition works.
- The neighbour notification of high noise generating activities during construction.
- The car park to be surfaced to minimise noise.
- The construction of a new footpath link to minimise noise.
- The resurfacing of a section of Richmond Road.
- Barriers must be provided to close the car park outside of trading hours.
- The acoustic barrier to the roof top plant to be of solid construction with no gaps.
- Restrictions to the hours of delivery and size of service vehicles.
- Restrictions to the hours of waste collection.
- Restrictions to the hours of operation.
- Restrictions to the loading dock operating hours.
- The provision of briefing notes to all service vehicle drivers.
- The provision of level adjusting broadband reversing beepers to all Woolworths owned
vehicles.
- The closure of the car park outside of the operating hours.
- The prohibition of large articulated trucks.
- A trolley management plan.
- The certification of the acoustic barriers by a structural and acoustic engineer.
- Restrictions on noise emissions.
- The certification of the mechanical plant by an acoustic engineer.
- The maintenance of a waste collection log.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 17
- The provision of a Noise Management Plan.
- Details of the acoustic mitigation measures.
The issue of acoustics is discussed in greater detail within the ‗visual and acoustic privacy
performance criteria‘ section of the report.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal would maintain an adequate
level of residential amenity to the neighbouring residential properties. This is discussed in
greater detail within the remainder of the report.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent in relation to traffic movements and
parking, the proposal is satisfactory with regards to traffic and parking impacts. The
recommended conditions require:
- The creation of a vehicular access easement across 759 New South Head Road (Crystal
Car wash).
- Compliance with the traffic and parking report and supplementary information prepared
by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes Pty Ltd.
- The prohibition of service vehicles from exiting the site to Richmond Road.
- Service vehicles to be no greater than 8.8m in length.
- Restrictions on the number of heavy vehicles (over 7.5m in length) which access the
site.
- All heavy service vehicles must enter the subject site by turning right into the site from
Richmond Road.
- A management procedure for delivery truck movements, including a member of staff
supervising reversing vehicles.
- Signage and barriers must be located within the site to prevent customers from entering
or exiting via New South Head Road.
- A Transport Delivery Management Plan.
- Compliance with a delivery and waste collection schedule.
- Measures to ensure service and delivery vehicles do not enter the subject site until the
driveway/carpark is clear and safe for the vehicles entry.
- A construction management plan.
- A Section 94 contribution for 6 car parking spaces.
- Detailed plans and specification for the car parking layout.
- A traffic signal system for the car park which indicates when the car park is full.
- The use of the car park must be restricted to customer use.
- The removal of the existing driveways to New South Head Road to create three new on
street car parking spaces.
- Traffic calming measures in Norwich Lane to minimise impact to the surrounding road
network.
- Car park signage.
The issues of traffic and parking are discussed in greater detail within the remainder of the
report.
11.3 The aims and objectives of the WLEP 1995
The following objectives under Clause 2 of the LEP are relevant to the application:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 18
(b) in relation to retailing and commerce:
(ii) to consolidate and improve established centres so that they remain both commercially
attractive and viable,
(iii) to ensure that new development in the commercial centres does not unduly affect the
amenity of adjoining residential areas by virtue of the use, design, bulk and scale of the
development and traffic generation,
(iv) to allow for a diversity of suitable retail uses within the established centres, and
(v) to ensure that consideration is given to providing adequate levels of access when
alterations and additions to existing buildings and new developments for commercial or retail
uses are proposed.
The following comments are made with regards to Clause 2, objective (b) of the LEP:
The proposal promotes the consolidation of the Rose Bay centre by providing an additional retail
premise.
The proposal would maintain a wide variety of retail uses.
The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in terms of providing adequate levels of access. In
this regard, the proposal will provide an external wheelchair accessible ramp, level finished floor
levels and an accessible toilet.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal would not unreasonably impact
on neighbouring residential land as a result of the additional traffic generation in accordance
with clause (iii). This is discussed in greater detail within the remainder of the report.
(d) in relation to traffic and transport:
(i) to encourage the development of a balanced transport system, including the provision of
safe and convenient facilities for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport users and other
road users,
(ii) to implement a rational and efficient distribution of vehicular traffic throughout the area
of Woollahra by establishing a hierarchy of roads to service various transport
functions,
(iii) to ensure the adequate provision of car parking and servicing facilities within
commercial areas,
(iv) to improve the provision of car parking and reduce conflict between resident and visitor
demands for car parking space in residential areas,
(v) to minimise conflict between pedestrians and vehicles,
(vi) to minimise conflict between transport and land use activities,
(vii) to minimise the impact, on adjoining residential areas, of traffic and parking generated
by commercial areas,
(viii) to allow for contributions towards the provision of car parking and traffic management
measures necessitated by any new development,
(ix) to reserve land for the improvement of traffic flow,
(x) to encourage the provision of adequate access for older people and people with a
disability to safe and convenient car parking, footpaths and access to public transport
facilities
The following comments are made with regards to Clause 2, objective (d), of the LEP:
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal is satisfactory with regards to
the provision of car parking.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 19
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the impacts of the additional traffic upon the
amenity of the neighbouring properties will be reasonably mitigated and would not warrant
refusal of the development application.
Whilst it is anticipated that there will be additional traffic volumes in the surrounding road
network, subject to the recommended conditions of consent, this would not significantly impact
upon the surrounding road network.
The issues above are discussed in greater detail within the remainder of the report.
(f) in relation to the landscape:
(i) to protect and enhance the natural landscapes throughout the area of Woollahra,
(ii) to promote the retention of trees and the planting of suitable new trees in appropriate
locations,
(iii) to control or minimise the impact of future development upon natural features such as
significant trees or stands of trees, ridgelings or land within view of any waterway,
(iv) to protect and enhance the environmental quality of the area of Woollahra through the
appropriate management and conservation of the existing pattern of vegetation, and
(v) to protect the native flora and fauna,
The proposal generally accords with Clause 2, objective (f), of the LEP for the following reasons:
There is currently no substantive landscaping within the subject site.
Condition C.12 of the recommendation requires the provision of two new street trees to the New
South Head Road frontage in accordance with Council‘s Rose Bay Centre Public Domain
Improvement plan.
Subject to conditions including a Tree Security Bond and tree protection measures the proposal
would maintain the existing street trees to the Richmond Road frontage.
The proposal incorporates approximately 183.5m2 of deep soil landscaping within the site. This
includes a landscape buffer to the Richmond Road frontage which incorporates screen planting at
street level.
(g) in relation to heritage conservation:
(i) to identify heritage items and heritage conservation areas and to provide measures for
their conservation, protection and enhancement,
(ii) to ensure that new development is undertaken in a manner that is sympathetic to and does
not detract from the heritage significance of heritage items and their settings and of heritage
conservation areas,
(iii) to encourage the restoration or reconstruction of buildings or works which are heritage
items or buildings and works that contribute to the character of heritage conservation areas,
(iv) to enable the adaptation of existing non-residential buildings of heritage significance in a
manner which is compatible and sympathetic with the fabric and character of the building or
works and the use and fabric of neighbouring lands,
(v) to provide for the detailed control of development associated with or in proximity to
heritage items and heritage conservation areas,
(vi) to require, when considered necessary, the consideration of a statement of heritage
significance or a conservation plan before consent is granted for development relating to a
heritage item or development within a heritage conservation area, and
(vii) to protect sites of archaeological significance,
The proposal generally accords with Clause 2, objective (g), of the LEP for the following reasons:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 20
The proposal includes the adaptive re-use and refurbishment of the former Post Office building,
which is identified in the WLEP as a heritage item.
Whilst the proposal will remove the existing internal entry area and sections of the southern and
western elevations these changes are necessary for the supermarket interior to function. The
amended proposal retains the existing building form and a sufficient level of the existing
building fabric to ensure the heritage significance of the Post Office Structure is adequately
retained.
The former Post Office is currently being used as an office for the adjacent car wash. Minimal
maintenance, restoration or improvement works have been carried out to the building since the
relocation of the Post Office use to Dover Road. The proposal ensures the conservation of the
heritage item.
(k) in relation to urban design:
(i) to promote the creation and upkeep of an attractive and comfortable public environment,
(ii) to retain and enhance the existing elements of the physical environment of the area of
Woollahra that, in the opinion of the Council, contribute to the attractive public environment,
(iii) to require that design and siting of new development enhance the attributes of its site and
improve the quality of the public environment, and
(iv) to ensure that consideration is given to providing adequate levels of access, useability
and enjoyment of public facilities and places to all people in the community, including older
people and people with a disability,
The proposal generally accords with Clause 2, objective (k), of the LEP for the following reasons:
The proposal has been amended to retain the form of the two existing buildings on New South
Head Road. These buildings both contribute to the existing physical environment of the area.
The recommended conditions of consent would preserve the existing street trees to Richmond
Road and ensure the provision of two new trees to the New South Head Road frontage, thus
contributing positively to the public environment.
The proposal provides equitable access to the subject building through the provision of
wheelchair access.
(m) in relation to outdoor advertising:
(i) to convey advertisers‟ messages and images while complementing and conforming to both
the buildings on which they are displayed and the character of the locality, and
(ii) to ensure that it does not adversely affect the locality in terms of appearance, size,
illumination or overshadowing or in any other way, and
(iii) to ensure that it does not lead to visual clutter through the proliferation of signs.
The recommended conditions of consent ensure that the proposed advertising accords with the
above objectives.
In conclusion, subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal would uphold the
aims and objectives of WLEP.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 21
11.4 Statutory compliance table
Site Area (2132.6m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies
Overall Height (metres)
Former Post Office 7.7m (ridge) 7.7m (ridge) 12m YES
Former Car Showroom
8.3m (parapet)
11.8m (flag staff)
8.3m (parapet)
11.8m (flag staff)
12m
12m
YES
YES
Rear Addition
N/A
3.8m-8m
12m
YES
Dwellings (to be demolished) 6.2m
1.8m-3.4m
(acoustic barriers)
12m YES
Floor Space Ratio (m²) <4265.2m
2
(2:1)
1363.5m2
(0.64:1)
4265.2m2
(2:1) YES
11.5 Height
The overall height of the proposed alterations and additions (the parapet height) is 8.3m. This is
3.7m below the 12m maximum height control which applies to the site. It is noted that the proposed
flag staff to New South Head Road has a height of 11.8m which also fully accords with the 12m
maximum height control. The proposal satisfies the height objectives stipulated under Clause 12AA
of WLEP 1995.
11.6 Floor space ratio
Clause 11 of WLEP 1995 stipulates that a building shall not be erected on land to which this plan
applies if the floor space ratio would exceed the ratio indicated for that land on the density map, in
the case of two floor space ratios being indicated for that land on the density map, the greater of the
two ratios is applicable, which is 2:1 (4265.2m2).
The proposed development has a floor space ratio of 0.64:1 or 1363.5m2, which would fully comply
with the maximum floor space ratio and satisfy the objectives of the floor space ratio requirements
under Clause 11AA of WLEP 1995.
It is noted that the statement of environmental effects states that floor area is broken down as
follows:
Trading floor area 812.3m2.
Non trading floor area 551.2m2:
- Ground floor back of house area 235.8m2.
- First floor mezzanine storage area 144.1m2.
- Staff area 171.3m2.
The floor area calculations have been verified by Council staff. It is noted that the architectural
plans incorrectly identify the trading floor area as 1025m2.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 22
11.7 Other special clauses/development standards
Clause 18 Excavation: The provisions of Clause 18 require Council, when considering a
development application involving excavation, to have regard to how that excavation may
temporarily or permanently affect:
(a) the amenity of the neighbourhood by way of noise, vibration, dust or other similar
circumstances related to the excavation process
(b) public safety
(c) vehicle and pedestrian movements
(d) the heritage significance of any heritage item that may be affected by the proposed excavation
and its setting
(e) natural landforms and vegetation and
(f) natural water run-off patterns
The extent of excavation associated with the proposal includes the following:
Minor excavations for footings and services.
Minor excavations for the landscaping works including the provision of the car parking and
landscaping areas.
Having regard to the above-mentioned heads of consideration, the following comments are made in
relation to the impact of the proposed excavation upon the local environment:
(a) the amenity of the neighbourhood by way of noise, vibration, dust or other similar
circumstances related to the excavation process
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the amenity of the adjoining residential
properties would be maintained. Specifically conditions C.8, C.10, C.11, D.2, D.3, D.4, D.8, E.8,
E.9, and E.16 require: soil and water management plan, certification of the structural adequacy of
the existing buildings, engineering details, dilapidation reports for existing buildings, dilapidation
reports for public infrastructure, provisions for adjoining buildings located on loose foundations,
erosion and sediment control, maintenance of environmental controls, erosion and sediment
controls maintenance, and dust mitigation measures.
(b) public safety
(c) vehicle and pedestrian movements
Issues relating to public safety and pedestrian movements during the excavation phase are inter-
related and are addressed by the following conditions: D.5, D.6, E.3 and E.7, these require: a
construction management plan, security fencing, compliance with the Construction Management
Plan, and the maintenance of vehicular and pedestrian safety and access.
(d) the heritage significance of any heritage item that may be affected by the proposed excavation
and its setting
Subject to the conditions of consent outlined above, the proposal would not unreasonably impact
upon the heritage significance of the subject heritage item. Furthermore, any other heritage items in
the vicinity of the site are located beyond the zone of influence associated with the proposed
excavation and will not be adversely affected in this instance.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 23
(e) natural landforms and vegetation
The proposal involves only minor excavation works for the proposed footings and services. This
ensures that the site‘s topography is adequately maintained.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent the proposal is satisfactory with regards to trees
and landscaping.
(f) natural water run-off patterns
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, which require: the discharge of stormwater from
a single pipe outlet to a new pit and pipe system in New South Head Road, a stormwater
management plan, flood protection measures, compliance with Council‘s specifications for
drainage, commissioning and certification of flood protection measures and stormwater drainage
systems, and the commissioning and certification of public infrastructure works, the proposal is
satisfactory with regards to stormwater and runoff.
Clause 19 HFSPA: The proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 19(2).
Clause 25 Water, wastewater and stormwater: Clause 25(1) and (2) of WLEP 1995 requires
council to consider the provisions of adequate stormwater drainage and the provisions of adequate
water and sewage services.
Subject to the recommended conditions of consent, the proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause
25(1) and (2).
Clause 25D Acid Sulfate Soils:
Council‘s Environmental Health Officer concludes that the preliminary acid sulfate soils assessment
lodged by the applicant is acceptable. The assessment concludes that an acid sulfate soils
management plan is not required. Therefore, consent for the proposed works under clause 25D is
not required. However, it is recommended that conditions requiring: an assessment of the ground
water quality prior to any demolition or construction works, Council notification if any new
information comes to light, and requirements for the disposal of soil from the site, form part of the
recommendation. These form Conditions A.4, B.4, and E.20. Subject to these conditions, the
proposal is satisfactory with regards to Clause 25D.
Clauses 26-33 Heritage and conservation area provisions:
No. 757 New South Head Road (the former Post Office) is listed as a heritage item within the
WLEP 1995.
A heritage survey of the former Post Office was carried out by the National Estate Grants Program
in 1992. Due to the date of the existing survey, Council‘s former Strategic Heritage Officer - Susan
O‘Neil inspected the interior and exterior of the Post Office and prepared a detailed heritage
inventory. This identified the significance of the interior and exterior of the building fabric of the
former Post Office and ancillary buildings.
The recommendations of the heritage inventory stated:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 24
Adaptive re-use of the former Rose Bay Post Office should retain the principal building form.
The rear toilet and store additions and side phone booth additions could be removed. The
building could be adapted internally and linked, in a pavilion type arrangement, to adjacent
new structures. The adaptive re-use of this building should retain its external integrity, the
vestibule entry open to the street and the panelled joinery doors with etched glass in their
existing location. The damaged window joinery should be conserved or reinstated internally
and the external grilles removed and damaged brickwork restored and repointed. The
spalling sandstone should be conserved and the moulded rosettes reinstated. The following
intrusive elements should be removed or replaced; the rockery garden at the street front and
replaced with a garden in keeping with the style of the building or similar to the original
landscaping and the tiles in the vestibule and on the front stairs.
The original proposal was referred to Council‘s Heritage Officer. It was concluded that the amount
of demolition and the incompatible form and scale of the proposed addition did not represent a
successful re-use of the former Post Office building. Specifically the proposal would:
Result in an unacceptable loss of fabric.
Remove the principal building form.
Remove the original entry steps.
In response, the applicant submitted the first set of amendments to the proposal which:
Retained a greater extent of the building form.
Provided a recessed area between the former Post Office and former car show room to provide a
greater understanding of the original building forms.
Retained the original entry steps.
The revised proposal was referred to Council‘s Heritage Officer who concluded that the revisions
failed to address all of the heritage concerns. Specifically, the following revisions were required:
A greater retention of the south western and south eastern elevations to enable a sense of the
former Post Office internally. This could include the reuse of the existing window openings.
The retention of the original roof form.
In response, the applicant submitted a second set of amendments to the proposal which included:
The retention of the existing roof form.
A greater retention of the south western and south eastern elevations through the reuse of the
existing window openings.
The reuse of the entry doors.
The retention of the existing floor.
Below are internal and external photomontages of the second revision to the proposal.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 25
The second revision to the proposal was referred to Council‘s Heritage Officer – Sara Reilly. The
comments are summarised as follows:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 26
The proposal has been amended and improved substantially by the adoption of Council‘s
heritage recommendations.
There is still some serious loss of heritage significance, as the entry area which would be of high
significance, along with the existing postal boxes would be removed. Windows to the south and
west will be mostly removed, with two windows to the west being removed, and two windows
plus a door to the south being removed. These changes are necessary for the supermarket interior
to function.
All the existing window arches to the south and west are being retained over the new steel
openings, which will allow some interpretation of the former openings.
The retention of the former car showroom building is positive, as it contributes its solid masonry
façade and commercial character to the street front.
Subject to a number of conditions the application complies with the relevant provisions of the
statutory and policy documents associated with the site.
Council‘s Heritage Officer recommended the following conditions of consent:
- There is some concern over the height of the timber batten screen to the plant area.
However, this is set back from the street and may not be highly visible. The timber
batten screen serves as a visual device to mediate between the two-storey section at the
rear and the single-storey Post Office building. It would be desirable to reduce the
height of the batten screen by approximately 500mm, which is approximately half way
in height between the rear service area and the metal clad shop area.
- All ceilings and cornices to the Post Office are to be retained.
- All brick arches and round head openings to the existing windows of the south and west
elevations are to be retained. Infill material of round arch window frames is to be in new
timber.
- Skirtings are to be retained where existing, and to be reconstructed and reinstated to
the remainder of original walling being retained in the Post Office.
- More ephemeral elements of the former Post Office should be retained. The black
railings to the front steps are to be retained, along with the former Post Office white
lettering ‗Rose Bay 2029‘ to the façade.
- The sandstone base is to be properly conserved and repaired by a heritage conservation
specialist.
- Sandstone is not to be painted.
- The brickwork where required is to be repaired. Unsympathetic repairs are to be
reversed and properly repaired (such as the damage to the brickwork and mortar
associated with the addition of the security bars to the windows).
- The timber arch windows are to be conserved and continue to be painted white.
- The security bars to the windows are to be removed, and the associated brickwork
repaired.
- The timber eaves soffits are to be repaired and repainted to match existing colour.
- The yellow metal plates to the corners of the building are to be removed, and the
brickwork repaired as necessary.
The fourth revision to the proposal was referred to Council‘s Heritage Officer – Sara Reilly. The
comments are summarised as follows:
The increase in height of the batten acoustic screens is unfortunate, and as previously
recommended the height should be reduced not increased, in order to reduce visual
dominance over the one-storey heritage item.
The heritage item of the former Post Office is being for the most part conserved, as the
principal building form of the Post Office is being generally retained where visible from the
streetscape.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 27
The conditions set out in this referral require retention, conservation and repair of many
significant elements of the Post Office principal building.
The new development allows for a new and ongoing use for the Post Office principal
building, which is suffering from what appears to be years of neglect. The exterior is in need
of maintenance and the interior is cluttered with intrusive elements. There are repairs and
general maintenance required.
The proposal by Woolworths allows the building to be partially conserved and adaptively
reused, which is generally positive.
The larger scale elements of the proposed development are set back from the single-storey
Post Office, and a reduction in height of the acoustic battens is recommended if possible to
reduce the scale of the development behind in relation to the retained Post Office building.
The contemporary materials for the rear buildings are acceptable.
The former Post Office building should not have signage installed, especially where ample
opportunities exist elsewhere on the site to advertise the new business.
A statement of heritage impact was submitted as part of the development, and was found to be
acceptable.
Council‘s Heritage Officer recommended the inclusion of the conditions above plus the
following additional
- New graphic panels are not to be applied to existing windows of the heritage item.
- Signage as proposed is not to be installed above the sandstone-framed former entry door.
- The Post Office principal building form is to retain its current colour scheme, that is:
unpainted facebrick where existing is to remain unpainted
stone is to remain unpainted
timber joinery is to remain white
external ‗cornice‘ and external ‗skirting‘ are to remain existing white/off-white
colour
eaves soffits are to remain existing white/off-white colour
where currently external brickwork becomes internal it is to remain unpainted.
Council‘s Heritage Officers‘ full referral responses are attached as Annexure 5.
The comments provided by Council‘s Heritage Officer are concurred with, with the exception of the
requirement to reduce the height of the acoustic screen to the plant area. The reduction to the height
of the acoustic screen is not supported for the following reasons:
The screen would help to ensure that the plant area does not unreasonably impact upon the
acoustic privacy of the neighbouring properties.
The screen is setback by approximately 19m from the front boundary of the subject site and
would therefore not unreasonably impact upon the streetscape or the prominence of the
former Post Office heritage item
The recommended conditions form conditions B.2, C.2 and E.24 of the recommendation. Subject
to these conditions the proposal is acceptable in terms of Clause 26-33 of the WLEP.
12. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS
12.1 Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Competition) 2010
Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Competition) 2010 applies.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 28
Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) of the Act requires that in determining a development application, a consent
authority is to take into consideration any draft environmental planning instrument "EPI" that is
or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent
authority.
Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Competition) 2010 ("the proposed SEPP") was publicly
exhibited from 27 July 2010 to 26 August 2010. In considering how much weight should be placed
upon an exhibited draft environmental planning instrument under section 79C of the Act one must
assess how likely it is that the draft EPI will commence, in what form it is likely to commence and
consider what effect the instrument would have if applied.
At the time of writing the report no information was available regarding whether or not the
proposed SEPP will commence and in what form.
The draft SEPP proposes:
o The commercial viability of a proposed development may not be taken into consideration
by a consent authority, usually the local council, when determining development
applications;
o The likely impact of a proposed development on the commercial viability of other
individual businesses may also not be considered unless the proposed development is
likely to have an overall adverse impact on the extent and adequacy of local community
services and facilities, taking into account those to be provided by the proposed
development itself; and
o Any restrictions in local planning instruments on the number of a particular type of retail
store in an area, or the distance between stores of the same type, will have no effect.
Source: NSW media release ‗Proposed planning changes to support competition‘, dated 27 July 2010.
If the instrument were applied, it is considered that the effect would not be significant for the
following reasons:
Whilst s79C (1) (b) (b) of the EP & A Act 1979, requires the evaluation of the proposal in terms
of the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural
and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality, existing case law
clearly states that competition between a proposed use of a building and other businesses within
the same locality is not a matter for consideration under the EP & A Act 1979.
Carrying out a recent inspection of Rose Bay centre revealed that the centre provides a wide
variety of retail and business uses. These include Motor Vehicle Services (fuel retailing,
automotive services, etc), Commercial retail (banking, real estate, etc), Personal services
(hairdressers, laundrettes, cafes, restaurants, etc) Personal and Household Goods retail (clothing,
stationary, pharmaceuticals, etc) and food retailing (food shops, takeaways, etc). Many of the
services and facilities which are provided by the existing retail and business outlets would not be
provided by the proposed supermarket. This will ensure that the proposal would not have an
overall adverse impact on the extent and adequacy of local community services and facilities.
Council‘s local planning instruments do not contain any restrictions relating to the number of a
particular type of retail store in an area, or the distance between stores of the same type.
The issue of competition is addressed in greater detail within section 16.2 of the report.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 29
Given the above, it is considered that the application of draft State Environmental Planning Policy
(competition) would not alter the assessment of the proposal when compared to an assessment of
the proposal under the current policy.
13. ROSE BAY URBAN DESIGN STUDY
The Rose Bay Urban Design Study 1999 covered a wide range of issues which are pertinent to Rose
Bay such as topography, public facilities, landscape, pedestrian amenity, parking, traffic, social and
economic context, drainage, heritage and built form. Information from the study was consolidated
to form guidelines for the Rose Bay Centre Development Control Plan and the Rose Bay Centre
Public Domain Improvements Plan.
The relevant findings of the Urban Design Study are outlined below:
Parking Summary
There is a perceived shortfall in public parking on a demand basis although the actual
quantity of public parking satisfies Council‟s restrictive parking code rates. The Centre lacks
improved circulation of parking areas and regular enforcement of time restricted spaces.
The study identified that Rose Bay has capacity for further retail capacity.
It is recommended that 80% to 100% of the retail parking demand should be made by an off
site contribution.
Retail Supply
Rose Bay has 0.06m2 of supermarket floor space per capita which is well below the Sydney
Metropolitan average of 0.22-0.3m2 per capita. This would indicate a desire for operators to
increase floor space provision but the high cost of land is most likely the factor limiting this
achievement.
Potential Development Sites
No. 751-751, the former car showroom, which forms part of the subject, site was identified in the
study as an underdeveloped site with potential for amalgamation.
It is acknowledged that the Rose Bay Urban Design Study was undertaken in 1999. The date of the
study has been taken into consideration.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 30
14. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS
14.1 Compliance table - Rose Bay Centre DCP (RB DCP)
Site Area (2132.6m²) Existing Proposed Control Complies
Max depth of Occupiable Area 40.2m 40.2m 27.6m NO*
Building Articulation Depth (metres)
Front: <2.4m
Rear: <1.2m
Front: Existing
façade retained
<2.4m
Rear: <1.2m
Front: 2.4m
Rear: 1.2m
NO*
NO
No. 751-755 Building Line 0m 0m 0m YES
No.
751-755
Setback
(metres)
Side (north east and south
west) 0m 0m 0m YES
Rear (south east) 0m 0m 12.4m NO*
Maximum Retail Frontage per
Tenancy (metres)
16m
(car showroom)
12m
(Post Office)
30.8m 15m NO*
Maximum Internal Plan Depth
(Above Ground Level) (metres) 10.7m (front)
N/A
10.7m (front)
6.9m (rear) 12m
YES
NO*
Continuous Awning Not provided Provided Required YES
Minimum Awning Soffit Height
(metres) N/A >3.2m 3.2m YES
Maximum Ground Floor Street
Frontage (Site Amalgamation)
(metres)
N/A 32m 40m
YES
Maximum Area of Advertising
Signage (m²)
<0.5m² for each
1m of Building
Width at Street
Frontage
<0.5m² for each 1m
of Building Width
at Street Frontage
0.5m² for each 1m of
Building Width at
Street Frontage YES
Minimum Soft Landscaping Area
(%)(m²) <183.5m
2 183.5m
2
50% of Required
Landscaped Area
(343m2)
NO*
Location of Car Parking Structures
Behind Front
Building
Alignment
Behind Front
Building Alignment
Incorporated Within
the Building and
Behind Front Building
Alignment
YES
Solar Access to Habitable Rooms
and Private Open Space of Adjoining
Properties (Hours in Mid-Winter)
4 Hours Between
9am and 3pm in
Mid Winter
<4 Hours Between
9am and 3pm in
Mid Winter
4 Hours Between 9am
and 3pm in Mid Winter NO
Minimum % of Required Car
Parking to be provided On Site
(Commercial Development)
N/A 25
20%
(9 Spaces under the
1995 Car parking DCP) YES
N/A 25
20%
(7 Spaces under the
2011 Car parking DCP) YES
Maximum Driveway Width (metres) <6.5 <6.5 6.5 YES
*Existing non-compliance
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 31
Urban structure – objectives
The subject site is located within a transition area at the edge of the core area of the Rose Bay
centre. The RB DCP states that:
The Transition Areas lie outside the Core in the vicinity of the recreational areas and
residential zones, and are an important buffer to these areas. They do not contain the same
level of retail activity as the Core but provide residential and commercial uses. They are
generally characterised by less continuous building frontage and a stronger landscape
presence. The Transition Areas should provide a gradation in development intensity from the
Core to the residential and recreational areas.
The proposed level of retail activity is considered appropriate for this location for the following
reasons:
The level of commercial activity is similar to a number of existing commercial uses within the
transition areas.
Specific consideration has been given to the recent Land and Environment Court approval (Parisi
v Woollahra Council [2008] NSWLEC 1269) for the Parisi‘s greengrocers in Dover Road, Rose
Bay. The Parisi‘s development has a greater gross floor area than the current proposal, and like
the subject site, the Parisi‘s development is also located within a transition zone within the Rose
Bay centre. The scale of the proposed retail establishment is not considered to be inappropriate
given the surrounding context.
The previous uses of the existing buildings, as a former car showroom and a Post Office, would
have resulted in customer and delivery movements to and from the subject site.
The proposal provides a stronger landscape presence than currently exists at the subject site.
The proposal largely provides the existing building frontage which retains the ‗small shop‘
character of the Centre.
The proposed development has been designed to be well below the height and FSR standards
which apply to the subject site. The proposal presents an acceptable intensity of development for
the subject site.
The relevant objectives for the Rose Bay Centre include:
3.2.1 To retain and enhance the urban village quality of Rose Bay
(i) To encourage contiguous ground floor retail frontage to ensure liveliness of the centre;
(ii) To limit the width of street frontage of individual shops to preserve the „small shop‟
characterof the Centre;
(iii) To promote a coherent building scale and high quality development;
(iv) To retain and improve the pedestrian environment by encouraging through block
pedestrian connections at nominated locations, and requiring continuous awnings in
nominated areas;
(v) To employ Traffic and Parking Strategies to improve traffic and parking management in
the Centre and reduce vehicular and pedestrian conflicts;
(vi) To enhance the Public Domain of Rose Bay Centre by applying a Co-ordinated Public
Domain Improvement Plan and Streetscape Design Manual; and,
(vii) To encourage the provision of community services and facilities as part of site
redevelopments.
With regards to the objectives of section 3.2.1the following comments are made:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 32
The removal of the existing driveway located between the former car show room and the former
Post Office would provide additional on street car parking spaces to New South Head Road.
Furthermore, the removal of the driveway would improve the quality of the public domain.
The proposal involves the re-adaptive reuse of the existing buildings within the site. Whilst this
involves the connection of the two buildings to New South Head Road, the individual form of
these buildings will be retained. This ensures the preservation of the ‗small shop‘ character of the
Centre.
The proposal incorporates a through block pedestrian connection during opening hours.
Subject to conditions, the traffic generated by the proposal would be appropriately managed to
ensure that the proposal would not unacceptably impact upon the surrounding road network or
detrimentally impact upon road safety.
The proposal represents an appropriate response to the subject site and surrounding area in terms
of building scale and design.
Subject to condition, the proposal would contribute positively to the character of the public
domain through the provision of new street trees to New South Head Road.
3.2.4 To improve the Rose Bay Centre’s Public Domain
(i) Implement a Co-ordinated Public Domain Improvement Program using the Streetscape
Design Manual to enhance the Public Domain of Rose Bay;
(ii) To improve pedestrian amenity throughout the Centre; and,
(iii) To retain the important role that public transport plays in the Rose Bay Centre.
With regards to the objectives of section 3.2.4 the following comments are made:
Whilst it is currently physically possible to walk from New South Head Road to Richmond Road
via the site, the access to Richmond Road is across the shared driveway to the residential
dwellings at 12 and 14 Richmond Road, where no public right of way appears to exist.
The proposal would improve pedestrian amenity throughout the centre by incorporating a
through block pedestrian connection through the supermarket during opening hours.
Subject to condition, the proposal would contribute positively to the character of the public
domain through the provision of new street trees to New South Head Road.
3.2.5 To foster the diverse mix of uses in the Rose Bay Centre
(i) To retain and enhance the combination of retail, commercial, public and residential
uses that characterise Rose Bay
The proposal would improve the provision of retail uses within the Rose Bay Centre by providing a
new supermarket.
3.2.6 To conserve and enhance the visual & environmental amenity of all buildings and
places of heritage significance in the Centre
(i) Conserve properties which are listed as heritage items in Woollahra LEP 1995 (the
LEP);
(ii) To adopt the heritage controls contained in the LEP; and
(iii) To ensure that alterations and additions to heritage items are compatible in scale, form
and material with the heritage items and adjoining developments
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 33
Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal would adequately conserve and enhance the
heritage significance of the subject heritage item and Rose Bay centre.
3.2.7 To improve traffic & parking management in the Centre & reduce vehicle and pedestrian
conflicts
(i) To implement comprehensive Traffic and Parking Strategies;
(ii) To optimise efficiency of use of existing parking areas and on street spaces; and,
(iii) To better match the traffic volumes with the function and character of each street.
The following comments are made with regards to the objectives set out under section 3.2.7:
Condition C.3 of the recommendation requires a S94 parking contribution of $112,560.00,
which comprises of a contribution for 6 car spaces at $18,760/space. The S94 contribution
combined with the proposed 25 off street car parking spaces, and the creation of three new on
street car parking spaces to New South Head Road, ensures that adequate provision has been
made for parking.This issue is discussed in greater detail within the remainder of the report.
To ensure a comprehensive traffic and parking strategy, conditions A.1, C.14, and I.5 of the
recommendation require:
- The creation of a vehicular access easement across 759 New South Head Road
(Crystal Car wash).
- The prohibition of service vehicles from exiting the site from Richmond Road.
- Service vehicles to be a maximum of 8.8m in length.
- Restrictions on the number of heavy vehicles (over 7.5m in length) which access
the site.
- A Transport Delivery Management Plan.
- The provision of appropriate signage relating to access and parking.
Condition C.4 requires: traffic calming measures to be implemented in Norwich Lane. This
comprises of a Watts profile speed hump and the provision of a footpath to narrow the width of
Norwich Lane. These works are subject to neighbour consultation and approval from the Local
Traffic Committee. The traffic generated from the proposal would not unacceptably impact upon
the surrounding road network or significantly impact upon road safety. The proposal generally
accord with Objective 3.2.7, part (iii).
3.3.9. To enhance the diverse character of streets in the Rose Bay Centre
(i) To carry out Public Domain Improvements to preserve and enhance the unique
character of the individual streets in the Centre; and,
(ii) Formulate specific design criteria for both public and private domain to allow for and
enhance the character of individual streets.
The proposal would:
Subject to condition, provide two additional street trees to the New South Head Road frontage in
accordance with the provisions of the Rose Bay Public Domain Improvements Plan.
In conclusion, the proposal generally accords with the urban structure objectives for the Rose Bay
Centre.
Street character strategies
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 34
New South Head Road Transition area – Section 4.2
The front section of the site (fronting New South Head Road) is identified as being part of the
―Transition area” under the Rose Bay Centre DCP. The strategy for the Transition Area is to create
a transition between the Rose Bay Centre core and the recreational / landscape area towards Lyne
Park, with a portion of street defined by street trees and a discontinuous wall of buildings on the
harbour side.
The rear section of the site is identified as part of the Richmond Road Street Character. The strategy
for Richmond Road is to retain the unique character of this predominantly residential street on the
periphery of the Centre, defined by mature street trees and a discontinuous wall of buildings.
Built form – Urban design envelopes – Section 5.8
The built form section of the RB DCP contains control drawings which show building envelopes for
every site in the Rose Bay Centre. The envelopes have been tailored to each site, taking into
consideration its particular characteristics.
Control Drawing 5 in section 5.8 applies to the subject site. In summary:
o No envelope controls apply to the former Post Office site as it comprises of a Heritage Item.
o The controls which apply to the remainder of the subject site aim to ensure that development
relates successfully to the character of the street, is appropriate in size, provides sufficient deep
soil landscaping and does not adversely impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties.
The following sections assess the proposal against the urban design envelope controls identified in
Control Drawing 5.
Use – Section 6.2
Relevant design principles:
Encourage the maintenance of retail and commercial uses at street level in the Rose Bay
Centre.
Discourage large scale retail establishments, by limiting the frontage of individual retail
tenancies.
Encourage activities that achieve an appropriate level of environmental performance, such as
appropriate noise levels.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
Design for a mix of uses within buildings.
Design durable and adaptable buildings, spaces and places.
Design for retail, commercial and community uses at ground floor.
The maximum retail frontage for individual tenancies is 15 metres.
The maximum ground floor street frontage for site amalgamations is 40 metres.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 35
The ground floor street frontage of the amalgamated site (the front boundary width) is
approximately 32m and comprises of a retail use which accords with the street frontage guidelines.
However, the proposal comprises of an individual tenancy with a retail frontage of 30.8m. This is
greater than the 15 metre maximum retail frontage control which is applicable to individual
tenancies.
Development Control Plan design principles and guidelines are not prohibitive, and whilst the
proposal fails to accord with the guidelines for the width of individual retail tenancies, the proposal
upholds the wider objectives of the RB DCP for the following reasons:
Village character:
The proposal comprises of a high quality architectural design which maintains the form of the
existing buildings to the New South Head Road frontage. This ensures the retention of the ‗small
shop‘ character and enhances the village atmosphere of the Rose Bay centre. Subject to conditions,
the proposal is supported by Council‘s Urban Design Officer.
Retail character and use:
Linking the two properties to New South Head Road; removing the existing vehicular access to
New South Head; and the provision of a new awning to the New South Head Road frontage, would
improve the retail character of this street edge. In addition, the removal of the driveway would
provide additional on street car parking.
Heritage: Subject to conditions, the proposal would adequately conserve the former Post Office
heritage item, and is supported by Council‘s Heritage Officer.
The scale of the proposed retail use:
The proposal is substantially less than the relevant LEP floor space ratio standard. The
proposal provides a floor space ratio of 0.64:1 or 1363.5m2, which is less than half of the
permissible floor space ratio of 2:1 (4265.2m2).
The proposed development has a floor space ratio of 0.64:1 or 1363.5m2.
Council‘s Rose Bay Urban Design Study 1999 identified that Rose Bay has 0.06m2 of
supermarket floor space per capita which is well below the Sydney Metropolitan average of
0.22-0.3m2 per capita. The proposal would improve the provision of retail uses within the
Rose Bay Centre by providing a new supermarket.
The scale of the proposed supermarket is not considered to be inappropriate:
- The proposal provides a supermarket with a gross floor area of 1363.5m2, which
comprises of a trading floor area of 812.3m2 and a non trading floor area of 551.2m2.
- The following table compares the gross floor area of the proposal with surrounding
retailers within a 3km radius of the subject site. The figures are taken from the original
DA files for each property.
Retailer Approximate
Gross floor area
Approximate
Trading Floor area
Approximate Non
Trading Floor area
Woolworths Supermarket, New South
Head Road, Double Bay
2636m2 1416m
2 1220m
2
Parisi‘s Greengrocers, Dover Road Rose
Bay
1640m2 828m
2 812m
2
Proposed Woolworths Supermarket,
New South Head Road, Rose Bay
1363.5m2 812.3m
2 551.2m
2
Coles Express Supermarket, Old South
Head Road, Rose Bay North
1327m2 Not available Not available
Franklins Supermarket, Dover Road,
Rose Bay
851.7m2 Not available Not available
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 36
- The proposal is considered to represent a small scale supermarket.
- The proposed supermarket is smaller in gross floor area than the recently approved Parisi‘s
greengrocers, in Dover Road, Rose Bay. The Parisi‘s development has a greater gross floor
area than the current proposal, but is located on a long narrow plot and therefore fully accords
with Council‘s 15m maximum retail frontage control. Like the subject site, the Parisi‘s
development is also located within a transition zone within the Rose Bay centre. The scale of
the proposed retail establishment is not considered to be inappropriate given the surrounding
context.
The proposal incorporates acoustic barriers to the eastern and western side boundaries of the
proposed car park. Five types of acoustic barriers have been provided, these comprise of:
Two 1.81m high acoustic fences on the boundary with a canopy extending into the subject site
at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal (a total height of 3.1m).
A 2.11m high acoustic fence adjacent to the boundary with a canopy extending into the
subject site at an angle of 45 degrees to the horizontal (a total height of 3.4m).
A 2.5m high acoustic fence located on the boundary.
Two 1.8m-2.5m acoustic fences located on the boundary.
The acoustic fences are constructed of a steel frame structure, sound absorbent lining, and
vertical colourbond panels. The canopies are constructed of clear polycarbonate sheeting.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 37
Objections have been received in relation to the impact of the proposed acoustic barriers upon the
residential amenity of the neighbouring properties and the public domain. Specifically, that the
barriers would result in an adverse visual impact, a loss of solar access, and a sense of enclosure.
The acoustic barriers are considered to be satisfactory for the following reasons:
The Rose Bay DCP has no height restrictions for side or rear boundary fences. Furthermore a
12m height limit and a 1m side setback control applies to the rear section of the site, therefore
a building in this location could have a significantly greater impact in terms of loss of sunlight
and sense of enclosure than the proposed barriers.
The barriers with canopies would not result in any unreasonable impacts in terms of
overshadowing due to the angle of the canopy, and the use of the clear polycarbonate
sheeting.
The orientation of the 2.5m high barrier to the eastern boundary, and the existence of a
number of neighbouring outbuildings adjacent to the eastern boundary of the subject site,
would ensure that the proposal would not result in any unreasonable impacts in terms of loss
of solar access.
The location of the 1.8-2.5m high barriers would ensure that these elements would not result
in any unreasonable impacts in terms of overshadowing.
The rear of the subject site is currently enclosed by a variety of fencing that includes
colourbond fencing with barbed wire above, painted timber fencing, and unpainted timber
fencing with barbed wire above. The proposed barriers comprise of colourbond and
polycarbonate sheeting. This will ensure a uniform boundary fence presentation, which will
have a satisfactory visual presentation from the neighbouring properties and the public
domain.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 38
The 3.1m high barriers with canopies would not result in any unreasonable impacts in terms
of enclosure due to the angle of the canopy, and the use of the clear polycarbonate sheeting.
The 3.4m high barrier with canopy would not result in any unreasonable impacts in terms of
enclosure as the barrier is separated from the boundary with No. 10 Richmond Road by a
landscaping strip.
The 2.5m high barrier to the eastern boundary would not result in any unreasonable impacts in
terms of sense of enclosure, as the barrier would be largely screened by the existing pitched
roofed neighbouring outbuildings.
It is noted that the acoustic barrier adjoining vehicle space No. 9 extends to approximately
800mm short of the end of the space. Condition C.2 requires the end of the barrier to be
splayed to ensure there is an adequate sight distance to approaching traffic for a vehicle
reversing out of the space.
In addition Condition C.2 requires a 2.0m by 2.0m visibility splay to be provided to either
side of the driveway.
Urban Character – Section 6.3
Building envelopes (6.3.1)
Relevant design principles:
Enhance the urban village character of the Rose Bay Centre by encouraging a coherent street
character with appropriate and consistent building types built to or parallel to the street
alignment.
Retain and promote the pattern of perimeter block development to ensure a high level of
environmental amenity to all new development.
Eastern boundary
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 39
Accommodate retail and commercial uses by allowing deep building footprints at the ground
floor level only.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
Development may only occur within the building envelopes shown on the control drawings
(refer Sections 5.2-5.7).
The total floor space allowed is controlled by the floor space development standards set out
in Woollahra LEP 1995.
The maximum height of buildings in the Rose Bay Centre is defined in Woollahra LEP 1995
as 12m. Council may consider a variation to this limit where bonus incentives apply. Well-
designed buildings which achieve the maximum height are encouraged, to enhance the
definition of the street edge.
The maximum permissible internal plan depth above ground level is 12 metres.
The proposed building envelope is satisfactory for the following reasons:
The proposal is for the adaptive use of two existing buildings to New South Head Road.
At ground floor level, the proposal retains the existing former car showroom building and
former Post Office by providing a new addition to link the two buildings and a new parapet
and roof to the rear of the car showroom. At first floor level, the proposal retains the existing
first floor level to the car showroom building and provides a mezzanine storage level to the
rear of the extended buildings.
No building envelope controls apply to the portion of the site which contains the heritage
listed former Post Office. Whilst the building envelope controls apply to the portion of the site
containing the former car showroom building, the proposal retains the same building footprint
as the existing building.
With an FSR of 0.64:1 (1363.5m2), the proposed gross floor area is significantly below the
maximum FSR development standard of 2:1 (4265.2m2) which applies to the site. The
proposal fully accords with the floor space development standard objectives contained within
the Woollahra LEP.
With a parapet height of 5.6m-8.3m, the height of the proposal is significantly below the
maximum height development standard of 12m. The proposal fully accords with the
maximum height development standard objectives contained within the Woollahra LEP.
The mezzanine floor level to the rear of the extended buildings fails to accord with the upper
level building envelope controls. However, the mezzanine floor level would have a
satisfactory impact in terms of the visual form and scale of the upper level, and would
maintain the amenity of the neighbouring properties. This is due to the fact that the mezzanine
level:
- Is setback 5.6m from the southern boundary with No. 10 Richmond Road, which makes
it visually recessive.
- Has a maximum height of 8.1m.
- Respects the existing rear setback pattern.
The following building envelope controls apply to the former car show room site: a maximum
building height of 12m, 0m side setbacks, and 0m front setback and 12.4m rear setback. A
complying proposal could have significantly greater visual impacts upon the amenity of the
neighbouring properties and streetscape than the subject proposal.
Setbacks (6.3.2)
Relevant design principle:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 40
Retain and enhance the predominant pattern of party wall buildings only in the Rose Bay Core,
and row and free-standing buildings in the Transition Areas.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
Building alignment should comply with the building lines shown on the control drawings (refer
Sections 5.2-5.7.)
Front setbacks are identified as building lines on the control drawings (refer Sections 5.2-5.7).
Front setbacks should:
- define a coherent alignment to the public domain;- accentuate significant street corners;
- accommodate contiguous front gardens in identified areas.
Side setbacks should:
- protect privacy to adjoining buildings;
- protect access to natural light and ventilation;
- facilitate views from the public domain to the harbour.
Rear setbacks should:
- provide consolidated landscaped areas at the centre of blocks adjoining residential areas;
- facilitate natural infiltration of stormwater;
- protect privacy to adjoining buildings and gardens;
- facilitate solar access.
The proposed building setbacks are satisfactory for the following reasons:
The proposal has been amended to retain the form of the two existing buildings on New South
Head Road which both contribute to the existing built environment of the area. Whilst this
involves the connection of the two buildings to New South Head Road, the individual form of
these buildings will be retained. This ensures the preservation of the ‗small shop‘ character of
the Centre.
It is noted that there are no requirements for side setbacks within the front section of the site
where the adapted buildings are located.
Whilst the proposal does not accord with the rear building alignment, the proposal accords with
the relevant objectives of the rear setback control. The proposal, maintains the existing building
footprint, retains an adequate level of residential amenity to the neighbouring properties, and
increases the level of deep soil landscaping and permeable surface within the site.
The proposal includes a mezzanine level which is located to the rear of the extended buildings.
The plans have been amended to ensure that the mezzanine level is setback 5.6m from the rear
boundary of the site. The proposal maintains an adequate level of privacy and sunlight access to
the neighbouring properties.
The proposal retains the existing front setback to New South Head. The proposal removes the
existing vehicular access which is located between these two buildings. This provides three to
four new on street car parking spaces. In addition the proposal provides a new/reinstated awning
and a castellated parapet to the former car showroom building. This ensures the retention and
improvement of the existing buildings, thus contributing to the character of the Rose Bay centre.
Building articulation (6.3.3)
Relevant design principle:
Promote buildings of articulated design and massing, with building facades that contribute to
the character of the street, and provide usable private external spaces.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 41
Encourage buildings to respond to environmental conditions, and promote energy efficient
design principles.
Utilise building articulation elements of appropriate scale to their use and context.
Reinforce the more open streetscape quality in the Transition Areas.
The proposal accords with the building articulation design principles for the following reasons:
The proposal predominantly retains the existing building presentation to New South Head Road.
The existing buildings make a positive contribution to the streetscape.
The proposal improves the articulation to the New South Head Road frontage by providing a
new awning to the former car show room, removing the existing vehicular access and
reinstating the castellated parapet.
The proposal has been amended to relocate the proposed entry ramp to the eastern side of the
building. This enables the retention of the existing Post Office entry, stairs and deep soil
landscaping which are located to the front of the former Post Office.
The rear of the building is over 45m from Richmond Road. This ensures that the proposed
building would not adversely impact upon the Richmond Road streetscape.
Heritage & conservation (6.3.4)
Relevant design principles:
Protect and enhance items of environmental and heritage significance, including contributory
buildings, (refer Figure Heritage Items and Contributory Buildings).
All new developments and works to existing developments are to be designed to be compatible
with the heritage significance of listed heritage items and nominated contributory buildings.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
Proposed developments involving heritage items must comply with the heritage provisions
contained in LEP 1995.
When submitting an application in respect of a heritage item, the onus is on the applicant to
demonstrate that the heritage significance of the item would not be compromised by the
proposal.
When submitting an application in respect of a contributory building, the onus is on the
applicant to demonstrate that the architectural and streetscape value of the building would be
retained or enhanced by the proposal.
Where a development involves a heritage item or contributory building, Council requires that a
statement of heritage impact be lodged with a development application. That statement must set
out the heritage significance of the place and the effect the proposed works will have on the
significance of the heritage item.
The proposal accords with the heritage and conservation design principles for the following
reasons:
The proposal was referred to Council‘s Strategic and Development Application Assessment
Heritage Officers. A detailed analysis of the heritage significance of the heritage item, and the
effect of the proposed works upon the significance of the heritage item was carried out.
In response to the heritage concerns raised by Council staff, the applicant amended the proposal
on two occasions to address these concerns.
Council‘s Heritage Officer reviewed the amended proposal and determined that, subject to
conditions, the proposal is satisfactory with regards to Heritage impact.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 42
The proposal ensures the long term conservation of the heritage item through its re-adaptive re-
use.
Conditions C.2 and E.24 form part of the recommendation, which require the conservation and
restoration of the significant elements of the former post office. Subject to these conditions the
proposal would be sympathetic to the heritage significance of the heritage listed former Post
Office and would accord with the heritage provisions contained in LEP 1995. This is assessed in
greater detail under section 11.7 of the report.
Architectural resolution (6.3.5)
Relevant design principles:
Promote high quality architectural design throughout the Rose Bay Centre to create a desirable
living and working environment.
Encourage a more coherent streetscape.
The proposal accords with the architectural resolution design principles for the following reasons:
The proposed pedestrian entries are well defined.
Whilst the proposal includes alterations to the southern and western elevations, the retention of
the existing window arches will allow some interpretation of the former openings.
The proposed conditions include the conservation of the existing materials and the reversal of
the existing unsympathetic works and repairs.
The proposed ‗linking‘ addition has been designed to highlight the original heritage fabric of the
building. The ‗linking‘ addition is clad in metal and timber to ensure the addition is compatible
with both buildings.
The design of the addition ensures that it will compliment rather than mimic the character of the
existing buildings.
The proposal retains all of the existing glazed openings to the New South Head Road frontage.
Roof design (6.3.6)
Relevant design principles:
Encourage roof design to create a distinctive silhouette to buildings.
The proposal accords with the roof design principles for the following reasons:
The proposal has been amended to ensure the retention of the original roof form to the former
Post Office.
The proposal reinstates/enhances the castellated parapet to the former car showroom building in
order to present a unified roof form to the street.
The rear mezzanine level has been setback from the rear boundary to ensure that the proposal
would not unreasonable impact upon the amenity of the neighbouring properties in terms of
bulk or overshadowing.
The rear mezzanine is setback by approximately 28m from the front boundary, which ensures
that the mezzanine level would not be unduly prominent within the New South Head Road
streetscape.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 43
Awnings (6.3.7)
Relevant design principles:
Retain and supplement the existing awnings to provide discontinuous awning cover along
footpaths in the Rose Bay Centre Transition Areas to accommodate new street tree planting.
The proposal accords with the awning design principles for the following reasons:
Control Drawing 5 in section 5.8 requires an awning to be provided to the former car showroom
frontage. The proposal incorporates an awning which extends across the full frontage of the
former car shown room.
Condition C.12 forms part of the recommendation. This requires the amendment of the awning
to be discontinuous to accommodate two new Harpullia pendula (Tulipwood) street trees on the
road reserve to New South Head Road.
Visual & acoustic privacy (6.3.8)
Design principles, guidelines and controls:
Relevant design principles:
Ensure adequate visual and acoustic privacy to residential apartments in the Centre and private
open spaces.
Protect the privacy of adjacent residential neighbours.
The proposal accords with the visual privacy design principles for the following reasons:
The existing boundary fences and the location and design of the proposed windows will ensure
a satisfactory level of visual privacy is retained to the neighbouring properties.
Relevant guidelines and controls with regards to acoustic privacy are:
Acoustic Privacy
Buildings are to be sited to minimise the transmission of external noise to other buildings on
the site and on adjacent land.
The internal layout of rooms, courtyards, terraces and balconies, the use of openings, screens
and blade walls, and choice of materials, should be designed to minimise the transmission of
noise externally.
Noise impact associated with goods delivery and garbage collection, particularly early
morning, should be minimised.
Council may require a Noise Impact Assessment Report to accompany a Development
Application.
Developments are to comply with Council‟s Code for Control of Noise on Building Sites.
Acoustic reports and peer reviews:
The second amendment to the application which revised the proposal from a Thomas Dux
Greengrocers to a Woolworths supermarket was accompanied by a revised Noise Impact
Assessment Report prepared by Aecom Australia Pty Ltd, dated 11 August 2010. Further acoustic
information was received from: Aecom Australia Pty Ltd, dated 24 September 2010, Aecom
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 44
Australia Pty Ltd, dated 29 November 2010, Aecom Australia Pty Ltd, dated 28 January 2011 and
Aecom Australia Pty Ltd, dated 26 May 2011.
A Noise Impact Assessment Report peer review was provided on behalf of a number of objectors,
prepared by Renzo Tonin and Associates, dated 28 September 2010 (hereby referred to as the
objector‘s peer review).
The Noise Impact Assessment Report peer review, prepared by Renzo Tonin and Associates, dated
28 September 2010, which was provided on behalf of a number of objectors, raised a number of
concerns with the acoustic information submitted by the applicant prior to September 2010. It was
requested that Council commission an independent acoustic report.
Council staff subsequently commissioned a peer review of: the DA submission and accompanying
specialist reports, the objectors peer review, and the Council‘s Environmental Health referral
responses. Council‘s peer review, reference 8249-1-811, prepared by Challis Consulting Pty
Limited, dated 19 August 2011(Council‘s peer review), concluded that:
The applicant‘s acoustic information incorrectly concluded that the development and its
peripheral facilities would fulfil the relevant acoustical requirements, in the DECCW‘s
Industrial Noise Policy.
In response to this concern, a further acoustic report, reference DA Acoustic Assessment
Woolworths Rose Bay, prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011, was submitted by the
applicant (applicant‘s acoustic report). The applicant‘s acoustic report forms one concluding report,
which assesses the acoustic impacts of the proposal. It is noted that this acoustic report was
prepared over a three month period. The methodology and content was determined in consultation
with the Council appointed acoustic engineer.
Council‘s acoustic assessment:
The applicant‘s acoustic report, the objectors peer review, and Council‘s peer review, all identify
six main areas of noise concerns. These are:
1. Appropriate Noise Criterion & Measurement Locations.
2. Road Traffic Noise.
3. Loading Dock Activity Noise.
4. Car Park Activity Noise.
5. Roof Top Mechanical Plant & Services.
6. Noise Management Plan
The application along with the objector‘s peer review was referred to Council‘s Environmental
Health Officer. The full referral responses are attached as Annexure 4. The following comments
are made in relation to the acoustic impacts:
1. Noise Criteria and Measurement Locations:
Noise monitoring was carried out adjacent to the subject site in November 2008. At the request
of the Council appointed acoustic engineer, further noise monitoring was carried out in
September 2011. The September 2011 noise monitoring was carried out at the ‗most, or
potentially, most affected noise sensitive locations‘ in accordance with the NSW Industrial
Noise Policy.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 45
Council staff are satisfied that the recorded background and ambient noise levels presented in
Table 7 of the applicant‘s acoustic report now accurately indicates the existing ambient noise
within the area of the proposed development.
2. Road Traffic Noise:
The road noise criteria for traffic movements to and from the site, which included truck and car
movements were assessed using the NSW DECCW document titled Environmental Criteria for
Road Traffic Noise (ECRTN). To accord with the Environmental Criteria, the traffic generated
by the proposed development should not lead to an increase in existing noise levels by more
than 2 dB(A).
The applicant‘s acoustic report shows that the development is unlikely to increase traffic noise
levels by more than 2 dB(A).
The road traffic noise levels contained within the acoustic report are based upon the traffic
levels contained within the applicant‘s traffic report. Council‘s Traffic Engineer has formed the
view that the traffic levels contained within the applicant‘s traffic report underestimate the
traffic generation from the proposal.
Notwithstanding the above, the additional traffic movements, suggested by the Council‘s Traffic
Engineer are approximately 35 additional movements per hour during the Thursday afternoon
peak period above that estimated in the applicant‘s traffic report and this would not significantly
impact upon road traffic noise assessment.
It is noted that the Traffic Engineer carrying out Council‘s Traffic peer review, has formed the
view that the the applicant‘s traffic report only underestimates the traffic generation from the
proposal by 25 additional movements per hour during the Thursday afternoon peak period.
3. Loading Dock Activity:
The acoustic report proposes the following measures to mitigate the noise impacts from the use
of the loading dock.
o All Woolworths vehicles would be fitted with level adjusting broadband beepers. The
sound power level of the beepers will be 20dB lower than the standard beepers.
o Acoustic barriers to the north eastern and south western sides of the car park.
o Acoustic lining to the underside of the loading dock roof.
o Acoustic lining to the vertical side of the loading dock.
o The provision of a rubber based impact absorbing surface to the loading dock floor.
o The provision of an additional staff member to supervise reversing delivery trucks.
Subject to these measures, the acoustic report identifies that the noise levels would comply with
the environmental noise emission criteria at all nearby receivers with the exception of the first
floor level at 11 Newcastle Street. The exceedance is 1dB, and is negligible and unlikely to be
perceptible, particularly given the restriction of the loading dock hours discussed below.
The loading dock activity would maintain an adequate level of acoustic privacy to the
neighbouring properties subject to the following conditions:
o The use of the loading dock area by trucks, refrigerated vans and other vehicles for the
purpose of goods deliveries and the movement of such goods shall be strictly restricted
to the following hours:
7:00 am - 6:00 pm from Monday to Saturday.
8:00 am – 6:00 pm on Sunday
o The noise control measures detailed in the acoustic report, reference DA Acoustic
Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay, prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011,
being fully implemented.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 46
o No trucks, refrigerated vans or any other vehicles shall be parked within the vicinity of
the loading dock area awaiting delivery or accepting of goods prior to or after the hours
listed in (1) above. Similarly, no trucks, refrigerated vans or any other vehicles shall
leave engines idle when delivering or accepting goods within the loading dock area.
o Large articulated truck deliveries to the loading dock are not permitted at the proposed
development.
o The use of the loading dock must accord with the proposed delivery schedule referenced
in section 1.4 of the acoustic report.
Concern has been raised that the noise control measures to the loading dock contained within
the acoustic report are not indicated on the architectural plans. The recommended conditions of
consent will ensure that the noise measures are fully implemented.
The conditions recommended above form conditions A.4, C.14, C.20, I.2, and I.13 of the
recommendation. Subject to these conditions, the noise from the use of the loading dock would
be satisfactory.
4. Car Park Activity Noise:
The acoustic report proposes the following measures to mitigate the noise impacts from the use
of the car park:
o The provision of acoustic barriers to the north eastern and south western sides of the car
park.
o The incorporation of an acoustically effective surface to the car park.
o Reimbursement of costs involved with constructing a low noise section of footpath to
link the proposed car park and Richmond Road.
o The provision of low noise shopping trolleys.
o A management procedure for the return of shopping trolleys to the proposed store to
minimise noise.
o Barriers to be provided to close the car park outside of trading hours.
The noise analysis has been conducted on traffic flows with peak vehicle movements of 100
trips per hour.
The measured ambient noise levels and the potential noise impacts arising from car park activity
noise have been based on the intrusiveness noise criterion, which is in line with the
requirements of the NSW Industrial Noise Policy. The intrusiveness criteria is based on a Rating
Background Level (RBL) calculated over an entire day, evening and night period for the entire
week. The methodology used by Aecom Australia to assess potential noise emissions from the
proposed development is not in dispute by Council‘s peer review.
The acoustic report looks at predicted car park noise levels for Thursday and Friday as these are
the expected peak periods for traffic movements within the car park (in accordance with the
RTA guidelines).
Detailed acoustic analysis of car parking activity has been completed. Iteration of the
calculations has confirmed the optimal height of the noise barriers to ensure that the car park
noise emissions comply with the intrusive criterion at all times.
The traffic noise levels contained within the acoustic report are based upon the traffic
movements for 25 car parking spaces taken from the applicant‘s traffic report.
The noise analysis has been conducted on traffic flows with peak vehicle movements of 100
trips per hour within the car park. This figure has been reviewed and agreed by Council‘s
Traffic Engineer.
The noise emissions associated with the car park activity will not result in any unreasonable
noise impacts, subject to the following conditions:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 47
o Condition F.6 requires the provision of a traffic signal system for the car park. This
will minimise traffic congestion within the car park during peak operating periods by
indicating to approaching drivers that the car park is fully occupied.
o The noise control measures detailed in the acoustic report, reference DA Acoustic
Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay, prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011,
being fully implemented.
o Condition 1.4 restricts the use of the car park to be within the supermarket opening
hours.
o The measures detailed in the Noise Management Plan to manage potential noise
emissions from the operation of the car park being fully implemented. These include,
restrictions on car park access, signage, a complaints procedure, and an acoustic review.
5. Roof Top Mechanical Plant and Services:
The acoustic report proposes the following measures to mitigate the noise impacts from the use
of the roof top mechanical plant and services:
o The construction of an acoustic barrier to the north eastern and south eastern sides of the
plant deck. The top of the barrier is to have an RL of 12.63.
o The construction of an acoustic barrier to the north eastern and south eastern sides of the
trading area AC unit. The top of the barrier is to have an RL of 12.63.
o All acoustic barriers should be of solid construction and free from gaps.
With the proposed barriers, noise emissions from the roof top plant would not exceed the
background noise levels in accordance with Council‘s requirements.
The roof top mechanical plant and services area would maintain an adequate level of acoustic
privacy to the neighbouring properties subject to the following conditions:
o The noise level measured at any boundary of the site at any time while the mechanical
plant and equipment is operating must not exceed the background noise level. Where
noise sensitive receivers are located within the site, the noise level is measured from the
nearest strata, stratum or community title land and must not exceed background noise
level at any time. The background noise level is the underlying level present in the
ambient noise, excluding the subject noise source, when extraneous noise is removed.
o The Construction Certificate plans and specification required to be submitted pursuant
to clause 139 of the Regulation must be accompanied by a certificate from a
professional engineer (acoustic engineer) certifying that the noise level measured at any
boundary of the site at any time while the proposed mechanical plant and equipment is
operating will not exceed the background noise level. Where noise sensitive receivers
are located within the site, the noise level is measured from the nearest strata, stratum or
community title land and must not exceed background noise level, at any time. The
background noise level is the underlying level present in the ambient noise, excluding
the subject noise source, when extraneous noise is removed. Where sound attenuation is
required this must be detailed.
6. Noise Management Plan:
The acoustic report incorporates a noise management plan which details the following measures
to mitigate the noise impacts from the ongoing use of the development:
o Signage highlighting acoustic issues.
o A procedure for complaints handling.
o Requirements for shopping trolley construction, maintenance and collection.
o Requirements for car park maintenance.
o Restrictions on car park access.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 48
o No external speakers or music.
o Requirements for mechanical services design and maintenance.
o Staff training on acoustic issues.
o Restrictions on the number and hours of cleaning staff.
o An acoustic review to be carried out after three months of opening. This will include
noise monitoring. If noise complaints have been received, Woolworths supermarket
management will review the Operational Noise Management Plan together with an
Acoustic Consultant and a representative resident to modify the plan so as to address
their noise concerns. If changes are required, further noise monitoring will be carried
out after an additional 3 months. This process should continue until a satisfactory
outcome with respect to noise has been achieved.
o It is noted that as an extra precaution, Condition I.1 provides a trial period for the
proposed hours of use. The applicant will need to submit a s96 application and
demonstrate that the operation of the supermarket maintains the acoustic privacy and
residential amenity of neighbouring properties in order to continue to operate between
7pm and 10pm after the 12 month trial period.
The noise management plan is satisfactory subject to the following conditions:
o The recommendations of the noise management plan must be complied with during the
ongoing use of the development.
In addition to the above, the following conditions are proposed to ensure that waste collection at the
subject site would not result in any unreasonable acoustic impacts:
o Woolworths shall maintain a log to be kept on the premises which details the name/s of
waste contractors and dates/times that they have entered and left the site in the case that
noise complaints are received.
o The provision of the glass bin within the proposed building structure be mandatory with
the bin being emptied to the refuse bin area only once per day to minimise noise
associated with the transfer of glass.
o The collection of waste materials/recyclables; the collection of fat oil; and grease trap
servicing shall occur in accordance with waste collection details set out under section
1.5of the acoustic report, reference DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay,
prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011.
Council commissioned review of the applicant‘s concluding acoustic report:
The Council commissioned a peer review of the applicant‘s acoustic report, prepared by Challis
Consulting Pty Limited, which provides the following comments:
The revised DA now addresses most, but not all of our concerns and presents analyses, which
appear to confirm that the future vehicular noise impacts in the car park should be capable of
'nearly fulfilling' the guidelines outlined by the INP at the facades of the multiple apartments,
which are located at the rear of 11 Newcastle Street, as well at the facade of 10 Richmond Road.
Notwithstanding, there are many assumptions and multiple issues, which have neither been
confirmed, nor adequately specified, which I believe should be reviewed, prior to the opening of the
proposed Woolworths Rose Bay supermarket. Accordingly, I am presenting a supplementary
Draft Set of Conditions of Consent for Council's consideration.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 49
Draft Set of Conditions of Consent
1. The proposed car park's surface finish shall be sufficiently smooth so that it will preclude the
generation of unacceptable noise emission, when either empty, or loaded shopping trolleys are
wheeled into, or across the car park.
2. Two samples of the proposed plastic and/or the plastic coated steel framed shopping trolleys,
shall be provided to Council for its assessment within 90 days of receipt of these Conditions
being received. [It is noted that this forms part of condition F.7. The timeframe for the
provision of the samples has been amended to prior to the use of the development].
3. Samples of the sound absorptive material, which is being proposed for the internal surfaces of
barrier walls type A, B1 and B2, together with a copy of the NATA Laboratory test certificate,
which confirms its acoustical performance characteristics, shall be provided, prior to the
installation of the barrier walls.
4. Provide precise details of the impact noise control measures, which will be provided for all
drainage grates, which are to be installed, at either the entrance to, or within the main area of
the car park.
5. A report from a qualified structural engineer shall be provided, confirming that the proposed
acoustical barrier walls, Type A, B1 and B2, have each been designed to withstand gale force
winds. The structural engineer shall subsequently present a report to Council confirming that
he/she has conducted an appropriate number of inspections of each of the specified
classifications of walls, during their installation, and is satisfied that the walls, which have been
installed, are compliant with their original design intent.
6. Seven days prior to the [physical] commencement of any demolition, or significant excavation
activities, the builder (or specialised subcontractor) shall inform the owners, or tenants, of both
11 Newcastle Street, and 10 Richmond Road, by letter of his,( or of its ) schedule of demolition,
excavation and subsequent construction activities. Any very noisy activities involving the use of
hydraulic hammers, or pneumatic hammers, shall be identified, so that the occupants of those
apartments may plan to be away from the site, should they so choose.
7. Provide copies of the briefing documents that Woolworths intends to issue to its own drivers, as
well as the document which it intends to issue to those companies, which will be supplying it
with bread, milk, and other groceries, or services, and which will specify the precautions, which
shall be implemented during their drivers deliveries to the Rose Bay supermarket. The
instructions shall comprehensively outline the sensitivity of the Rose Bay site, the need to enter
and depart in a manner which generates the minimum degree of noise. Each driver, who will
make such deliveries, shall be required to sign a copy of those instructions to confirm that
he/she has read the instructions and agrees to strictly follow those instructions.
8. Where a large delivery vehicle is equipped with either a two way radio, or where the driver has
a mobile phone, then the driver shall be instructed by his/her written instructions, to contact the
Woolworths' loading dock supervisor, prior to the truck entering Richmond Road, in order that
the supervisor may thereby ensure that a member of his/her staff may be present to ensure that
the driveway is clear and safe for the truck's entry.
Furthermore in, an email dated 11 December 2011, the following comment and recommended
condition were provided:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 50
I am not completely satisfied that the submission, which Aecom have prepared, dealt transparently
with the key issue of car park noise emission, and I was not entirely happy with the concept of
adopting a 'performance goal', which was (and will be) +1dB(A) higher than the criterion, which
is nominated by the INP.
In such circumstances, I strongly recommend that Council should add one further item to its
existing list of Draft Conditions of Consent.
The NSW Land and Environment Court routinely includes an almost 'standard' Condition for most
Licensed Premises, when issuing its judgements, which deals with Hours of Operation of those
premises. Accordingly, I recommend that Council should follow that lead and also adopt the
following Clause:-
"The hours of operation of the supermarket shall be 7AM to 10PM, Monday to Sunday.
Following a period of 12 months of operation, Council will again review those hours to assess the
magnitude of that operational regime on the adjacent residential properties and will thereafter
specify what hours will be adopted in the future."
These conditions are generally concurred with. The wording of these conditions has been modified
to ensure that the conditions accord with section 80A of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979. The conditions form conditions B.9, C.2, C.11, C.14, C.20, F.7, I.1 of the
recommendation.
On 14 December 2011, a peer review of the acoustic report was provided on behalf of an objector,
prepared by Renzo Tonin and Associates, reference TE329-05F01 (rev 0) (hereby referred to as the
objector‘s second peer review).
In response to the objector‘s second peer review, the applicant has provided responses from Aecom,
dated 15 December 2011, and from Steven Cooper of the Acoustic Group, also dated 15 December
2011.
The issues raised in the objector‘s second peer review, are largely addressed above with the
exception of the following:
The applicant has proposed level adjusting broad band beepers to all Woolworths service
vehicles. The sound power levels for these beepers will be 20dB lower than the existing
standard beepers. Woolworths cannot provide broadband beepers to service vehicles which are
not owned by Woolworths. Notwithstanding this, the noise emissions from service vehicles are
considered to be satisfactory, subject to the recommended conditions, which require the
following:
- Restrictions on the hours of use of the loading dock to the daytime period.
- The provision of acoustic barriers.
- The provision of sound attenuation measures to the loading dock.
- The provision of broad band beepers to all Woolworths owned service vehicles.
Steven Cooper has provided the following comments in relation to the reversing beepers:
It is appropriate to consider the noise characteristics of reversing beepers at night yet I am
unable to find a Renzo Tonin and Associates report that considers reversing beepers during
the day in terms of any annoying and intrusive impact to neighbouring residences, bearing in
mind the reversing beepers would be in use in the loading dock area and not the car park.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 51
The accuracy of the applicant‘s delivery schedule (contained within the acoustic report) has
been questioned. Condition C.14 requires all deliveries to be undertaken in accordance with the
submitted delivery schedule.
The objector‘s second peer review has raised concerns with the assessment of the loading dock
noise emissions, as in a worst case scenario a truck may potentially enter, unload and leave the
loading dock within a 15 minute period, if this occurs then exceedances of the noise emission
criteria of up to 2dB(A) would be predicted.
Steven Cooper has provided the following comments in relation to the assessment of the loading
dock noise emissions:
The assessment provided by Aecom for loading dock operations is identified as occurring for
the large trucks operating at Woolworths facilities. Persons who have conducted similar
acoustic assessments would be aware that it is impossible to unload such large trucks within
15 minutes. The size of trucks that could undertake a turnaround time of less than 15 minutes
will be significantly smaller and therefore quieter.
The objector‘s second peer review has raised concerns that the acoustic report has adopted a
method of assessing car park noise based on hourly noise levels assessed against hourly noise
criteria established from hourly background levels. This is said to be contrary to the
requirements of the Industrial Noise Policy.
Steven Cooper has provided the following comments in relation to the assessment of the car
park noise emissions:
[The above approach is consistent with the approach undertaken by] Dr Tonin in the ROI
matter where Dr Tonin considered acoustic modelling for a car park utilising both 2 hour and
1 hour periods (RTA ref TE794-04F03). The Aecom report goes to a finer resolution by
considereing the lowest background level in each of the one hour period and therefore is
more conservative in its assessment than undertaken by Dr Tonin.
The objector‘s second peer review has raised concerns that the traffic volumes presented for the
assessment of traffic along public roads as a result of the supermarket are in conflict with the
traffic volumes presented for the assessment of the car park.
Aecom has provided the following comments in relation to the traffic volumes:
The traffic volumes as detailed in the report are correct. The overall traffic volume of 100
vehicles per hour comprises traffic generated by the development (80 vehicles per hour) and
traffic already passing the site (20 vehicles per hour) as advised by Colston, Budd, Hunt and
Kafes.
Condition F.7 which requires a Trolley Management Plan would ensure a satisfactory acoustic
outcome with regards to trolley management.
For the reason set out above, subject to conditions, it is concluded that the proposal would maintain
an adequate level of acoustic privacy to the neighbouring properties.
Signage & advertising (6.3.9)
Relevant design principles:
Ensure that signage and advertising structures are unobtrusive, informative and compatible
with an attractive shopping environment.
Avoid physical and visual clutter of the public domain.
Ensure there is no conflict between advertising signs and any nearby safety, public directional
or traffic signs.
Protect the amenity of residential development.
Preserve the existing and future roofscapes and protect views.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 52
The following comments are made with regards to the proposed signage and advertising:
In accordance with the signage guidelines contained within the RB DCP:
- The proposal includes integrated signage, which includes suspended under awning
signage.
- No roof signs are proposed.
- The parapet and façade signs only comprise of building identification.
- The proposed signage will consist of Woolworths branded signage to ensure a
coordinated presentation for all signs.
- The permissible sign area would not exceed a factor of 0.5 square metre for each metre
of the building width at its frontage to a public road.
As set out under section 11.1 of this report, subject to conditions, all advertising signs and/or
structures would generally accord with the objectives relating to advertising contained within
Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995.
Condition C.2 forms part of the recommendation which requires the deletion of the flush wall
sign, and the new graphic inset panels to the windows, located to the front (New South Head
Road) elevation of the heritage item former Post Office. In addition condition I.7 restricts the
level of advertisement illumination.
The proposal was referred to Council‘s Signage Officer who determined that the proposed
advertising is satisfactory subject to conditions. The full referral response is attached as
Annexure 8.
Soft landscaping (6.4.1)
Relevant design principles:
Maintain and enhance landscape quality on private land.
Encourage contiguous rear garden areas in the middle of blocks to enable retention of existing
significant trees and to allow new planting of tall trees.
Encourage contiguous front garden areas to strengthen the street character and allow street
surveillance.
Assist in stormwater control by maximising on-site infiltration through the use of permeable
surfaces, and providing stormwater detention in the consolidated landscape areas.
Encourage the use of planting to assist in energy conservation in buildings and comfort of
outdoor living areas, and to protect privacy through screening.
The following comments are made with regards to the soft landscaping design principles and
guidelines and controls:
The area of soft landscaping should be at least 50% of the area nominated on the control
drawing. This equates to approximately 343m2.
The proposal provides 183.5m2 of soft landscaping.
The existing site comprises of minimal soft landscaping, and no significant trees. The site is
predominantly covered with bitumen and concrete with the exception of a small garden area to
the front of No. 12 and 14 Richmond Road.
The proposal significantly increases the level of landscaping within the site, thus improving its
landscape quality.
The soft landscaping shortfall is supported as the proposal provides substantial landscaping
areas within the car parking area. These landscape areas enhance the landscape quality of the
site and form buffer zones between the proposed parking areas and the adjacent properties.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 53
The proposal maintains a landscaped area to Richmond Road which provides screening to the
proposed parking area and maintains the character of Richmond Road. The provision of low
level screen landscaping within this area would strengthen the street character.
Conditions have been included as part of the recommendation which would ensure the provision
of:
- Adequate deep soil landscaping.
- Two new street trees to the New South Head Road frontage in accordance with
Council‘s Rose Bay Centre Public Domain Improvement plan.
- A Tree Security Bond and tree protection measures.
Concern has been raised by a number of neighbouring properties with regards to service
vehicles entering Richmond Road causing damage to, or requiring the removal of, the existing
street trees. Condition C.14 requires service vehicles to be a maximum of 8.8m in length. This
ensures that no street trees will need to be removed in order for the service vehicles to access the
site. Furthermore, with a maximum length of 8.8m the service vehicles will be smaller than the
garbage trucks which currently service the street. It is therefore considered that the subject to
conditions, the service vehicles would not result in any unreasonable impacts upon the street
trees.
Front fences (6.4.3)
Relevant design principles:
Encourage the design of front fences which enrich the streetscape.
Ensure street surveillance is possible to assist safety.
The proposal provides no detail with regards to any front fence or advertising structure to
Richmond Road. Condition C.2 of the recommendation states that no approval is given for any
front fence or advertising signs to the Richmond Road frontage.
Energy efficiency – Section 6.5
The proposal is considered to be satisfactory with regard to energy efficiency. The first floor office
areas are all provided with windows to ensure natural light and ventilation. At ground floor level
natural light will be provided to the retail area via the twelve windows to the front and side
elevations.
Solar access & natural daylight (6.5.1)
Relevant Design principles:
Minimise overshadowing of adjoining properties or publicly accessible spaces.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
Where already existing, access to sunlight should be substantially maintained or achieved for a
minimum period of 4 hours between 9.00 am and 3.00 pm on June 22nd to windows of habitable
rooms and to the private open space of adjoining properties.
The overshadowing effect of new buildings on public domain areas are to be considered for the
hours of 10 am to 2 pm on March 21, June 22 and September 24.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 54
The proposal would cast additional shadows upon the north eastern side elevation and private open
space of No. 745-749 New South Head Road, and the north western rear elevation and private open
space of No. 10 Richmond Road.
The proposal generally accords with the solar access & natural daylight principles for the following
reasons:
A 12m height limit applies to the subject site. The front section of the existing building
(approximately 8.3m high) is proposed to be retained, the rear section of the proposed building
has a maximum height of 8m, and the middle section of the building is substantially lower with
a maximum height of 5.5m. It is noted that a proposal which attained a height of 12m could
have a significantly greater impact, in terms of loss of sunlight access, to the neighbouring
properties.
The proposal maintains sunlight access to all of the habitable room windows to the north
western rear elevation and north eastern side elevation of No. 10 Richmond Road.
The proposal will maintain sunlight access to between 35m2 and 90m
2 of the rear private open
space of No. 10 Richmond Road for four hours between 9am and 3pm on June 22nd.
The proposal would not result in any significantly greater impacts in terms of overshadowing to
the east facing windows of No. 745 New South Head Road, than the level of overshadowing
which would occur from a building within a complying building envelope.
The rear private space of No. 745 New South Head Road is already significantly overshadowed
by existing development. The proposal would not result in any significant impacts in terms of
loss of solar access to this area.
The design and location of the proposed acoustic barriers would ensure that these elements
would not result in any unreasonable impacts in terms of overshadowing.
Stormwater (6.5.8)
Relevant Design principles:
Ensure that stormwater does not affect the quality of the harbour by controlling the amount and
quality of urban runoff from the Centre into the bay.
Protect the existing drainage system in the Rose Bay Centre and the adjacent residential areas.
Relevant Guidelines and controls:
Development must comply with Council‟s private stormwater code
Minimise runoff into the existing stormwater system by implementing design measures to
reduce, and where possible, reuse and recycle site stormwater.
Provide required soft landscaping in Transition Areas where indicated on the control drawings
to assist with on site drainage.
Developments shall provide for the on-site retention of stormwater in accordance with
Woollahra Council‟s design guidelines.
Development must not be carried out on land to which this plan applies until arrangements
satisfactory to Sydney Water have been made for the provision of water and sewerage services
to that land.
The application was referred to Council‘s Development Assessment Engineer who provided the
following comments with regards to stormwater. Council‘s Technical Services Division is satisfied
that adequate provision has been made for the disposal of stormwater from the land it is proposed to
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 55
develop and complies with the provisions of Clause 25 (2) of WLEP 1995, subject to the following
conditions C.2, C.15, C.16, E.17, F.3, and F.4. These conditions require: the discharge of
stormwater from a single pipe outlet to a new pit and pipe system in New South Head Road, a
stormwater management plan, flood protection measures, compliance with Council‘s specifications
for drainage, commissioning and certification of flood protection measures and stormwater drainage
systems, and the commissioning and certification of public infrastructure works.
The above conditions have been included as part of the recommendation, subject to these conditions
the proposal would accord with the stormwater design principles.
Access, Parking and Servicing – Section 6.6
Access and mobility (6.6.1)
Subject to conditions, the proposal would comply with the provisions of the Building Code of
Australia and Australian Standard AS1428.1 1993 Design for Access and Mobility. The proposal
provides a 1:14 entry ramp, level access within the trading area and one disabled car parking space.
This ensures that the proposal provides adequate access for persons with disabilities.
On-site parking (6.6.2)
Rose Bay DCP Parking provisions:
Section 6.6.2 of the Rose Bay DCP addresses on-site parking. The explanation to section 6.6.2
states that:
On-site parking includes surface parking areas, car parking structures, semi-basement and
underground parking areas.
The opportunity for on-site parking is restricted in many areas of the Rose Bay Centre. The
narrow width of some lots makes it impossible to accommodate more than two spaces onsite,
and site excavation for underground parking is made difficult by the level of the existing
water table in the Centre.
This Plan aims to satisfy the parking demand likely to be generated by future development,
whilst facilitating the redevelopment of narrow sites and discouraging over-reliance on cars.
Relevant Design principles:
Facilitate the redevelopment or incremental development of narrow sites by implementing a
parking contributions scheme to provide public car parking.
Ensure the impact of car parking on the site and streetscape is handled discretely.
Ensure the design of on-site car parking is safe and efficient, and integrated with the overall site
and building design.
Maximise natural light and ventilation to parking areas where possible.
Relevant Guidelines and controls:
General
Car parking provision must comply with the Woollahra Development Control Plan for Off-
Street Car Parking Provision and Servicing Facilities, except where detailed below.
Car parking should be incorporated within the building, behind the building alignment.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 56
Consolidated parking areas should be provided below ground or screened from the street and
concentrated under building footprints, to maximise the area for soft landscaping.
Geotechnical, Structural and Hydraulic Reports must accompany any proposal for underground
parking.
Opportunities for natural ventilation to basement car parking should be maximised.
Retail component
Retail development is required to provide a minimum of 80% of the required parking (in
accordance with the Woollahra Development Control Plan for Off-Street Car Parking and
Servicing Facilities) as an off-site contribution with the balance of the spaces provided on-site as
private parking. The provisions for the off-site contribution are detailed in the Woollahra Section
94 Contributions Plan.
Parking DCPs:
On 23 March 2010, the Parking Development Control Plan 2011 (Parking DCP 2011) came into
force. The Parking DCP 2011 repeals the current car parking plan, the Woollahra Development
Control Plan For Off-Street Car Parking Provision and Servicing Facilities 1995.
It is acknowledged that the savings and transition arrangements of the Parking DCP 2011 (clause
1.6) state that outstanding development applications shall be assessed under the Woollahra
Development Control Plan for Off-Street Car Parking and Servicing Facilities 1995 (Parking DCP
1995). However, the Parking DCP 2011 has undergone extensive public consultation and provides a
review of Council‘s existing parking requirements, and where appropriate, provides amendments to
ensure that Council‘s objectives for car parking are achieved. Given that the Parking DCP 2011
provides up to date policies which reflect Council‘s current objectives, notwithstanding clause 1.6,
it is appropriate to give considerable weight to the provisions contained within the Parking DCP
2011.
Furthermore, section 1.3 of the Parking DCP 1995 states:
The Council reserves its right to exercise discretion to vary the standards where exceptional
circumstances warrant variation. The applicant will be required to demonstrate, to the
satisfaction of the Council, the exceptional circumstances relating to a particular application
which would warrant variation of the DCP requirements.
The following figures in relation to off street car parking and the subsequent traffic
generation figures (contained under section 16.1) have been calculated on the gross floor area
of the proposed building in accordance with the gross floor area definition contained within
the WLEP 1995. This is not consistent with the gross floor area definition contained within
section 2.0 of the Parking DCP 1995. It should be noted that the gross floor area definition
contained within section 2, of the Parking DCP 2011, is generally consistent with the WLEP
1995.
Applying the strict interpretation of the gross floor area definition contained within section
2.0 of the Parking DCP 1995 equates to a car parking requirement of 36 car parking spaces.
Using the correct gross floor area definition, the car parking requirement for the proposed
development under the Parking DCP 1995, is two car parking spaces greater than the car
parking requirement under the Parking DCP 2011.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 57
The notable difference between the two documents is that the Parking DCP 1995 has a supermarket
car parking generation rate of 4.6 spaces per 100m2 and the Parking DCP 2011 has a car parking
generation rate of 3.5 spaces per 100m2. The car parking requirement under the Parking DCP1995
is 44 car parking spaces, the car parking requirement under the Parking DCP 2011 is 34 car parking
spaces. The proposal provides 25 off street carparking spaces and creates 3 new on street car
parking spaces. This represents the provision of 82% of the car parking required under the Parking
DCP 2011 as opposed to 63% of the car parking required under the Parking DCP 1995.
Development Control Plan controls are not prohibitive, and whilst the proposal fails to accord with
the car parking requirement set out under the Parking DCP 1995 the proposal upholds the wider
objectives of the Parking DCP 1995. The objective of the Parking DCP in relation to car parking
generation is as follows:
To ensure that development generating vehicular traffic make adequate provision off the
public street for car parking and servicing needs of its occupants and users, including visitors
employees and deliveries.
This is discussed in greater detail below.
Council‘s Traffic Engineer Referral Response:
The proposal was referred to Council‘s Traffic Engineer. The full referral response is attached as
Annexure 2. The following is a summary of the Council‘s Traffic Engineer‘s comments with
regards to parking:
Three traffic reports have been provided to Council, one prepared on behalf of the applicant, one
prepared on behalf of the owner of the subject site, and one prepared on behalf of a number of
the objectors.
Each of the submitted Traffic Reports has presented alternate estimates of parking demand and
considerations on these variations. These are summarised as follows:
1. The applicant‘s traffic report estimates a parking demand of 15-25 car parking spaces.
This is based upon a parking survey of a Woolworths store in Crows Nest, which has a
similar floor area (1385m2) to the proposal with a parking facility adjoining the site.
2. The owner‘s traffic report states that the proposed 25 off street car parking spaces fully
complies with Councils Rose Bay DCP control which requires a minimum 80% of the
site‘s parking demand to be made as a Section 94 contribution. As such the proposal
complies with Councils controls and objectives.
3. The objector‘s traffic report estimates a parking demand of 44 car parking spaces if
Council‘s Parking DCP 1995 is applied and 57-83 car parking spaces if the parking
demand rate provided by the RTA‘s “Guide to Traffic Generating Developments” is
applied.
On review of the applicant‘s traffic report, Council‘s Traffic engineer has concluded that the
Woolworths store in Crows Nest does not provide an appropriate comparison to the subject site
for the following reasons:
- The Crows Nest store is more accessible via public transport.
- The parking lot adjoining the Crows Nest Woolworths is a multi-storey carpark with
capacity for 122 vehicles and free parking for the first two hours. Whilst the car park
would appear to have ample parking availability, access to the carpark is difficult for
westbound traffic on Falcon Street (due to a ―No Right Turn‖ restriction) and
northbound traffic on the Pacific Highway (due to an uncontrolled right turn into Falcon
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 58
Street at a major intersection). There are routes around this, however these present a
circuitous route to the store.
On review of the objector‘s traffic report, Council‘s Traffic engineer has concluded that the RTA
rates are likely to be higher than the anticipated parking demand of the proposed development
for the following reason:
- The RTA parking demand rates have been derived from large shopping centre
complexes where there is a large pool of available parking. This would obviously favour
the motor vehicle as a mode of transport and the incidence of multipurpose trips would
be very high.
Council‘s Traffic engineer has concluded that it is most appropriate to apply the parking demand
rates found in Councils Car Parking DCPs. This equates to 44 car spaces under Parking DCP
1995 and 34 car spaces under the Parking DCP 2011.
Council‘s Traffic engineer has been advised by Council‘s Planning Department that the new
Parking DCP is to be given weight in the consideration of the proposed development. It is
conceded that the argument for the higher rate given by the previous DCP has been diminished
by Council‘s adoption of the lower parking rate contained in the new DCP.
The applicant has stated that additional on street parking capacity in New South Head Road will
be provided at the front of the site, as two existing driveway crossovers will be removed by the
proposal. The applicant‘s supplementary report, prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes Pty
Ltd, dated 04 May 2011, details that three to four additional car spaces will be provided.
The applicant has indicated that they would be prepared to provide a Section 94 Contribution
equivalent to the shortfall under the new Parking DCP 2011.
Under the Parking DCP 2011 the number of off street parking spaces required is 34. The
proposal provides 25 off street parking spaces and creates 3 new on street parking spaces, which
equates to a shortfall of 6 parking spaces.
The parking shortfall is accepted given the degree of non-compliance is relatively minor and the
parking shortfall can be addressed by a section 94 contribution.
Assessment Officers comments:
The retail component guidelines set out under section 6.6.2 of the Rose Bay DCP states that a
minimum of 80% of the required parking is to be provided as an off-site contribution with the
balance of the spaces provided on-site.
Given the potential for the purchase of large quantities of goods at supermarkets it is considered
that whilst it is inappropriate for 80% of the required supermarket car parking to be provided
off-site (in accordance with section 6.6.2) it is considered that a providing 18% (6 off site car
parking spaces) via a contribution is appropriate for the following reasons:
o With a trading floor area of approximately 789m2 and a further 586m
2 of non trading
area, the proposal represents a small to medium scale supermarket. For comparison, the
approximate trading floor areas of a number of local retail stores, have been provided on
under the ‗Use‘ section of this report, within section 14.1.
o The Economic Impact Assessment prepared by the applicant states that ‗typically, most
supermarkets which serve the weekly food and grocery shopping needs of local
residents are around 3,000m2 or greater in size‘.
o Given the size of the trading floor area (789m2), the proposed supermarket would have a
smaller range of goods than a large scale supermarket. The proposed supermarket is
therefore likely to experience a higher level of convenience shopping than a larger full
line supermarket. Consumers undertaking convenience shopping are less likely to be
dependant on private vehicles to travel to and from the supermarket. The provision of
18% of the parking to be provided as a Section 96 contribution for off site parking is
therefore supported.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 59
o Sydney buses operate a number of services along New South Head Road, which provide
service seven days a week to Watsons Bay, Vaucluse, Dover Heights, and the CBD. The
subject site is therefore provided with a reasonable level of access to public transport
services.
o Whilst each application must be assessed on its own merits consideration has been
given to the Land and Environment Court Appeal judgement for the Parisi‘s
Greengrocer on Dover Road, Rose Bay (Parisi V Woollahra Council [2008] NSWLEC
1269. It is acknowledged that the appeal related to a greengrocers and the subject site
benefited from abutting an existing public car park. However, the traffic experts for the
applicant and Council and the presiding Commissioner concluded that it was
appropriate to apply a lower car parking traffic generation rate to the non trading floor
area which comprised storage, office space and staff facilities. If this approach was
applied to the subject site it would result in a reduction to the required number of car
parking spaces at the subject site.
Condition C.3 forms part of the recommendation and requires a car parking contribution under
Council's Section 94 Contributions Plan 2002 of $112,560.00, comprising of 6 car spaces at
$18,760/space.
Other parking issues:
Loss of on street parking:
Concern has been raised that the swept path required for service vehicles to enter the site would
result in a loss of on street parking to Richmond Road. The proposal would not result in a loss of on
street parking to Richmond Road for the following reasons:
The applicant has confirmed that the site can be serviced by vehicles with a maximum length of
8.8m.
The applicant‘s supplementary traffic report, prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes Pty Ltd,
dated 04 May 2011, demonstrates that swept paths can be provided for an 8.8m long medium
rigid truck without removing any existing on street parking within Richmond Road.
Loss of existing off street parking:
A number of objectors have raised concerns that the proposal would remove a number of car
parking spaces (approved under DA 598/2006) which are designate to a number of existing
businesses within close proximity to the subject site. DA 598/2006 was approved by the
Development Control Committee (DCC) on 03 September 2007, for the demolition of the
outbuildings to the rear of the former Post Office, and the demolition of the pair of semi-detached
dwellings at No.12-14 Richmond Road, and the use of this area as a car park. The car park was to
be a free private car park providing 31 spaces to be used by customers of the local commercial
premises owned by the applicant (including Crystal Car Wash/Shell service station and the Westpac
Bank Building). The proposed car park was proposed as an interim use of the subject site pending
the future re-development of the subject site and adjoining sites. DA consent 598/2006 has not been
enacted upon. The approved hours of operation of the car park were 7am to 7:30pm Monday to
Friday and 8am to 7:30pm on weekends and public holidays.
The redevelopment of the site would not result in any unreasonable impacts, in terms of loss of
parking, to the businesses which were to benefit from the parking approved under DA 598/2006 for
the following reasons:
The commercial premises which were to benefit from the approved parking (including Crystal
Car Wash/Shell service station and the Westpac Bank Building) were all in operation prior to
the approval of DA 598/2006.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 60
The new 31 spaces were therefore not required in order for these businesses to operate. Instead
the proposal provided additional parking over and above what was required.
The proposed parking was to be provided on a temporary basis pending the future re-
development of the subject site and adjoining sites.
There is no obligation for the DA consent to ever be inacted.
For the reasons set out above, subject to conditions included as part of the recommendation
requiring: a s94 parking contribution, the removal of the driveways to New South Head Road, the
provision of plans and specifications for all car and commercial vehicle parking, and the restriction
of the size of service vehicles, the proposal is satisfactory with regards to parking provision.
Independent traffic peer review - Parking
The applicant‘s traffic report and the objector‘s traffic report reach differing conclusions with
regards to whether the proposal provides sufficient parking. Due to the contrasting positions,
Council staff commissioned an independent traffic engineer to carry out a peer review of: the DA
submission, the objectors‘ traffic report, and the Council‘s Traffic Engineer‘s referral responses.
With regards to parking impacts, the independent peer review, reference 11 266, prepared by
Traffix, Traffic and Transport Planners, dated 20 August 2011(hereby referred to as the independent
traffic peer review), concludes that:
Parking Provision
We share the opinion of Council officers that parking for the development should be assessed
with significant weight given to the new DCP 2011, which reflects Council‟s current planning
objectives. Conversely, the outdated DCP which applied at the time of DA lodgement does not
represent current best practice and is outdated. It only arises as a matter for consideration in
the context of a technical (legal) procedural matter; so that little weight should be attached to
it in relation to a merit based assessment.
With an area of 1,365m2 GFA and based on the application of the rate under the current
DCP 2011 of 2.45 spaces/100m2 (3.5 spaces/100m2 x area multiplier of 0.7) the development
requires 34 spaces (rounding up as required). We note that this is the minimum level of
provision and that Council has discretion to vary the rate depending upon the circumstances,
as set out in Section 1.8 of the DCP. This includes consideration of the constraints imposed by
heritage buildings where these reduce the ability of a development to provide the requisite
parking. The site contains the Rose Bay Post Office and it is possible that this has resulted in
a design solution that might otherwise have permitted additional parking to be provided.
Nevertheless, this has not been explored by the applicant and in the circumstances it is
considered that 34 spaces should be accepted as the appropriate level of provision.
In response to this, the development proposes 25 spaces. We note that the development also
results in the removal of existing driveways in New South Head Road and that this results in a
net increase of 4 parking spaces based on Figure 2 attached to the CBHK letter of 4 May
2010. In our view, this additional parking provides a measurable public benefit as it
effectively increases the amount of parking available within the commercial centre. It is also
parking that will be available at the times of peak trading of the development, which is
expected to be on a Thursday and Friday evening; and on a Saturday morning. This will
therefore reduce the „shortfall‟ from 9 spaces (34 less 25) to 5 spaces (34 less 29). In our
view, the payment of a Section 94 contribution for a shortfall of 5 spaces would be
appropriate. This would be the maximum contribution, reflecting circumstances where the
applicant gains no advantage of the heritage status of the existing buildings within the site.
The full independent traffic peer review is attached as annexure 11.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 61
In response to the independent traffic peer review:
The CBHK letter dated 04 May 2011 states that, in practice the increase in on street parking
would be three spaces. Therefore Condition C.3, requires the payment of a Section 94
contribution for a shortfall of 6 spaces.
Vehicular access (6.6.3)
Relevant design principles:
Encourage discrete access to car parking and servicing.
Maximise retail frontage in nominated streets.
Maximise pedestrian safety and amenity by minimising conflict with vehicles.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
In the Transition Areas vehicular access must be via a rear lane, rear right of way, or side
street where such access is available.
Driveway widths should be kept to minimum dimensions.
Allow up to one two-way driveway per development. Two single driveways may only be
provided where the distance between crossings exceeds 30 metres.
Driveways to underground car parks should be designed with minimal visual impact on the
street, and maximum pedestrian safety. Pedestrian access to the development should be
separate and clearly defined. Garage doors should be set back. Access ways to underground car
parking should not be located in direct proximity to doors or windows to habitable rooms.
Driveways and kerb crossings must be sited to have minimum impact on the root zone of
existing street trees, and be designed in accordance with the Public Domain Improvements Plan
and Streetscape Design Manual.
Driveways must be located in alignment with the garage. They must occupy a minimum
proportion of any front garden area, up to a maximum width of 6.5 metres, or a maximum area
of 50% of the front garden, whichever is the lesser.
The following comments are made with regards to vehicular access:
The proposal results in the removal of the existing vehicular access to New South Head Road.
This ensures that the retail frontage to New South Head Road is maximised and the public
domain is improved.
The proposed landscape buffer to the Richmond Road frontage, and the landscaping within the
proposed car park area, would ensure that the proposed access and car parking would have a
satisfactory streetscape outcome.
The proposal is satisfactory with regards to vehicle access subject to the following conditions
which have been included as part of the recommendation:
- The creation of a vehicular access easement across No. 759 New South Head Road (Crystal
Car Wash) to enable service vehicles to exit to New South Head Road.
- The prohibition of service vehicles from exiting the subject site via Richmond Road.
- All road and public domain works to be carried out in accordance with Council approval.
- The provision of a traffic (parking signal) system to be installed and operated.
- The provision and approval of a Transport Delivery Management Plan.
- Service vehicles restricted to a maximum length of 8.8m.
- Restrictions on the number of heavy vehicles visiting the site.
- Tree preservation measures to the Richmond Road street trees.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 62
Independent peer review – vehicular access
With regards to vehicular access, the independent peer review, reference 11 266, prepared by
Traffix, Traffic and Transport Planners, dated 20 August 2011(hereby referred to as the independent
traffic peer review), comments have been summaries as follows:
Site Access
It is noted that the RTA has raised no objection to the development and that there is no
proposal to create a new driveway crossing onto New South Head Road, so that the RTA‟s
concurrence is not required. It is noted however that with the constraints associated with the
site the only feasible access for the vast majority of traffic associated with this development is
via the proposed Richmond Road access driveway. This is however entirely consistent with
RTA policy, which seeks to avoid access onto a main road where there is alternate access
available.
The issue arises therefore as to whether the alternate access (i.e. via Richmond Road) is a
suitable access in the circumstances; and whether its use by this development will not create
unacceptable impacts. This is discussed further below but in principle, the proposed access
arrangements are considered the optimal for the site.
Internal Design Aspects
We have reviewed the DA plans prepared by as well as the swept paths provided by CBHK
and we consider that the design is generally supportable, subject to the traffic management
measures addressed in Council‟s assessment report being implemented. These include the
installation of an electronic sign to advise when the car park is full; and the formulation and
implementation of a Loading Dock Management Plan which can be conditioned, subject to
the clarification discussed in the following section.
It is noted that the single disabled parking space (Space 1) does not comply with AS 2890.6 as
required under DCP 2011 and this requires attention by the applicant. That is, if the
applicant is to rely on DCP 2011 in relation to parking supply, then it follows that the DCP
should be adhered to generally.
The full independent traffic peer review is attached as annexure 11.
In response to the independent traffic peer review:
The disabled parking space has been amended to comply with AS 2890.6.
Site facilities (6.6.4)
Relevant design principles:
Ensure adequate provision of site facilities.
Ensure site facilities are accessible, functional and unobtrusive.
Relevant guidelines and controls:
Loading facilities must be provided via a rear lane or side street where such access is available.
Adequate garbage and recycling areas must be provided. These areas are to be visually
integrated with the development to minimise their visibility from the street. Such facilities must
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 63
be located away from openable windows to habitable rooms to avoid amenity problems
associated with smell. They must be located close to rear lanes where such access is available.
Note: Information relating to specific requirements for garbage and recycling is contained in
Annexure 10 of Council‟s DA Guide. This note does not form part of the approved DCP, but is
provided for guidance.
The following comments are made with regards to site facilities:
The proposal makes adequate provision for garbage and recycling, which are sited away from
neighbouring properties and are fully enclosed.
Concern has been raised by a number of objector‘s in relation to the potential for service
vehicles to conflict with the operations of the car wash and with pedestrians entering the
supermarket.
A condition has been imposed upon the consent which requires a Transport Delivery
Management Plan to ensure that all service deliveries are conducted in a safe and efficient
manner. The management plan must include a delivery schedule and measures to be
implemented for service vehicles reversing into the site.
Council‘s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal, and subject to conditions, raises no issues
in relation to the location and function of the proposed site facilities.
Subject to conditions, the proposed service vehicle arrangements are satisfactory.
Application of bonuses – Section 6.7
The aim of a bonus system is to encourage the provision of public benefits as part of the
redevelopment of privately owned sites. In return Council will offer certain concessions with regard
to development standards and controls.
The Rose Bay Urban Design Study identified the need for better pedestrian and vehicular
circulation within the Centre. Council encourages the inclusion of ‗through block connections‘, in
specific areas, in private developments. These may include arcades, through shop links, shareways,
laneways and rights of way.
Relevant design principles:
Improve the pedestrian circulation in the Centre by providing arcades, through shop links, and
shareways in key locations, as identified in figure „Areas Designated for Through Block
Connections‟ and „Detailed Location Plan‟.
Facilitate rear site access for car parking and servicing to avoid vehicular crossings on
principal streets by providing new laneways and rights of way as identified in figure „Areas
Designated for Through Block Connections‟ and „Detailed Location Plan‟ .
The following comments are made with regards to through block connections:
The amended scheme provides a through site link through the shop and car park. This provides
an unobstructed pedestrian access between New South Head Road and Richmond Road during
opening hours.
With regard to development standards and controls, no specific concessions have been
requested by the applicant or provided by Council as a result of the provision of a through block
connection.
14.2 Car Parking Development Control Plans
Car Parking DCP 1995:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 64
The proposal generally accords with the objectives of the now superseded car parking development
control plan 1995.
Car Parking DCP 2011:
This is addressed within the on-site parking section of the report above, with the exception of the
following issues:
Section 8.1 ‗Location of parking areas‘ states that where more than 20 car parking spaces are to be
provided on site, Council will require the car parking spaces to be accommodated undercover or in
a basement area. Notwithstanding the proposed non-compliance with section 8.1 the proposal is
satisfactory for the following reasons:
Enclosing the parking area would present additional bulk and mass to the streetscape and
neighbouring properties.
The level of the existing water table makes the provision of basement parking in Rose Bay
difficult.
Subject to conditions the proposed car park area would not result in any unreasonable
impacts in terms of loss of acoustic privacy to the neighbouring properties.
The design of the proposed car park, vehicular access and deep soil landscaping would
ensure that the proposed car park area would have a satisfactory streetscape outcome.
Section 8.3 ‗Signposting‘ requires parking areas to be well signposted. Condition C.14 ensures that
adequate signage is provided to indicate customer parking and entry and exit points.
Subject to conditions the proposal generally accords with the Car Parking Development Control
Plan 2011.
14.3 Woollahra Access DCP
The provisions of Council's Access DCP require the provision of adequate access to the
development by all people in the community including people with disabilities. The proposal
provides for an internal disabled access ramp adjacent to the main entrance, and a disabled car
parking space. The recommended conditions of consent would ensure compliance with the
provisions of the Australian Standard AS1428.1 1993 Design for Access and Mobility and the
Building Code of Australia. Subject to these conditions, the proposal could provide adequate
pedestrian access including persons with disabilities.
14.4 Other DCPs, codes and policies
No other controls apply.
15. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
The proposal would comply by condition.
16. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSAL
All likely impacts of the proposal have been assessed elsewhere in this report with the exception of
the following:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 65
16.1 Traffic generation
The following objectives set out under Clause 2, point d) of the LEP 1995 are applicable:
(v) to minimise conflict between pedestrians and vehicles,
(vi) to minimise conflict between transport and land use activities,
(vii) to minimise the impact, on adjoining residential areas, of traffic and parking generated
by commercial areas,
The proposal was referred to Council‘s Traffic Engineer. The full referral response is attached as
Annexure 2. The following is a summary of the Council‘s Traffic Engineer‘s comments with
regards to traffic generation:
Guidelines for assessing the impacts of additional traffic generation:
The impact of the proposed traffic generation has been assessed against the RTA guidelines
“Guide to Traffic Generating Development”.
The RTA guidelines address:
- Road capacity which relates to the efficiency of a roadway. For local roads this is typically
defined by the serviceability of the bounding intersections. The RTA provides grades of
intersection performance based on delay periods and queue lengths and refers to this
classification as the Level of Service (LOS).
- Environmental Capacity which relates to the impact on the amenity of the surrounding area.
This can be defined as the maximum level of traffic volume that can be accommodated until
it becomes detrimental to the standard of living of surrounding residents (including such
factors as noise, vibration and pollution) and on road safety and amenity (including both
vehicle and pedestrian traffic).
- Section 4.3.5 of the RTA document ―Guide to Traffic Generating Development‖ provides
two levels of performance standards which stipulate maximum vehicles per hour based on
the classification of the roadway and typical speed environment. These limits define an
environmental goal (which is desirable) and maximum. In accordance with this Guide,
Richmond Road has an environmental goal of 200 vehicles per hour (vph) and a maximum
level of 300 vph. It is pertinent to note however that the RTA guide states that tolerance
levels to increased traffic volumes vary greatly amongst residents and further notes that
there is no particular level where problems begin to emerge. The document also goes on to
state the environmental capacities may vary due to road width and the composition of traffic
(e.g. % of heavy vehicle traffic).
Estimated Traffic Generation:
Three traffic reports have been provided to Council, one prepared on behalf of the applicant, one
prepared on behalf of the owner of the subject site, and one prepared on behalf of a number of
the objectors.
Each of the submitted Traffic Reports has presented alternate estimates of traffic generation
essentially based on the traffic generation rates provided in the RTA's Guide to Traffic
Generating Developments. The traffic reports all acknowledge some discount should apply to the
RTA's traffic generation rate as it is based upon developments having unrestricted access to
parking. In respect of this, each of the reports has alternate opinions in relation to the size of the
discount. These are summarised as follows:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 66
1. The applicant‘s and owner‘s traffic reports present a traffic generation rate of vehicle
trips per hour, derived from the proposed 25 car spaces. This is calculated by utilising
the RTA‘s traffic generation rate divided by the RTA‘s parking demand estimate (57 car
spaces). The resulting rate has been multiplied by the proposed 25 car spaces, producing
a vehicle trip generation rate of 90 vehicle trips per hour for the Thursday peak period.
2. The objector‘s traffic report has presented the RTA generation rate for the Friday peak
period (188 vehicle trips per hour) and discounted this by the ratio of Council‘s Parking
DCP (1995) (44 car spaces) from the RTA‘s 57 car spaces. This results in a peak traffic
generation rate of 145 vehicle trips per hour.
On review of the applicant‘s traffic generation approach, Council‘s Traffic engineer has
concluded that this approach underestimates traffic generation from the development as it
precludes traffic accessing the parking area despite all spaces being occupied. Furthermore, it
precludes any traffic that may elect to utilise on street parking on route to the store.
Council‘s Traffic engineer has concluded that the RTA‘s traffic generation rates would be
overestimated for the site, for the same reasons stated previously in relation to the RTA‘s
parking demand estimates. The RTA‘s rates include potential for multipurpose trips and assume
there is ample parking availability in these centres thereby encouraging motor vehicle use.
Council‘s Traffic engineer has concluded that it is, most appropriate to apply the RTA traffic
generation rate discounted by the ratio of Councils car parking DCP car parking requirements.
This is presented in the CHA report as 145 vehicle trips per hour for the Friday afternoon peak
period.
It is to be noted that as the estimate is based upon Council‘s parking requirements, it will
consequently be reduced should Council‘s Planning Department place any weight on the
application of the new Car Parking DCP 2011. Based on the reduced parking demand rate of this
control, the resulting traffic generation estimate is then 112 vehicle trips per hour for the Friday
afternoon peak period.
The estimated traffic generation rate is a Friday afternoon peak period. The Thursday afternoon
period is expected to be higher. Utilising the same approach accepted above the peak period
traffic generation is estimated at 162 vehicle trips/ hour under the Car parking DCP 1995 and
125 vehicle trips per hour based on the new car parking DCP 2011
The distribution of the additional traffic:
The application and impact of the estimated traffic generation level on the surrounding road
network is complex given there are a number of variables and conditions that influence parking
habits of customers and traffic flows.
With regards to the distribution of the traffic generated by the proposal, Engineering Services
considers that a great majority of customer traffic for the afternoon peak will be commuting from
the city and may either approach from Norwich Road or Newcastle Street (pending on the state
of the traffic signals in New South Head Road). However there will be a greater trend to exit to
Newcastle Street given the majority of customers would be outward bound from the city.
Assuming this trip distribution and applying the estimated traffic generation of 145 vehicle trips
per hour under the Car parking DCP 1995, and 112 under the car parking DCP 2011, the
following table is provided (in part reproduced from the objector‘s traffic report (Table 3.1)).
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 67
Road
Friday Afternoon (Vehicle Per Hour)
Existing
vehicles
per hour
Applicant’s estimation
of additional vehicles
per hour generated by
the development
Council’s Engineering Services
estimation of additional vehicles
per hour generated by the
development
Car Parking
DCP 1995
Car Parking
DCP 2011
New South Head Road
- east of Newcastle Road
- west of Newcastle Road
- west of Norwich Road
1985
2030
2195
+30
+0
+40
+40
+15
+51
+31
+12
+39
Newcastle Road
- south of New South Head
Road
- south of Richmond Road
505
475
+30
+20
+55
+29
+43
+22
Richmond Road
- east of Newcastle Road
- west of Norwich Road
215
215
+50
+40
+94
+51
+73
+39
Norwich Road
- south of New South Head
Road
- south of Richmond Road
285
90
+40
+0
+51
+0
+39
+0
Traffic Generation Impacts:
General traffic generation:
The projected traffic volumes during the Friday afternoon peak hour for the eastern end of
Richmond Road are estimated to be a total of 309 vehicles per hour under the Parking DCP 1995
and 288 under the Parking DCP 2011. Under the Parking DCP 1995 the proposal will be above
the maximum environmental capacity level as defined by the RTA‘s Guide to Traffic Generating
Developments. However, under the Parking DCP 2011 the proposal will be within the maximum
environmental capacity level.
Council‘s Planning Department have indicated that a major point of objection to the
development from residents surrounding the site is the opinion that Richmond Road will be
unable to accommodate the resulting traffic volumes after the development is completed. It is
stated that due to the relatively narrow road width, the prevalence of on-street parking and road
alignment, the roadway is not conducive for two way traffic flow, and significant congestion will
result once the development is completed.
Engineering Services advises that the roadway has sufficient width to allow two vehicles to pass
however traffic significantly slows when there is conflicting vehicle flows. It is unlikely that
there will be extreme congestion such to effect the adjoining road network from the additional
traffic volumes.
The applicant has identified that Richmond Road is used as a ‗rat run‘ (subject to non-local
through traffic) as some city bound traffic utilises this route to avoid delays at the signalised
intersection of Newcastle Road and New South Head Road. The applicant has stated that the
level of non-local through-traffic will be reduced, as additional traffic volumes resulting from the
development will no longer make Richmond Road an efficient detour. Engineering Services
agrees with this position. However, it is foreseeable that some of this through-traffic will be
diverted to Norwich Lane. The applicant has indicated support to implement measures (to be
determined by Council) to address this.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 68
Council‘s Manager of Engineering Services has investigated Norwich Lane and advises that an
appropriate traffic calming measure would include narrowing the carriageway by establishing a
footpath, kerb and gutter and the implementation of a Watts profile speed hump. This would
improve pedestrian safety and act as a traffic calming measure. As these measures are subject to
agreement by the Local Traffic Committee, the condition of consent should make provision for
an alternative measure decided upon by the Local Traffic Committee. This forms condition C.4.
The applicant has noted that similar roads in the Municipality operate effectively with traffic
volumes above the environmental capacity. Furthermore, the applicant is of the view that
Richmond Road cannot be classified purely as a local road, given properties on the northern side
of the roadway are zoned for commercial and retail development.
Council‘s Manager of Engineering Services accepts that whilst the roadway has physical
characteristics of a local road, the zoning of the land on the northern side of Richmond Road is
retail/commercial. As it cannot be classified purely as a local road, it is therefore conceded that
the environmental capacity for Richmond Road would be higher than those specified in the
RTA‘s Guidelines.
Service vehicle generation:
With regards to the impact of service vehicles upon the local road network, the applicant has
advised in the supplementary traffic report, prepared by Colston Budd Hunt and Kafes Pty Ltd,
dated 04 May 2011, that they would be able to undertake service deliveries using service
vehicles with a maximum length of 8.8m. The applicant has also indicated that delivery
schedules can be restricted to no more than 3 heavy vehicles (heavy vehicles being over 7.5m in
length as per NSW Road Rules) a day to address concerns related to the impact on traffic flow
and parking in Richmond Road.
Council‘s Engineering services originally had concerns that heavy vehicles in Richmond Road
would cause congestion and impair the operation of the roadway. Subject to condition C.14
which restrict the size and number of heavy vehicles, the relatively low level of heavy vehicle
activity is unlikely to adversely affect traffic flow or parking conditions in the area.
To ensure that all service vehicles exit the site via New South Head Road rather than Richmond
Road, the applicant is required to establish a right of way over No. 759 New South Head Road
(Crystal Car Wash) to be maintained over the life of the development. This forms deferred
commencement condition A.1.
Assessment Officers comments:
The views of Council‘s Traffic Engineer are generally concurred with.
The subject site is located in a transition zone, in accordance with the transition zone planning
principle referenced in section 11.2 of this report, the residents living on the southern side of
Richmond Road, within the residential zone, must accept that commercial uses are permissible
within the subject site and whilst impacts must be within reason they can nevertheless occur.
With regards to calculating traffic generation Council‘s Traffic engineer has concluded that it is
most appropriate to apply the RTA traffic generation rate discounted by the ratio of Councils car
parking DCP car parking requirements. This is a similar approach to that provided within the
traffic report prepared on behalf of the objectors.
Applying the newly adopted car parking DCP 2011 car parking requirements would result in a
reduction to the traffic generation rate when compared to the application of the superseded car
parking DCP 1995 car parking requirements. Given that the Parking DCP 2011 provides up to
date policies which reflect Council‘s current objectives, consideration has been given to
provisions contained within the Parking DCP 2011.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 69
The projected traffic volumes during the afternoon peak hour for the eastern end of Richmond
Road are estimated to be 288 vehicles per hour when the car parking DCP 2011 is applied. The
projected traffic volumes within Richmond Road are within the RTA‘s maximum environmental
capacity level.
The RTA environmental capacity guidelines provide two levels of performance standards; an
environmental goal (which is desirable) and a maximum. Whilst the proposal may exceed the
desirable capacity goal the proposal is within the maximum capacity level. Given the
commercial zoning of this site this is considered to be reasonable. Specifically, it is not
uncommon for roads within a commercial zone to operate near to capacity given the traffic
generating nature of commercial areas.
The recommended conditions of consent would:
- Restrict the size and number of service vehicles.
- Ensure that all service vehicles exit the site via New South Head Road.
- Provide traffic calming measures to Norwich Lane to ensure that any traffic displaced
from Richmond Road would not adversely impact upon the amenity of Norwich Lane.
Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal accords with the objectives set out under
Clause 2, point d) of the LEP 1995 in relation to traffic and transport. Specifically, the
recommended conditions adequately minimise the impact of the traffic generated by the
proposed commercial use upon the adjoining residential area.
Independent peer review – traffic generation and associated impacts:
With regards to traffic generation and associated impacts, the independent peer review, reference 11
266, prepared by Traffix, Traffic and Transport Planners, dated 20 August 2011(hereby referred to
as the independent traffic peer review), comments have been summarised as follows:
Traffic Generation and External Traffic Impacts
It is evident that in a global sense (within the Rose Bay Commercial Centre generally) the
traffic generation associated with the site will relate to the entire demand of 34 spaces as
derived from the DCP, wherever this demand is met. This includes on-site, on-street or within
public car parks in the locality. In this regard, these 34 spaces are expected to generate a trip
rate of 3.7 vtph per space based on the RTA‟s Guideline (for a Thursday evening peak) and
this equates to an average „dwell‟ time of 32 minutes. This is arguably high but is appropriate
for adoption to assess a worst case for planning purposes and on this basis, the development
will generate a total of 126 veh/hr during a Thursday PM peak (63 in, 63 out)and these will
be dispersed as follows:
93 veh/hr within the site (25 x 3.7);
15 veh/hr on-street (4 x 3.7); and
18 veh/hr associated with public parking provided by way of contribution (5 x 3.7).
We note and agree with the proposition by all experts that these volumes create no external
traffic issues in relation to the capacity of the road network.
Environmental Amenity Impacts
These impacts technically only arise in relation to Richmond Road in the context of the 25
spaces that are accessed via this road. However, there is a reasonable prospect that at peak
times, drivers will arrive at the site in the expectation of finding an available space; and then
have to leave the site via Richmond Road to circulate in search of an available space
elsewhere. In this regard, the proposed electronic signage will not overcome this behaviour
as the sign is to be located within the site and only visible once a driver has committed to
using Richmond Road.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 70
Notwithstanding this, patrons will generally be regular users of the site and it is reasonable to
expect that some of these people will rely on the 9 spaces that are provided external to the site
elsewhere, including on-street in New South Head Road and within public parking areas that
have been partly funded by the development through a Section 94 contribution. Having
regard for this, we consider that a reasonable assumption would be to assume that 50% of
the traffic using these „external‟ spaces will attempt to access the on-site parking, so that the
overall traffic in Richmond Road will be as follows:
93 veh/hr (46 in, 47 out) within the site (i.e. 25 spaces x 3.7);
8 veh/hr associated with „unsuccessful‟ cars on arrival (50% of the balance of 16
arrivals); and
8 veh/hr as these unsuccessful drivers immediately depart the area
That is, there will be a total of 109 veh/hr generated onto Richmond Road (say 110 veh/hr)
during the critical PM peak period. In our view, demands in the AM peak will be moderate
and we accept the general assumption that for planning purposes, AM peak flows will be 60%
of the PM peak flows. Further, as parking demands will be able to be accommodated within
the site in the morning, the resultant 76 veh/hr (60% of 126 veh/hr) will use Richmond Road.
The CBHK traffic report has assumed that 60% of all traffic using the Richmond Road access
will travel to/from the east via Newcastle Street; with 40% travelling to/from the west via
Norwich Road. On this basis, the traffic volume increases on these sections of road will be as
shown in Table 1 below on a typical Friday, based on the CBHK survey results:
It is evident from the Table 1 that traffic volumes on any section on Richmond Road will at all
times remain below the „environmental goal‟ of 300 veh/hr, assuming for the moment that this
is a relevant criteria.
Nevertheless, we note that the surveys undertaken by C Hallam & Associates undertaken
separately resulted in different traffic volumes. Using these survey results, the resulting traffic
volume increases on a typical Friday would be as shown in Table 2 below:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 71
It is evident from the Table 2 that traffic volumes on any section on Richmond Road will still
remain below the „environmental goal‟ of 300 veh/hr, again assuming that this is a relevant
criteria. On this basis, we conclude that the development will create no unacceptable impacts
on the environmental amenity of residents on this street. We also note that while background
traffic volumes on other weekdays may be higher, the supermarket would typically generate
lower volumes on those days.
With regard to the concept of environmental amenity generally, we note that the amenity
thresholds outlined above relate to a residential street and that even with an exclusively
residential street, there are factors that warrant variations to these thresholds. One such
factor is the use of traffic management devices which can increase environmental amenity by
reducing speeds. In our view, the relatively narrow width of Richmond Road, the presence of
kerbside parking, the limited length of the street, and the curvilinear alignment are all factors
that would reduce speeds and thereby increase the environmental capacity threshold.
Arguably of more relevance however is the fact that Richmond Road is not a residential street
as contemplated in the RTA‟s Guideline. It is a street that lies along the southern boundary of
commercially zoned land and it therefore has a legitimate service function, particularly where
the RTA policy would not support direct access onto New South Head Road. In these
circumstances, the environmental capacity is higher and residents in a street such as
Richmond Road should not in our view have the same expectation of amenity as would be
available within an exclusively residential area. Nevertheless, these factors are not brought to
bear in circumstances where the amenity threshold is not exceeded. Rather, it may be
considered to provide a „safety margin‟ in the event that higher traffic generation rates were
to be considered.
Finally, we note that the traffic volumes assessed above are „peak volumes‟ that do not occur
on all weekdays. Conversely, the environmental amenity threshold is associated with traffic
volumes that occur on a daily basis (rather than peak weekday volumes that only occur on
two weekdays) and this therefore provides a further safety margin. We also note that the
above conclusions are not affected by the range of traffic generation assessed by the various
traffic experts.
In summary, we do not consider that the application creates any unacceptable impacts in
relation to environmental amenity on Richmond Road; or any other local road in the vicinity.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 72
External Road Improvements
We note that Council‟s Traffic Engineer has recommended that traffic calming measures be
implemented in Norwich Lane to prevent any increase of non-local through traffic. Such
works are to be implemented following approval by Council‟s Traffic Committee and may be
revised as part of this process. The works are outlined in the response of Technical Services
dated 20th May 2011 to Council‟s Senior Assessment Officer and include:
“Narrowing of the carriageway by establishing a footpath, kerb and gutter and the
implementation of a Watts profile speed hump. The applicant must liaise with Council‟s
Traffic section regarding the location of the new speed hump.”
The proposed development is likely to generate an additional 44 veh/hr in Norwich Road
during the PM peak based on our assessment above, with most of this traffic traversing the
section between Richmond Road and New South Head Road. This is less than one additional
vehicle movement per minute and this increase does not in itself create a need for a traffic
control device to be constructed, particularly where the supermarket has a potential to reduce
rat-running due to „side friction‟ effects in Richmond Road. Nevertheless, such a traffic device
will increase the environmental capacity of Norwich Lane by reducing speeds, as discussed in
Section 4.3.5 of the RTA‟s Guidelines; and this is an appropriate objective. The device may
also of itself remove some rat-running traffic thereby reducing traffic volumes and this is also
a desirable objective. Accordingly, implementation of this device is supported. In our view
there is a shared responsibility for its funding (between Council and the applicant), given that
the device is in part required to address an existing problem (rat-running) which is not
attributable to the proposed development. This is a matter for Council, noting that such a
device may be regarded as a low-cost measure.
Finally, we note that any condition relating to this device needs to have certainty and that the
current intention to accommodate any changes that the Traffic Committee may require is
uncertain. We therefore recommend that Council either describe the works more definitively;
or incorporate a concept plan into any condition that might be contemplated, so that the
nature and scope of the calming attached to any consent works is known.
Service Vehicles
The revised delivery schedule prepared by Scott Carver in its letter dated 19 August identifies
8-10 deliveries per day and this level of activity has been relatively consistently advised by the
applicant, with the CBHK Traffic Report of August 2010 stating (in Para 3.13) that:
“The number of deliveries will be low at some 6 to 8 per day, with the majority of those being
by vans and small trucks.”
This estimate was based on the use of 10.7m trucks once per day. The decision by the
applicant to rely on a maximum 8.8m truck (MRV) appears to have (logically) resulted in a
slight increase in the service volume from 6-8 trucks to 8-10 trucks. The most recent delivery
schedule prepared by Scott Carver has been reviewed and it is evident that on a typical
weekday, there will be about:
6 deliveries by trucks 8.8m or less (2 before 10am); and
4 deliveries by lite van/truck (3 before 10am).
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 73
It is probably reasonable to assume that the former (larger) trucks are in the range of 6.4m to
8.8m (SRV to MRV) and that the lite vans/trucks are smaller than a 6.4m SRV. It is unclear
from the application whether all these trucks are to enter the site and access the dock under
supervision; and also whether all these trucks are to exit via New South Head Road and this
requires clarification by the applicant. As there is no waiting area within the site it is also
necessary to ensure that there will be no more than one service vehicles on-site at any one
time and this outcome needs to be essentially guaranteed and demonstrated by the applicant
prior to any approval being granted. In this regard, while Woolworths may be in a position to
control the arrival of trucks from their distribution centre, this may not be possible in relation
to independent suppliers. This situation is also made more critical in circumstances where
there may occasionally be a need for cars to undertake a „U‟ turn manoeuvre in the vicinity of
the dock, in the event that all parking spaces are occupied (for example, two cars may enter
the site together whereas only a single space is available, with the electronic display
indicating that there is available parking).
Construction Traffic Impacts
It is considered that a standard condition of consent should be imposed on the development
requiring the preparation of a detailed Construction Traffic and Pedestrian Management
Plan.
In response to the independent traffic peer review:
External Road Improvements:
Council‘s Traffic Engineer has provided the following comments in relation to external road
improvements:
The comments regarding the recommended traffic calming measures in Norwich Lane by the
Council engaged Traffic consultant (Graham Pindar – Traffix) have been noted.
Whilst there is a significant level of non-local through traffic (“rat running”) occurring in
Norwich Lane and Richmond Road, the current levels and speeds are insufficient to warrant
traffic calming measures to be implemented. Traffic counts undertaken by Council indicate
both roadways convey relatively low traffic volumes for an inner city urban area and traffic
speeds are within the posted speed limit.
The approval and implementation of such measures are a protracted process warranting
resident consultation and support, Local Traffic Committee approval and Council‟s own
Community and Environment Committee approval. For this reason, the recommended
condition requires some flexibility to accommodate amendments to the works resulting from
this process. It is to be noted that the applicant has also agreed to this arrangement.
Condition C.4 requires traffic calming measures to Norwich Lane, subject to resident consultation
and support, and Local Traffic Committee approval.
Service vehicles:
The applicant has confirmed, in an email dated 23 September 2011, that:
All trucks would access the loading dock under supervision and exit via New South Head
Road.
The vehicles from Woolworths distribution centre can be staggered so that there will be no
more than one service vehicle on site at any one time. The arrival of small vans from external
suppliers cannot be controlled.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 74
There is no objection to a condition which restricts the length of the vehicles to a maximum of
8.8m and an average limit of 3, 8.8m vehicle deliveries per day over a typical week.
Condition C.14 requires the delivery vehicles to be equipped with a two way radio or mobile
phone. The drivers of the delivery vehicles shall be instructed by his/her written instructions, to
contact the Woolworth‘s loading dock supervisor, prior to the truck entering Richmond Road, in
order that the supervisor may thereby ensure that a member of his/her staff may be present to ensure
that the driveway is clear and safe for the truck‘s entry.
The applicant has provided
Construction vehicle traffic impacts:
Condition D.5 requires the preparation of a detailed Construction Traffic and Pedestrian
Management Plan.
On 14 December 2011, a further traffic peer review was provided on behalf of an objector, prepared
by Christopher Hallam and Associates, reference 2839. The issues raised in the objector‘s peer
review, are largely addressed above, with the exception of the following:
In relation to the traffic surveys undertaken in Richmond Road, the objector‘s peer review states
that, the Council commissioned peer review has applied the traffic counts incorrectly. The
objector‘s peer review states that if the existing traffic flows are correctly applied the proposal
would exceed the maximum environmental goal for Richmond Road.
It is noted that, even if this view is supported, it appears that the non-compliance would only
occur for one hour on Friday afternoon, and at all other times the proposal would accord with
the maximum environmental goal. A one hour non-compliance with maximum environmental
goal would not warrant the refusal of the application.
Subject to the above conditions, the proposal is satisfactory with regards to traffic generation.
16.2 Economic Impact
Many of the submissions have raised objections on the basis of increased competition with other
retailers in the locality. Concern has been expressed that the proposed supermarket may put other
shops out of business, and in doing so, reduce the level of service offered to the community.
Whilst s79C (1) (b) (b) of the EP & A Act 1979, requires the evaluation of the proposal in terms of
the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and
built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality, the following case law clearly
states that competition between a proposed use of a building and other businesses within the same
locality is not a matter for consideration under the EP & A Act 1979.
Fabcot v Hawkesbury City Council was a class 1 appeal from the refusal of Hawkesbury City
Council to grant development consent to a development application for a Woolworths supermarket
to be located outside the town centre of Windsor. One of the issues, numbered 5, was whether the
proposed supermarket would have an adverse economic impact on existing and planned retail
supermarkets within the Hawkesbury city local government area. That issue was not considered
under then s 90(1)(d) (superseded by the provisions of s79C).
Lloyd J decided that issue number 5 did not raise a planning or environmental consideration. In so
concluding, his Honour said at p378:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 75
Similarly, economic competition between individual trade competitors is not an environmental or
planning consideration to which the economic effect described in s 90(1)(d) is directed. The Trade
Practices Act 1974 (Cth) and the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) are the appropriate vehicles for
regulating economic competition. Neither the Council nor this Court is concerned with the mere
threat of economic competition between competing businesses. In an economy such as ours that is a
matter to be resolved by market forces, subject to the Trade Practices Act and the Fair Trading Act.
It is not part of the assessment of a proposal under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act
for a consent authority to examine and determine the economic viability of a particular proposal or
the effect of any such proposal on the economic viability of a trade competitor. Moreover, it is at
least arguable from the fact that the Trade Practices Act now applies to local government councils,
that if a local council were to refuse or to limit a proposal for development on the ground of
competition with a trade competitor, it could be guilty of anti-competitive conduct contrary to Pt 4
of that Act.
As previously stated, Rose Bay centre provides a wide variety of retail uses. These include Motor
Vehicle Services (fuel retailing, automotive services, etc), Commercial retail (banking, real estate,
etc), Personal services (hairdressers, laundrettes, cafes, restaurants, etc) Personal and Household
Goods retail (clothing, stationary, pharmaceuticals, etc) and food retailing (food shops, takeaways,
etc). Many of the services and facilities which are provided by the existing retail outlets would not
be provided by the proposed supermarket. This will ensure that the proposal would not have an
overall adverse impact on the extent and adequacy of local community services and facilities.
17. THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE
The subject site is located within a General Business 3(a) Zone. The proposal would improve the
provision of retail uses within the Rose Bay Centre by providing a new supermarket. Furthermore
the proposal would provide up to 20-30 additional full and part time employment positions.
It is acknowledged that the proposal will impact upon the residential amenity of the neighbouring
residential lands, specifically with regards to acoustic, parking and traffic impacts. However,
subject to conditions which have been included as part of the recommendation, the impact of the
proposed commercial use upon neighbouring residential lands will be appropriately managed.
18. SUBMISSIONS
The proposal was advertised and notified in accordance with Council‘s Advertising and
Notifications DCP.
The original proposal attracted the following submissions:
4 letters of support
64 letters of objection
A petition with 419 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 09 February 2009.
A petition with 250 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 11 May 2009.
The first amended proposal attracted the following submissions:
16 letters of objection
A petition with 607 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 13 July 2009.
The second amended proposal attracted the following submissions:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 76
3 letters of support
59 letters of objection
A petition with 150 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 11 October 2010.
A petition with 440 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 01 November 2010.
A petition with 1321 signatures was tabled at the Council meeting on 01 November
2010.
The third amended proposal attracted the following submissions:
8 letters of objection.
The fourth amended proposal attracted the following submissions:
20 letters of objection.
This comprises of a total of:
167 letters of objections.
6 petitions of objection containing approximately 3187 signatures.
7 letters of support.
The objections raised numerous issues with the proposal, seven key issues emerged which
consistently appeared in many of the submissions. These are listed below: A matrix of the
submissions is attached as Annexure 12.
Key issues:
1. Impacts to the Heritage Item (former Post Office).
2. Impacts upon the Rose Bay streetscape and village character.
3. Impact upon the existing shops within the Rose Bay Centre.
4. Impacts upon parking, traffic and pedestrian safety
5. Acoustic impacts.
6. The potential for the proposal to be amended to a Dan Murphy Liquor retailer
7. Environmental Sustainability
The issues raised are addressed as follow:
1. Impacts to the Heritage Item (former Post Office):
a. Fails to retain sufficient significant fabric.
b. Unacceptably impacts upon the heritage significance of the heritage item.
Council Response: These issues are addressed within the ‗Clauses 26-33 Heritage and conservation
area provisions‘ and ‗Heritage & conservation (6.3.4)‘ sections of the report.
2. Impacts upon the Rose Bay streetscape and village character.
Council Response: This is addressed within section 14 of the report.
3. Impact upon the existing shops within the Rose Bay Centre:
a. It will adversely impact upon small businesses.
b. It will reduce the variety of products available in Rose Bay.
c. It will encourage a monopoly within Rose Bay.
Council Response: These issues are addressed within the ‗Draft State Environmental Planning
Policy (Competition) 2010‘ and ‗Economic Impact‘ sections of the report.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 77
4. Impacts upon parking, traffic and pedestrian safety:
a. Insufficient parking.
b. Congestion.
c. Deliveries.
d. There is no waiting zone for delivery vehicles.
e. Pedestrian safety.
f. Conflict with the car wash operations.
g. The inappropriateness of providing a s94 contribution for parking.
h. Access for emergency vehicles.
i. Garbage collection.
j. The proposed car park provides no separate pedestrian access.
k. The proposal removes the parking approved for a number of existing businesses in Rose
Bay.
l. Providing an access for service vehicles from Richmond Road would require the
removal of on street parking.
m. Loss of on street car parking.
n. The inappropriateness of applying the 2011 Parking Development Control Plan.
o. The classification of Richmond Road.
p. Loss of car parking approved under DA 598/2006 at the subject site.
q. The inappropriateness of siting DA consent 598/2006 as justification for the subject
proposal.
Council Response: These issues are addressed within the ‗The aims and objectives of the WLEP
1995‘, ‗development control plans‘ and ‗traffic generation‘ sections of the report.
5. Acoustic Impacts
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Visual and Acoustic Privacy‘ section of the
report.
6. The potential for the proposal to be amended to a Dan Murphy Liquor retailer.
Council Response: The subject application is for a supermarket. Amending the proposal to a Dan
Murphy Liquor retailer would require a new Development Application. Any new development
application would be assessed on merit. As the subject application does not propose a Dan Murphy
Liquor retailer the impact of such a proposal is not a relevant planning consideration under the
current Development Application.
7. Environmental Sustainability of a supermarket.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗energy efficiency‘ section of the report.
8. Solar access.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Solar access & natural daylight‘ section of
the report.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 78
9. Stormwater runoff.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Clause 25 Water, wastewater and
stormwater‘ and ‗stormwater‘ section of the report.
10. The proposal is not appropriate in a transition area as identified in the Rose Bay Centre DCP.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Development Control Plan‘ section of the
report.
11. Advertising signage will adversely impact upon the streetscape
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP)
64-Advertising and Signage‘ and ‗Signage & advertising‘ section of the report.
12. Excessive hours of operation.
Council Response: The proposed hours of operation are trading hours of 7am to 10pm Monday to
Sunday (seven days a week). Condition I.1 provides a trial period for the proposed hours of use.
This is to ensure that the proposed use would not adversely impact upon the acoustic privacy, and
residential amenity of the neighbouring properties. For the first 12 months that the supermarket is in
operation, the hours of use are limited to 7am-10pm. After the first 12 months that the supermarket
is in operation, the hours of use are limited to 7am-7pm. If a section 96 application is submitted to
Council to amended condition I.1 to maintain the longer opening hours, Council will review the
hours of use to assess the magnitude of that operational regime on the adjacent residential
properties.
13. Car park lighting – light pollution
Council Response: The issue of light pollution is addressed by condition I.12 of the
recommendation.
14. Customer Vehicle headlights – light pollution to neighbouring residents
Council Response: It is considered that the light from the headlights of customer‘s vehicles entering
and exiting the site would not unreasonably impact upon the amenity of the neighbouring
properties. This view is formed taking into consideration: the commercial zoning of the subject site,
the separation distance to the closest properties to the southern side of Richmond Road (30m), and
the frequency of movements during the evening period. Furthermore condition I.1 provides a trial
period for the proposed hours of use after 7pm. This is to ensure that the proposed use would not
adversely impact upon the acoustic privacy, and residential amenity of the neighbouring properties.
15. Access and mobility.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Access and mobility‘ section of the report.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 79
16. Description of site and owners consent.
Council Response: The site address includes all properties which form part of the subject site. This
includes 759 New South Head Road, Rose Bay (Crystal Car wash) which provides egress for
service vehicles. Owners consent has been provided for all of the properties which form the subject
site.
17. The loss of a through site pedestrian connection.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Urban Structure‘ section of the report.
18. Trees and landscaping
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗soft landscaping‘ section of the report.
19. Undesirable elements would be attracted to the area which would impact upon safety.
Council Response: The proposal was reviewed by Council‘s Urban Design Planner, which
considered the design of the proposal‘s potential to attract antisocial behaviour. Condition C.2 of
the recommendation requires seating or appropriate landscaping to be provided to the recess to New
South Head Road, between the former post office and former car showroom to prevent this area
from becoming a litter trap or attracting anti-social behaviour. Subject to this condition, the
proposal is satisfactory in this regard.
20. Increases alcohol availability.
Council Response: The proposal does not include the sale of alcohol. For clarity condition A.6
states that: „This approval does not give consent for the sale of liquor at the subject site. A separate
Development Consent will need to be obtained prior to such development work commencing‟.
21. Adequacy of the submitted documentation.
Council Response: The submitted documentation is considered to be satisfactory.
22. The quality of Woolworths suppliers.
Council Response: This is beyond the scope of the current Development Application.
23. Decreases to neighbouring property values.
Council Response: This is beyond the scope of the current Development Application.
24. The proposal would encroach upon the existing right of way within the site.
Council Response: The applicant has provided a letter from Craig and Rhodes Surveyors dated 24
March 2011, which states that:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 80
‗regarding the status of the right of carriage way depicted on Lot 2 in DP776799, we
requested a historical search from the Land Titles Office to determine if there had been any
documentation lodged to cancel the subject Right of Carriage Way….Subsequent to this
application we have received the enclosed copy of Instrument No. 1233780 (denoted „E‟)
notifying of the cancellation of both Rights of Carriage Way over each property plus the
cancellation of the „Easement for support‟.
25. The impact of the acoustic barriers.
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Use‘ section of the report, which is contained
within section 14.1.
26. The impact of Norwich Lane Traffic Calming measures on residential amenity
Council response: The approval and implementation of traffic calming measures would involve
resident consultation and support, Local Traffic Committee approval and Council‘s own
Community and Environment Committee approval. The recommended condition requires some
flexibility to accommodate amendments to the works resulting from this process. The applicant has
also agreed to this arrangement. It is noted that the Council commissioned independent traffic peer
review identified that the development would result in ‗less than one additional vehicle movement
per minute and this increase does not in itself create a need for a traffic control device to be
constructed, particularly where the supermarket has a potential to reduce rat-running due to „side
friction‟ effects in Richmond Road‟.
27. Accuracy of the floor area calculations
Council Response: This issue is addressed within the ‗Floor Space Ratio‘ section of the report,
which is contained within section 11.6.
28. Nuisance caused by shopping trolleys
Council Response: This issue is addressed within section 14.1 of the report, and by Condition F.7
which requires a Trolley Management Plan to be submitted to and approved by a member of
Council‘s planning staff. The plan must detail: Measures to ensure shopping trolleys shall remain
on the premises of the subject site, the implementation of ―containment‖ systems that encourage the
confinement of trolleys to the retailer‘s premises, and a management program which ensures that
shopping trolleys taken from the retail premises are collected at least daily. In addition samples of
the proposed shopping trolleys shall be provided to Council for assessment and approval.
29. Service vehicles egressing via the adjoining car wash will conflict with condition 5 of NSW
Land and Environment Court Appeal No. 12087 of 2004 Wurley Group Pty Ltd v Woollahra
Municipal Council, at 759-777 New South Head Road, Rose Bay (Crystal Car Wash)
Council Response: Council‘s records indicate that the Wurley Group Pty Ltd v Woollahra
Municipal Council, NSW Land and Environment Court Appeal in 2004 was Appeal No. 10878 of
2004. Condition 5 of this judgment requires the replacement of the existing rear and side metal
boundary fences with 1.8m high painted masonry or lapped timber fencing. The condition was
imposed to improve the visual amenity of the locality. The north eastern side boundary of the
former Post Office site abuts the car wash. Under the subject proposal the land adjacent to the north
eastern side boundary will comprise of: a disabled access ramp, landscaping and hardsurfacing to
enable service vehicles to egress the supermarket. Whilst the proposal will prevent a boundary
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 81
fence being located at the point where the service vehicles will egress the supermarket, this will not
adversely impact upon the visual amenity of the locality.
30. The delivery schedule fails to make provision for fruit and vegetable deliveries
Council Response: The applicant has confirmed in an email from Richard Armitage, dated 09
February 2012, that ‗For our small metro stores (i.e. the met centre) we deliver produce (fruit &
veg) in the same vehicle as chilled meat & Deli (also dairy). The schedule is therefore correct‘.
The letters of support raised the following points:
1. The site is suitable for the proposed development.
2. There is an existing Council car park.
3. The proposal would not disadvantage existing shops.
4. The proposal provides an additional retail option for consumers.
5. The proposal may bring additional foot traffic to Rose Bay.
6. The proposal may encourage consumers to shop locally rather than requiring car trips to other
shopping centres.
7. There is a lack of good quality food stores in Rose Bay.
8. Woolworths provide competitive prices.
19. CONCLUSION - THE PUBLIC INTEREST
In determining whether or not the proposal is in the public interest, both the wider public interest (in
this instance, the provision of an additional retail facility and the sectionalised public interest
(protecting the amenity of the owners of surrounding land) must be taken into consideration in a
balanced manner. In the event that the wider public interest outweighs the sectionalised public
interest, the proposal can be determined to be in the public interest.
With regard to the wider public interest, the proposal will improve the provision of retail facilities
within Rose Bay by providing a new supermarket. Furthermore the proposal would provide up to
20-30 additional full and part time employed positions. The proposal will also ensure the adaptive
re-use of the former Post Office building and ensures the conservation of this building which is
listed in the WLEP as a heritage item.
In terms of the sectionalised public interest, whilst it is accepted that the proposal will impact upon
the amenity of the residents and occupiers immediately surrounding the site it is considered that
these impacts can be adequately conditioned to ensure that the proposal will not have any
significant adverse impact upon the residential amenity of the local community. Accordingly, it is
considered that the proposal is in the public interest.
20. DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Under S.147 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 there have been no
disclosure statements regarding political donations or gifts made to any councillor or gifts made to
any council employee submitted with this development application by either the applicant or any
person who made a submission.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 82
21. RECOMMENDATION: Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act, 1979
A. THAT the Council, as the consent authority issue a deferred commencement development
consent to Development Application No. 845/2008 for the re-adaptive reuse of No. 751-755
(former car showroom) and No. 757 (former Post Office) New South Head Road for a retail
use as a Woolworths supermarket, and the demolition of the pair of semi-detached dwellings
at No. 12 and No. 14 Richmond Road to provide the associated off-street car parking for 25
vehicles, with egress for service vehicles via 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash),
on land at 751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose
Bay, as follows:
A.1 Deferred Commencement - (s80(3) of the Act, cl.95 of the Regulation)
Development consent is granted subject that this consent is not to operate until the applicant
satisfies the Council in relation to the following:
a. To ensure that access is maintained throughout the life of the development, the person
with the benefit of this consent must procure an easement for right of carriage way over
No. 759 New South Head Road, Rose Bay NSW 2029 to enable service vehicles to
egress the site, across No. 759 New South Road, in accordance with drawing 1 ‗8.8m
Medium Rigid Vehicle Swept Paths‘, dated 02 May 2011, prepared by Colston Budd
Hunt and Kafes Pty Ltd.
b. Evidence of registration of the easement for right of carriageway benefiting the land
being developed and burdening the title of No. 759 New South Head Road, Rose Bay
NSW 2029 must be provided to Council.
c. Specifically a plan of Torrens title incorporating the right of carriageway pursuant to the
Conveyancing Act, burdening No 759 New South Head Road, Rose Bay NSW 2029 and
benefiting the land being developed is to be created and submitted to Council.
Period within which evidence must be produced
The applicant must produce evidence to Council sufficient enough to enable it to be satisfied
as to those matters above within 365 days (1 year) of the date of determination.
Clause 95(4) of the Regulation:
―The applicant may produce evidence to the consent authority sufficient to enable it to be
satisfied as to those matters and, if the consent authority has specified a period for the
purpose, the evidence must be produced within that period.‖
If the evidence is not produced within 365 days (1 year) of the date of determination this
deferred commencement consent is of no effect, the consent does not operate and no
construction certificate can be issued. No development can lawfully occur under this consent
unless it operates.
Note: Nothing in the Act prevents a person from doing such things as may be necessary to comply with this
condition. (See section 80(3) of the Act)
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 83
This consent does not operate until Council has acknowledged compliance with this condition
in writing.
Note: Implementing the development prior to written confirmation of compliance may result in legal
proceedings. If such proceedings are required Council will seek all costs associated with such
proceedings as well as any penalty or order that the Court may impose. No Construction Certificate can
be issued until all conditions including this condition required to be satisfied prior to the issue of any
Construction Certificate have been satisfied. Standard Condition: A3
B. THAT Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development
Application No. 845/2008 for the re-adaptive reuse of No. 751-755 (former car showroom)
and No. 757 (former Post Office) New South Head Road for a retail use as a Woolworths
supermarket, and the demolition of the pair of semi-detached dwellings at No. 12 and No. 14
Richmond Road to provide the associated off-street car parking for 25 vehicles, with egress
for service vehicles via 759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car Wash), on land at 751-755,
757 and 759 New South Head Road and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay, subject to the
following conditions:
A. General Conditions
A.1 Conditions
Consent is granted subject to the following conditions imposed pursuant to section 80 of the
Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (―the Act‖) and the provisions of the
Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (―the Regulation‖) such conditions
being reasonable and relevant to the development as assessed pursuant to section 79C of the
Act. Standard Condition: A1
A.2 Definitions
Unless specified otherwise words have the same meaning as defined by the Act, the
Regulation and the Interpretation Act 1987 as in force at the date of consent.
Applicant means the applicant for this Consent.
Approved Plans mean the plans endorsed by Council referenced by this consent as amended
by conditions of this consent.
AS or AS/NZS means Australian Standard® or Australian/New Zealand Standard®,
respectively, published by Standards Australia International Limited.
BCA means the Building Code of Australia as published by the Australian Building Codes
Board as in force at the date of issue of any Construction Certificate.
Council means Woollahra Municipal Council
Court means the Land and Environment Court
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 84
Local native plants means species of native plant endemic to Sydney‘s eastern suburbs (see
the brochure titled ―Local Native Plants for Sydney‘s Eastern Suburbs published by the
Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils).
Stormwater Drainage System means all works, facilities and documentation relating to:
The collection of stormwater,
The retention of stormwater,
The reuse of stormwater,
The detention of stormwater,
The controlled release of stormwater; and
Connections to easements and public stormwater systems.
Owner means the owner of the site and successors in title to the site.
Owner Builder has the same meaning as in the Home Building Act 1989.
PCA means the Principal Certifying Authority under the Act.
Principal Contractor has the same meaning as in the Act or where a principal contractor has
not been appointed by the owner of the land being developed Principal Contractor means the
owner of the land being developed.
Professional Engineer has the same meaning as in the BCA.
Public Place has the same meaning as in the Local Government Act 1993.
Road has the same mean as in the Roads Act 1993.
SEE means the final version of the Statement of Environmental Effects lodged by the
Applicant.
Site means the land being developed subject to this consent.
WLEP 1995 means Woollahra Local Environmental Plan 1995
Work for the purposes of this consent means:
the use of land in connection with development,
the subdivision of land,
the erection of a building,
the carrying out of any work,
the use of any site crane, machine, article, material, or thing,
the storage of waste, materials, site crane, machine, article, material, or thing,
the demolition of a building,
the piling, piering, cutting, boring, drilling, rock breaking, rock sawing or excavation of
land,
the delivery to or removal from the site of any machine, article, material, or thing, or
the occupation of the site by any person unless authorised by an occupation certificate.
Note: Interpretation of Conditions - Where there is any need to obtain an interpretation of the intent of any
condition this must be done in writing to Council and confirmed in writing by Council. Standard Condition: A2
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 85
A.3 Approved Plans and supporting documents
Those with the benefit of this consent must carry out all work and maintain the use and works
in accordance with the plans and supporting documents listed below as submitted by the
Applicant and to which is affixed a Council stamp ―Approved DA Plans‖ unless modified by
any following condition. Where the plans relate to alterations or additions only those works
shown in colour or highlighted are approved.
Reference Description Author/Drawn Date(s)
DA Acoustic Assessment
Woolworths Rose Bay.
Acoustic Report. Aecom Acoustic. 23/11/2011
Architectural Plans:
DA 02 DA-F
DA 03 DA-F
DA 04 DA-F
DA 05 DA-F
DA 06 DA-F
DA 07 DA-F
DA 08 DA-D
DA 09 DA-D
DA 10 DA-F
DA 11 DA-F
DA 12 DA-F
Architectural Plans:
Site Plan.
Ground Floor Plan.
Ground Floor Fitout Plan.
First Floor Plan.
First Floor Fitout Plan.
Roof Plan.
Site Demolition Plan.
First Floor Demolition Plan.
Elevations.
Colour Elevations.
Sections.
Scott Carver Pty Ltd. 16/11/2011
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
20/08/2010
20/08/2010
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
16/11/2011
LDA-001 A Landscape Plan. Scape. 02/2009
7191/1
7906/1
TR/7906/jj
Traffic and Parking Report.
Traffic and Parking Report.
Supplementary Traffic and
.Parking Info.
Colston Budd Hunt &
Kafes Pty Ltd.
12/2008
08/2010
04/05/2011
22724Vrpt Geotechnical Report.
Jeffery & Katauskas
Pty Ltd.
11/03/2009
1683 and 1683/2 Targeted Environmental Site
Assessment and Preliminary Acid
SUlfate Soils Assessment
Aargus Pty Ltd 02/2007
09/0050
C01 Rev 00
C02 Rev 00
Stormwater Report.
Management Plan.3
Richard Ross Pty Ltd. 16/03/09
17/02/09
17/02/09
Note: Warning to Accredited Certifiers – You should always insist on sighting the original Council stamped
approved plans. You should not rely solely upon the plan reference numbers in this condition. Should
the applicant not be able to provide you with the original copy Council will provide you with access to its
files so you may review our original copy of the approved plan.
Note: These plans and supporting documentation may be subject to conditions imposed under section 80A(1)(g)
of the Act modifying or amending the development (refer to conditions which must be satisfied prior to
the issue of any Construction Certificate.)
Standard Condition: A5
A.4 Ancillary Aspect of the Development (s80A(2) of the Act)
The owner must procure the repair, replacement or rebuilding of all road pavement, kerb,
gutter, footway, footpaths adjoining the site or damaged as a result of work under this consent
or as a consequence of work under this consent. Such work must be undertaken to Council's
satisfaction in accordance with Council‘s ―Specification for Roadworks, Drainage and
Miscellaneous Works‖ dated January 2003 unless expressly provided otherwise by these
conditions at the owner‟s expense.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 86
Note: This condition does not affect the principal contractor's or any sub-contractors obligations to protect and
preserve public infrastructure from damage or affect their liability for any damage that occurs. Standard Condition: A8
A.5 Development Consent is not granted in relation to these matters
This approval does not give consent for the sale of liquor at the subject site. A separate
Development Consent will need to be obtained prior to such development work commencing. Standard Condition: A9
B. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the demolition of any building or
construction
B.1 Construction Certificate required prior to any demolition
Where demolition is associated with an altered portion of, or an extension to an existing
building the demolition of any part of a building is "commencement of erection of building"
pursuant to section 81A(2) of the Act. In such circumstance all conditions in Part C and Part
D of this consent must be satisfied prior to any demolition work. This includes, but is not
limited to, the issue of a Construction Certificate, appointment of a PCA and Notice of
Commencement under the Act.
Note: See Over our Dead Body Society Inc v Byron Bay Community Association Inc [2001] NSWLEC 125.
Standard Condition: B1
B.2 Recording of Heritage Items prior to any demolition
A full archival record of the building and landscape elements to be demolished is to be
submitted, to the satisfaction of Council‘s heritage officer, prior to the commencement of any
work and prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.
The archival record is to be completed by a heritage consultant listed by the NSW Heritage
Office or by another suitably qualified consultant who must demonstrate a working
knowledge of archival principles.
The archival record is to include:
a) The submitted heritage report including the heritage assessment undertaken in
accordance with the current guidelines of the NSW heritage office, the statement of
significance, the dilapidation report and the reasons for demolition.
b) A site plan at a scale of 1:200 (or 1:500 if appropriate) of all structures and major
landscape elements including their relationship to the street and adjoining properties.
c) Annotated measured drawings: floor plans, roof plans, elevations and at least one cross
section, each at a scale of 1:100.
d) Photographic archival records must be taken of the building, landscape or item in
accordance with ‗The Heritage Information Series, Photographic Recording of Heritage
Items Using Film or Digital Capture 2006‘ published by the NSW Department of
Planning Heritage Branch.
The archival recode must include:
Context Photographs- A recording of each site, place or movable item or collection in
its context;
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 87
Relationship of Buildings on the Site to Each Other;
Individual Building or Structures- Photographs of each façade with details where
appropriate including but not limited to: eaves, soffits, rainwater heads, downpipes,
window reveals and sills, doorways and steps, and balustrades;
Internal Spaces- Images should be taken in a sequence to show all internal elevations,
including floors and ceilings, where possible. Special attention should be placed on
structural elements, fittings and any movable items.
There should be three sets of the photographic report and film materials or digital materials.
The following table summarises the lodgment details for photographic records, depending on
which material is selected. It is satisfactory to supply one material only and digital material is
recommended.
Material Minimum Requirement Repository
Digital Materials 3 copies of photographic
report – paper copy
3 CD-Rs or DVD
1 set of 10.5x14.8cm prints
Woollahra Council
Report (paper) + CD-R or DVD + prints
Local History Centre
Report (paper) + CD-R or DVD
Owner/client
Report (paper) + CD-R or DVD
Black & White Film
(plus any
supplementary colour
film)
3 copies of photographic
report
1 set of negatives
1 sets of proof sheets and
catalogue
Woollahra Council
Report + negatives + 1st set of proof sheets
Local History Centre
Report + 2nd set of proof sheets
Owner/client
Report + 3rd set of proof sheets
Colour
Transparencies or
Slides
3 copies of photographic report
1 set of original transparencies and
two sets of duplicates
OR
3 sets of original images taken
concurrently
Woollahra Council
Report + original transparencies
Local History Centre
Report + duplicate/concurrent transparencies:
Owner/client
Report + duplicate/concurrent transparencies
The full archival recording is to be submitted be to the satisfaction of Council‘s heritage
officer prior to the commencement of demolition, works and prior to the issue of a
Construction Certificate. The original will be retained by Council and a copy will be provided
to the Woollahra Local History Library.
These photographic records must be submitted to Council prior to the demolition or removal
of any part of the building and landscape elements to be demolished.
Note: The NSW Heritage Office Guidelines can be downloaded free of charge from
http://www.heritage.nsw.gov.au/docs/info_photographicrecording2006.pdf Standard Condition: B2
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 88
B.3 Assessment of groundwater quality (site contamination)
Prior to any demolition, excavation, or construction works, the applicant must assess the
groundwater quality at the proposed site with reference to the ANZECC (2000) ‗Australian
and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality‘ and the Dutch intervention
value (600ug/L) to determine if Trigger Value (TV) concentrations are exceeded that may
indicate a potential environmental problem and ―trigger‖ further investigation. The field
investigations and results of the groundwater sampling shall be forwarded to Woollahra
Council and approved in writing prior to the commencement of any demolition, excavation or
construction works.
B.4 Assessment of groundwater quality (Acid Sulfate)
Prior to any demolition, excavation, or construction works, a minimum of 4 sampling holes
must be analysed to consolidate the nature and degree of Acid Sulfate Soils present in the
surface and subsurface geology of the proposed development site in accordance with Table
4.1 of the ASSMAC Assessment Guidelines (1998). Soil samples should be collected for
every soil layer or every half (0.5) metres inspection locations conforming to the Australian
Soil and Land Survey handbook (McDonald et al., 1990). The resulting soil sampling and
laboratory analysis shall be forwarded to Woollahra Council and approved in writing prior to
the commencement of any demolition, excavation or construction works.
B.5 Establishment of Tree Protection Zones
Before the demolition of any building or construction, a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) shall be
established around the tree/s to be retained not less than the distance shown in the schedule
below.
a) Tree Protection Zone areas
Council
Ref No
Species Location Radius from
Trunk (Metres)*
1 Cinnamomum camphora
(Camphor Laurel)
Road reserve Richmond Road 3
Note: Where this condition relates to street trees and the fence cannot be placed at the specified radius,
the fencing is to be positioned so that the entire verge (nature strip) area in front of the subject
property, excluding existing driveways and footpaths, is protected.
b) Tree Protection Fencing shall be installed at the perimeter of the Tree Protection Zones
outlined above. The Tree Protection Fence shall consist of 1.8m high temporary chain
wire panels supported by steel stakes. They shall be fastened together and supported to
prevent sideways movement. The fence shall have a lockable opening for access. The
trees‘ woody roots shall not be damaged during the installation of the Tree Protection
Fencing.
c) The area within the Tree Protection Zone shall be kept free of weeds and grass, and
mulched to a depth of 70mm for the duration of works.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 89
d) Tree Protection Signage shall be attached to each Tree Protection Zone and displayed in
a prominent position. The signs shall be repeated at 10m intervals or closer where the
fence changes direction. The signage shall be installed prior to the commencement of
works on-site and shall be maintained in good condition for the duration of the works.
Each sign shall advise the following details:-
i. This fence has been installed to prevent damage to the trees and their growing
environment. Access is restricted.
ii. If access, encroachment or incursion into this Tree Protection Zone is deemed
essential, prior authorisation is required by the Site Arborist.
iii. Name, address, and telephone number of the developer
e) The Tree Protection Zone shall exclude the following activities, except as amended by
the following conditions:
i. Excavations and trenching
ii. Modification of existing soil levels
iii. Cultivation of the soil
iv. Mechanical removal of vegetation
v. Soil disturbance
vi. Movement of natural rock
vii. Storage of materials, plant or equipment
viii. Erection of site sheds
ix. Affixing of signage or hoarding to the trees
x. Preparation of building materials
xi. Disposal of waste materials and chemicals
xii. Movement of pedestrian or vehicular traffic
xiii. Temporary or permanent location of services, or the works required for their
installation
xiv. Any other activities that may cause damage to the trees Standard Condition: B5
B.6 Demolition and Construction Management Plan (Tree protection).
Before the demolition of any building or construction, a Demolition and Construction
Management Plan in relation to existing trees on/adjacent the subject site must be submitted
to Council for written approval. The plan must consider and make allowance for all
construction operations which will be undertaken within the vicinity of existing trees. In
particular the plan is to include:
a) Drawings and method statement showing details of hoarding and scaffold construction
and pruning required to accommodate hoarding and scaffolding;
b) Movement of heavy machinery, lifting cranes, Pier drilling gantry etc.;
c) How trees will be protected from storage and movements of materials;
d) Site construction access, temporary crossings and movement corridors on the site
defined;
e) Contractors carparking;
f) Phasing of construction works;
g) The space needed for all foundation excavations and construction works;
h) All changes in ground level;
i) Space for cranes, plant, scaffolding and access during works;
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 90
j) Space for site sheds, temporary latrines (including any drainage) and other temporary
structures;
k) Space for sorting and storing materials (short or long term), spoil and fuel and the
mixing of cement and concrete and
l) The effects of slope on the movement of potentially harmful liquid spillages towards or
into tree protection areas.
B.7 Arborists Periodic Site Inspection and Log
To ensure the condition and health of existing trees are maintained an arboricultural log book
for the subject property is to be prepared by a qualified arborist and retained by the site
foreman. Details of the arborist‘s site inspection are to be recorded in the log during each
visit. At each site visit the arborist must check and monitor the condition of existing trees and
compliance with approved protection measures or recommend action to improve site
conditions. As a minimum the following intervals of site inspections by a qualified arborist
must be made.
B.8 Noise objectives during demolition works
To assist in managing impacts of noise from the demolishing of the existing dwelling and
outbuilding on residences and other sensitive land uses, it is recommended that the NSW
Department of Environment & Climate Change: Construction Noise Guideline be applied to
the site to provide a quantitative and qualitative assessment for evaluating performance and
compliance of resultant noise from demolishing works of the existing buildings. In particular
reference is made to Table 2 of the NSW Department of Environment & Climate Change:
Construction Noise Guideline which sets out management levels for noise at residences and
other sensitive land uses.
B.9 Notification of noise generating activities
Seven days prior to the commencement of any demolition, or significant excavation activities,
the builder (or specialized subcontractor) shall inform the owners, or tenants, of both 11
Newcastle Street, and 10 Richmond Road, by letter, a schedule of demolition, excavation and
subsequent construction activities. Any high activities involving the use of hydraulic
hammers, or pneumatic hammers, shall be identified.
Stage of
arboricultural
inspection
Minimum considerations at each
stage
Additional visits required
determined by arborist
notes/comments
Prior to the demolition
of any building or
construction.
Correct installation of Tree Protection
Zone barriers.
Make additional site visits as deemed
necessary for ongoing
monitoring/supervisory work.
During development
work.
Tree Preservation and approved works
are complied with.
Monitor condition of trees.
Prior to the issue of a
Final Occupation
Certificate.
Supervise the dismantling of tree
protection measures.
Make additional site visits as deemed
necessary for ongoing monitoring of
tree vigour.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 91
C. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the issue of any construction certificate
C.1 Surrender of consent (s80A(1)(b) & s80A(5) of the Act)
A notice of surrender of DA 598 of 2006 dated 03 September 2011 must be provided to
Council in writing by the owner of the land in compliance with Clause 97 of the Regulation.
No Construction Certificate must be issued until Council has acknowledged in writing that
this condition has been satisfied. Standard Condition: C1
C.2 Modification of details of the development (s80A(1)(g) of the Act)
The approved plans and the Construction Certificate plans and specification, required to be
submitted to the Certifying Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail the
following amendments:
Signage:
a) To ensure the proposed signage is compatible with the existing and desired future
character of the locality and the heritage significance of No. 757 New South Head Road
(the former Post Office), the flush wall sign above the sandstone-framed former entry
door to the north western elevation to the former post office, and the new graphic inset
panels to the windows of the former Post Office, shall be deleted.
Heritage:
b) To ensure the proposal adequately retains the heritage significance of the subject
heritage item at No. 757 New South Head Road (the former Post Office):
- All ceilings and cornices to the former Post Office are to be retained.
- All brick arches and round head openings to the existing windows of the south
and west elevations are to be retained. Infill material of round arch window
frames is to be in new timber.
- Skirtings are to be retained where existing, and to be reconstructed and reinstated
to the remainder of original walling being retained in the former Post Office.
- The black railings to the front steps are to be retained, along with the former Post
Office white lettering ‗Rose Bay 2029‘ to the façade.
- The sandstone base is to be properly conserved and repaired by a heritage
conservation specialist.
- Sandstone is not to be painted.
- The brickwork where required is to be repaired. Unsympathetic repairs are to be
reversed and properly repaired (such as the damage to the brickwork and mortar
associated with the addition of the security bars to the windows).
- The timber arch windows are to be conserved and continue to be painted white.
- The security bars to the windows are to be removed, and the associated brickwork
repaired.
- The timber eaves soffits are to be repaired and repainted to match the existing
colour.
- The yellow metal plates to the corners of the building are to be removed, and the
brickwork repaired as necessary.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 92
- The Post Office principal building form is to retain its current colour scheme, that
is:
Unpainted facebrick where existing is to remain unpainted.
Stone is to remain unpainted.
Timber joinery is to remain white.
External ‗cornice‘ and external ‗skirting‘ are to remain existing white/off-
white colour.
Eaves soffits are to remain existing white/off-white colour.
Where currently external brickwork becomes internal it is to remain
unpainted.
Urban Design:
c) To ensure a satisfactory urban design outcome, public seating or landscaping must be
provided to the building recess to New South Head Road which is located between the
former Post Office (No. 757 New South Head Road) and the former car showroom (No.
751-755 New South Head Road). This condition has been imposed to prevent this area
from becoming a litter trap or attracting anti-social behaviour.
Richmond Road frontage:
d) To ensure a satisfactory streetscape outcome, no approval is given for any signage or
fencing to the southern Richmond Road frontage. This condition has been imposed as
no advertising or fencing details have been provided for this frontage.
Stormwater:
e) To ensure that adequate provision is made for the disposal of stormwater, a single pipe
outlet to a new pit and pipe system in New South Head Road shall be provided.
Pedestrian and vehicular safety:
f) To ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety, the acoustic barrier adjoining the length of
car space No. 9 must be splayed no less than 1m by 1m at the entry of the space to
ensure there is adequate sight distance to approaching traffic for a vehicle reversing out
of the space.
g) To ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety, a 2.0m by 2.0m visibility splay shall be
provided to either side of the driveway.
Acoustics:
h) To ensure an adequate level of acoustic privacy is maintained to the neighbouring
properties, the proposed car park‘s surface finish shall be sufficiently smooth so that it
will preclude the generation of unacceptable noise emission, when either empty, or
loaded shopping trolleys are wheeled into, or across the car park. Furthermore, the car
park must be surfaced in a material which minimises tyre squeal.
i) The section of footpath to link the proposed car park and Richmond Road must be
constructed to minimise the noise impacts of vehicles entering and exiting the subject
site.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 93
j) The section of Richmond Road adjacent to the proposed vehicular entrance must be
resurfaced to minimise noise impacts of vehicles entering and existing the subject site.
k) Barriers must be provided to close the car park outside of the trading hours. The details
of the barriers must be approved in writing by Council planning staff.
l) To ensure an adequate level of acoustic privacy is maintained to the neighbouring
properties, the noise control measures to the mechanical services as detailed in section
4.3 of the acoustic report, reference DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay,
prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011 shall be included on the construction
certificate plans. This includes showing the acoustic barrier to the roof top plant deck to
be of solid construction and free from gaps.
Note: The effect of this condition is that it requires design changes and/or further information to be
provided with the Construction Certificate drawings and specifications to address specific issues
identified during assessment under section 79C of the Act.
Note: Clause 146 of the Regulation prohibits the issue of any Construction Certificate subject to this
condition unless the Certifying Authority is satisfied that the condition has been complied with.
Note: Clause 145 of the Regulation prohibits the issue of any Construction Certificate that is inconsistent
with this consent.
Standard Condition: C4
C.3 Payment of Long Service Levy, Security, Contributions and Fees
The certifying authority must not issue any Part 4A Certificate until provided with the
original receipt(s) for the payment of all of the following levy, security, contributions, and
fees prior to the issue of a construction certificate, subdivision certificate or occupation
certificate, as will apply.
Description Amount Indexed Council
Fee Code
LONG SERVICE LEVY
under Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986
Long Service Levy
http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/levy_information/?le
vy_information/levy_calculator.stm
Contact LSL
Corporation or use
their online calculator
No
SECURITY
under section 80A(6) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979
Property Damage Security Deposit - making
good any damage caused to any property of the
Council
$80,000.00 No T115
Tree Damage Security Deposit - making good
any damage caused to any public tree $9,000.00 No T114
Infrastructure Works Bond - completing any
public work required in connection with the
consent.
$158,500.00 No T113
CONTRIBUTIONS
under Woollahra Section 94 Contributions Plan 2002 (March 2005 update)
This plan may inspected at Woollahra Council or downloaded at www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au .
Rose Bay commercial centre civic
improvements contribution
$5,537.00
+ Index Amount Yes, yearly T94
Rose Bay commercial centre public car
parking contribution
$112,560.00
+ Index Amount Yes, yearly T94
Administration charge $1,771.46
+ Index Amount Yes, yearly T94
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 94
INSPECTION FEES
under Section 608 of the Local Government Act 1993
Public Tree Management Inspection Fee $166.00 No T95
Public Road and Footpath Infrastructure
Inspection Fee $406.00 No T45
Security Administration Fee $180.00 No T16
TOTAL SECURITY, CONTRIBUTIONS,
LEVIES AND FEES
$368,120.46 plus any relevant indexed amounts
and long service levy
Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payment
The Long Service Levy under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payment Act,
1986, must be paid and proof of payment provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of any
Construction Certificate. The Levy can be paid directly to the Long Services Payments Corporation or to
Council. Further information can be obtained from the Long Service Payments Corporation‘s website
http://www.lspc.nsw.gov.au/ or the Long Service Payments Corporation on 13 14 41.
How must the payments be made?
Payments must be made by:
Cash deposit with Council,
Credit card payment with Council, or
Bank cheque made payable to Woollahra Municipal Council.
The payment of a security may be made by a bank guarantee where:
The guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution;
The bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council
on completion of the development or no earlier than 12 months from the provision of the guarantee
whichever occurs first [NOTE: a time limited bank guarantee or a bank guarantee with an expiry date is
not acceptable];
The bank agrees to pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other
person who provided the guarantee and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter
relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development in accordance with the
development consent;
The bank guarantee is lodged with the Council prior to the issue of the construction certificate: and
The bank‘s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with the
guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required.
How will section 94 contributions be indexed?
To ensure that the monetary value of the contributions are not eroded over time by increases in costs the
contributions will be increased annually. Clause 3.13 of Woollahra Section 94 Contributions Plan 2002 sets out
the formula and index to be used in adjusting the contributions.
Do you need HELP indexing the contributions?
Please contact our customer service officers on 9391-7000. Failure to correctly calculate the indexed
contributions will delay the issue of any Part 4A Certificate and could void any Part 4A Certificate (construction
certificate, subdivision certificate, or occupation certificate).
Deferred periodic payment of Section 94 contributions under Woollahra Section 94 Contributions Plan
2002
Where the applicant makes a written request supported by reasons for payment of the contribution other than as
required by clause 3.7 of the plan, the Council may accept deferred or periodic payment. The decision to accept a
deferred or periodic payment is at the sole discretion of the Council, which will consider:
The reasons given;
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 95
Whether any prejudice will be caused to the community deriving benefit from the public facilities
required by the proposed development;
Whether any prejudice will be caused to the efficacy and operation of this Plan; and
Whether the provision of public facilities in accordance with the adopted works schedule will be
adversely affected.
Where Council accepts periodic payment by way of instalments, it will be on the basis that each instalment is
paid before work commences on the corresponding stage of the development and the amount of each instalment
will be calculated on a pro-rata basis in proportion to the cost of the overall development.
Council may, as a condition of accepting deferred or periodic payment, require the provision of a bank guarantee
where:
The guarantee is by an Australian bank for the amount of the total outstanding contribution;
The bank unconditionally agrees to pay the guaranteed sum to the Council on written request by Council
on completion of the development or no earlier than 12 months from the provision of the guarantee
whichever occurs first [NOTE: a time limited bank guarantee or a bank guarantee with an expiry date is
not acceptable];
The bank agrees to pay the guaranteed sum without reference to the applicant or landowner or other
person who provided the guarantee and without regard to any dispute, controversy, issue or other matter
relating to the development consent or the carrying out of development in accordance with the
development consent;
The bank guarantee is lodged with the Council prior to the issue of the construction certificate; and
The bank‘s obligations are discharged when payment to the Council is made in accordance with the
guarantee or when Council notifies the bank in writing that the guarantee is no longer required.
Any deferred or outstanding component of the contribution will be indexed in accordance with clause 3.13 of the
plan. Under the indexation provisions, if a deferred or periodic payment is made before the next anniversary of
the Plan, there will be no increase in the amount payable. The applicant will be required to pay any charges
associated with establishing or operating the bank guarantee. Council will not cancel the bank guarantee until the
outstanding contribution as indexed and any accrued charges are paid. Standard Condition: C6
C.4 Road and Public Domain Works
A separate application under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 is to be made to, and
approved by Council prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate for the following
infrastructure works, which must be carried out at the applicant‘s expense:
a. New South Head Road
Road & Footpath
Removal the existing footpath and the re-construction of the footpath with pavers
for the full width of the property from boundary to kerb from the existing pavers
at No 755 in accordance with Council‘s standard as shown on ―Rose Bay Centre
Public Domain Improvements Plan‖.
Removal of the existing driveways and laybacks.
Reinstatement of footpath, kerb and gutter to match existing.
Erect new signage as approved by Woollahra Traffic Committee.
Drainage
Construction of a standard gully pit in the kerb to the east of the subject site in
accordance with Council‘s Standard ―Grated Gully Pit with extended Kerb Inlet‖
drawing DR1.
Construction of approximately 40m of 375mm RCP in-ground drainage line under
the road shoulder at standard depth. The line must connect to the existing pipeline
in the road to the east outside No 759 New South Head Road.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 96
It should be noted that RTA is the consent authority for these works.
The developer shall be responsible for carrying out any service investigations to
allow a gravity connection.
b. Richmond Road
Full width vehicular crossing with a width of 6m at the boundary and widened to
8m at the kerb. The driveway is to be constructed to commercial standard in
accordance with Council‘s standard drawing RF2B.
Reinstatement of footpath, kerb and gutter to match existing. The section of
footpath to link the proposed car park and Richmond Road must be constructed to
minimise the noise impacts of vehicles entering and exiting the subject site.
The section of Richmond Road adjacent to the proposed vehicular entrance must
be resurfaced to minimise noise impacts of vehicles entering and existing the
subject site.
Where a grass verge exists, the balance of the area between the footpath and the
kerb over the full frontage of the proposed development must be turfed. The grass
verge must be constructed to contain a uniform minimum 75mm of friable
growing medium and have a total cover of Couch turf.
c. Norwich Lane
Traffic calming measures must be implemented in Norwich Lane to minimise any
increase of non-local through-traffic. These works are subject to approval by the
Local Traffic Committee and may be revised as a result of this assessment
process.
Narrowing of the carriageway by establishing a footpath, kerb and gutter and the
implementation of a Watts profile speed hump. The applicant must liaise with
Council‘s Traffic Section regarding the location of the new speed hump.
d. Bond
A bond of $158,500 (One hundred and fifty eight thousand five hundred
dollars) will be used as security to ensure the satisfactory completion of the
infrastructure works in New South Head Road, Richmond Road and Norwich
Lane. The security or bank guarantee must be the original and not have an expiry
date.
Council may use all or part of the Infrastructure Bond as well as the Property
Damage Security Deposit to meet the cost of removing or completing the works if
they do not meet Council‘s requirements.
The Deposit/Bond will not be released until Council has inspected the site and is
satisfied that the Works have been completed in accordance with Council
approved drawings and to Council requirements.
Note: To ensure that this work is completed to Council‘s satisfaction, this consent by separate condition, may
impose one or more Infrastructure Works Bonds.
Note: Road has the same meaning as in the Roads Act 1993.
Note: The intent of this condition is that the design of the road, footpaths, driveway crossings and public
stormwater drainage works must be detailed and approved prior to the issue of any Construction
Certificate. Changes in levels may arise from the detailed design of buildings, road, footpath, driveway
crossing grades and stormwater. Changes required under Roads Act 1993 approvals may necessitate
design and levels changes under this consent. This may in turn require the applicant to seek to amend this
consent.
Note: See condition K24 in Section K. Advisings of this Consent titled Roads Act Application. Standard Condition: C13
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 97
C.5 Waste Storage - Compliance with Approved Site Waste Minimisation and Management
Plan (SWMMP)
Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Site Waste Minimisation and Management
Plan (SWMMP) is to be submitted to Council for written approval.
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required to be submitted to the
Certifying Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail provisions for
waste management in accordance with the approved SWMMP.
Waste Storage Areas must meet the following requirements:
a. Bins must be stored with lids down to prevent vermin from entering the waste
containers.
b. The area must be constructed with a smooth impervious floor graded to a floor waste. A
waste storage area that is located internal to the building must be fitted with both a hot
and cold water supply and hose cocks. Wastewater must be discharged to the sewer in
accordance with the requirements of Sydney Water.
c. Walls and ceilings of the waste storage area must be constructed of an impervious
material with a smooth finish. The junction between the walls and the floor must be
covered with a minimum radius of 25mm to prevent the accumulation of waste matter.
d. The garbage storage area must be well lit to enable use at night. A timer switch must be
fitted to the light fitting to ensure the light is turned off after use.
e. Odour problems must be minimised by good exhaust ventilation.
f. Both putrescible and recycling bins/crates must be stored together. Recycling bins must
never stand alone. They must always be located beside putrescible waste bins.
Putrescible bins must be located closest to the entrance to the waste storage room.
g. Signage on the correct use of the waste management system and what materials may be
recycled must be posted in the communal waste storage cupboard/ room or bin bay. Standard Condition: C19
C.6 Utility Services Generally
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required by clause 139 of the
Regulation, must demonstrate that all utility services (telecommunications, electricity, gas,
water and waste water) will be provided underground. All service ducts, pipes and conduits
must be provided within the fabric of the building (excluding stormwater down pipes).
Where telecommunications and electricity are provided from existing poles in the road they
must, in accordance with the relevant suppliers‘ requirements, be carried to the site
underground directly to the main switch board within the fabric of the building.
Note: Where adequate provision has not been made for an electrical sub-station within the building, this may
necessitate the lodgement of an application to amend this consent under section 96 of the Act to detail the
location, landscape/streetscape impacts and compliance with AS2890 as applicable.
The location of service poles and substations required by the relevant suppliers must be
shown upon the plans submitted with any Construction Certificate application together with a
letter from each relevant supplier setting out their requirements.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 98
Proposed water pipes, waste pipes, stack work, duct work, mechanical ventilation plant and
the like must be located within the building unless expressly shown upon the approved DA
plans. Details confirming compliance with this condition must be shown on the Construction
Certificate plans and/or detailed within the Construction Certificate specifications. Required
external vents or vent pipes on the roof or above the eaves must be shown on the Construction
Certificate plans.
Note: The intent of this condition is that the design quality of the development must not be compromised by
cables, pipes, conduits, ducts, plant, equipment, electricity substations or the like placed such that they are
visible from any adjoining public place. They must be contained within the building unless shown
otherwise by the approved development consent plans.
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required to be submitted to the
Certifying Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail the replacement of
all private sewer pipes between all sanitary fixtures and Sydney Waters sewer main where
they are not found by inspection to be UPVC or copper with continuously welded joints.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that where private sewer pipes are old, may leak or may be
subject to root invasion (whether from existing or proposed private or public landscaping) that existing
cast iron, concrete, earthenware or terracotta pipes be replaced with new UPVC or copper continuously
welded pipes between all sanitary fixtures and Sydney Waters sewer main, such that clause 25(1) of
WLEP 1995 be satisfied. Further, leaking sewer pipes are a potential source of water pollution, unsafe
and unhealthy conditions which must be remedied in the public interest Standard Condition: C20
C.7 Provision for Energy Supplies
The applicant must provide to the Certifying Authority a letter from Energy Australia setting
out Energy Australia‘s requirements relative to the provision of electricity/gas supply to the
development.
Any required substation must be located within the boundaries of the site.
Where an electricity substation is required within the site but no provision has been made to
place it within the building and such substation has not been detailed upon the approved
development consent plans a section 96 application is required to be submitted to Council.
Council will assess the proposed location of the required substation.
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required to be submitted pursuant to
clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail provisions to meet the requirements of Energy
Australia.
Where the substation is required the Construction Certificate plans and specifications must
provide:
a) A set back not less than 3m from the road boundary and dense landscaping of local
native plants to screen the substation from view within the streetscape,
b) A set back not less than 3m from any other site boundary (fire source feature) and not
within the areas required to be kept clear of obstructions to vehicle visibility pursuant to
clause 3.2.4 of AS2890.1-1993(See: Figures 3.2 and 3.3),
c) A set back to and not within the drip line of any existing tree required to be retained,
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 99
d) A setback not less than the 10m from any NSW Fire Brigade booster connection as
prescribed by clause 5.6.3(d)(iii) of AS 2419.1-1994 or be separated from any booster
connections by a construction with a fire resistance rating of not less than FRL 90/90/90
for a distance of not less than 2 m each side of and 3 m above the upper hose
connections in the booster assembly pursuant to clause 5.6.3(c)(ii) of AS 2419.1-1994,
and
e) The owner shall dedicate to the appropriate energy authority, free of cost, an area of
land adjoining the street alignment to enable an electricity substation to be established,
if required. The size and location of the electricity substation is to be in accordance
with the requirements of the appropriate energy authority and Council. The opening of
any access doors are not to intrude onto the public road reserve.
Note: If the substation is not located within the building its location, screening vegetation, all screen walls or
fire separating walls must have been approved by the grant of development consent or amended
development consent prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for those works. Documentary
evidence of compliance, including correspondence from the energy authority is to be provided to the
Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. The Certifying Authority must be
satisfied that the requirements of energy authority have been met prior to issue of the Construction
Certificate.
Note: This condition has been imposed because the application fails to provide sufficient detail (either by plans
or by the Statement of Environmental Effects) demonstrating that provision has been made to Energy
Australia‘s satisfaction for the provision of electricity supply to the building. Nevertheless, Council has
no reason to believe that provision cannot be reasonably made for electricity to service the development.
Note: Where it is proposed to shield any booster connection or any building from any substation pursuant to
clause 5.6.3(c)(ii) of AS 2419.1-1994 or by fire resisting construction under the BCA respectively and this
construction has not been detailed upon the approved development consent plans such works should be
considered inconsistent with consent pursuant to clause 145 of the Regulation. The Applicant must lodge
with Council details for any such construction pursuant to section 96 of the Act to allow assessment under
section 79C of the Act.
Note: Substations must not be located within the minimum sight distance at driveway entrances under
Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890 (Set)-2004 Parking Facilities Set whether such driveways service the
site or any adjoining land. Standard Condition: C21
C.8 Soil and Water Management Plan – Submission & Approval
The principal contractor or owner builder must submit to the Certifying Authority a soil and
water management plan complying with:
a) ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2001; and
b) ―Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction‖ published by the NSW
Department of Housing 4th Edition‖ ('The Blue Book').
Where there is any conflict The Blue Book takes precedence. The Certifying Authority must
be satisfied that the soil and water management plan complies with the publications above
prior to issuing any Construction Certificate.
Note: This condition has been imposed to eliminate potential water pollution and dust nuisance.
Note: The International Erosion Control Association – Australasia http://www.austieca.com.au/ lists consultant
experts who can assist in ensuring compliance with this condition. Where erosion and sedimentation
plans are required for larger projects it is recommended that expert consultants produce these plans.
Note: The ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖ publications can be
down loaded free of charge from http://www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au/ .
Note: Pursuant to clause 161(1)(a)(5) of the Regulation an Accredited Certifier may satisfied as to this matter. Standard Condition: C25
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 100
C.9 Tree Management Details
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications required by clause 139 of the
Regulation must, show the following information;
a) trees to be numbered in accordance with these conditions,
b) shaded green where required to be protected and retained,
c) shaded yellow where required to be transplanted,
d) shaded blue where required to be pruned,
e) shaded red where authorised to be removed and,
f) references to applicable tree management plan, arborists report, transplant method
statement or bush regeneration management plan. Standard Condition: C30
C.10 Structural Adequacy of Existing Supporting Structures
A certificate from a professional engineer (Structural Engineer), certifying the adequacy of
the existing supporting structure to support the additional loads proposed to be imposed by the
development, must be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.
Note: This condition is imposed to ensure that the existing structure is able to support the additional loads
proposed.
Standard Condition: C35
C.11 Professional Engineering Details
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required by clause 139 of the
Regulation, must include detailed professional engineering plans and/or specifications for all
structural, electrical, hydraulic, hydro-geological, geotechnical, mechanical and civil work
complying with this consent, approved plans, the statement of environmental effects and
supporting documentation.
Detailed professional engineering plans and/or specifications must be submitted to the
Certifying Authority with the application for any Construction Certificate.
Note: This does not affect the right of the developer to seek staged Construction Certificates. Standard Condition: C36
C.12 Amended Landscape Plan
An amended Landscape Plan, prepared by a qualified Landscape Architect or Landscape
Designer, in accordance with Councils DA Guide Annexure 8 and conforming to the
conditions of this Development Consent is to be submitted to Council for written approval
prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. The amended landscape plan must include the
following:
The installation of a minimum of four (4) Elaeocarpus reticulatus Blueberry Ash within
the garden beds.
The installation of a minimum four (4) Banksia integrifolia (Coastal Banksia) within the
garden beds.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 101
The installation of two (2) Harpullia pendula (Tulipwood) on the road reserve of New
South Head Road. The awning should be discontinuous to accommodate these trees.
C.13 Bicycle, Car and Commercial Parking Details
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications required by clause 139 of the
Regulation, must include detailed plans and specifications for all bicycle, car and commercial
vehicle parking in compliance with AS2890.3:1993 Parking Facilities - Bicycle Parking
Facilities, AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 : Parking Facilities - Off-Street Car Parking and AS
2890.2:2002 – Off-Street Parking: Commercial Vehicle Facilities respectively and to include.
A Right Of Way (easement) must be established over the neighbouring property No.
759 New South Head Road (Crystal Car wash) to permit service vehicle egress.
Service vehicles must not exit to Richmond Road.
A Traffic (Parking) Signal System which indicates when the car park is full, is to be
installed and operated.
Access levels and grades must comply with access levels and grade required by Council
under the Roads Act 1993.
The Certifying Authority has no discretion to reduce or increase the number or area of car
parking or commercial parking spaces required to be provided and maintained by this consent. Standard Condition: C45
C.14 Transport Delivery Management Plan (TDMP)
To ensure that all traffic movements associated with service deliveries are conducted in a safe
and efficient manner without adversely impacting on the surrounding road network, the
applicant is to prepare and submit a Transport Delivery Management Plan (TDMP) containing
the following;
The TDMP must state;
The size and quantities of service delivery vehicles. Vehicles longer than 8.8m in length
will not be accepted.
Outline a daily delivery schedule.
Outline a waste collection schedule.
Measures to be implemented for service vehicles reversing into the site.
Specify vehicle routes associated with these operations.
Any additional requirements arising from Council‘s Engineering Services review of the
plan.
The TDMP must comply with the following requirements;
No service vehicles with a length greater than 8.8m shall enter the subject site.
The number of heavy vehicles (being a vehicle over 7.5m in length as per NSW Road
Rules) utilising Richmond Road to access the site must be no greater than 3 vehicles on
any single day.
All heavy service vehicles must enter the site by turning right into the site from
Richmond Road to ensure the retention of on street parking. This requirement must be
included in the briefing notes which are issued to all service vehicle drivers who will be
entering the site.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 102
A management procedure to ensure members of the public are adequately warned of
delivery truck movements.
A Woolworth employee must be present to supervise reversing delivery and service
vehicles within the subject site. Any form of traffic or pedestrian control related to
vehicles reversing into the loading dock area must be undertaken by personnel having
RTA accreditation.
The Plan is to be formatted for implementation by Management of the development.
All service vehicles are to enter the site from Richmond Road, and exit the site to New
South Head Road via the adjoining site of 759 New South Head Road. Signage must be
located in the site to advise service delivery drivers of this arrangement. The TDMP
must nominate the wording and location of sign(s).
Signage and barriers must be located in the site to prevent customers from entering or
exiting the site via New South Head Road.
The use of the loading dock must be undertaken in accordance with the delivery
schedule contained with the section 1.4 of the acoustic report, acoustic report, reference
DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay, prepared by Aecom, dated 23
November 2011.
The waste collections must be undertaken in in accordance with the waste collection
schedule contained with the section 1.5 of the acoustic report, acoustic report, reference
DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay, prepared by Aecom, dated 23
November 2011.
Provide copies of the briefing documents that Woolworths intends to issue to its own
drivers, as well as the document which it intends to issue to the independent companies
which will supply goods or services to the supermarket at the subject site, which will
specify the precautions, which shall be implemented during their drivers deliveries to
the supermarket at the subject site. The instructions shall comprehensively outline the
sensitivity of the supermarket at the subject site, the need to enter and depart in a
manner which generates the minimum degree of noise.
The delivery vehicles must be equipped with a two way radio or mobile phone. The
drivers of the delivery vehicles shall be instructed by his/her written instructions, to
contact the Woolworth‘s loading dock supervisor, prior to the truck entering Richmond
Road, in order that the supervisor may thereby ensure that a member of his/her staff
may be present to ensure that the driveway is clear and safe for the truck‘s entry.
Electronic signage must be located at the Richmond Road entrance to the subject site.
The signage must notify approaching delivery vehicles when the loading dock is full. In
this situation, drivers are not permitted to enter the site, or wait in the vicinity of the site.
All Wooworths owned servicing vehicles shall be fitted with level adjusting broadband
reversing beepers in accordance with the DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose
Bay, prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011.
The Transport Delivery Management Plan must be submitted to Council for written approval
prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.
C.15 Stormwater management plan Clause 25(2) WLEP 1995)
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required by clause 139 of the
Regulation, must include a Stormwater Management Plan for the site.
The Stormwater Management Plan must detail:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 103
a. general design in accordance with Stormwater Report, prepared by Richard Ross P/L,
dated 16 March 2009, and Stormwater concept Dwg No C01 and C02 Rev 00, prepared
by Richard Ross P/L, dated 17 February 2009 other than amended by this and other
conditions;
b. the discharge of stormwater, by a single direct connection and the construction of
approximately 40m of 375mm RCP in-ground drainage line under the road shoulder at
standard depth. The line must connect to the existing pipeline in the road to the east
outside No 755 New South Head Road;
c. compliance the objectives and performance requirements of the BCA;
d. any rainwater tank required by BASIX commitments including their overflow
connection to the Stormwater Drainage System, and
e. general compliance with the Council‘s draft Development Control Plan Stormwater
Drainage Management (draft version 1.1, public exhibition copy dated 14/12/2006).
The Stormwater Management Plan must include the following specific requirements:
Layout plan
A detailed drainage plan at a scale of 1:100 based on drainage calculations prepared in
accordance with the Institute of Engineers Australia publication, Australian Rainfall and Run-
off, 1987 edition or most current version thereof.
It must include:
All pipe layouts, dimensions, grades, lengths and material specification,
All invert levels reduced to Australian Height Datum (AHD),
Location and dimensions of all drainage pits,
Point and method of connection to Councils drainage infrastructure, and
Overland flow paths over impervious areas.
Copies of certificates of title, showing the creation of private easements to drain water by
gravity, if required.
Subsoil Drainage - Subsoil drainage details, clean out points, discharge point.
Note: This Condition is imposed to ensure that site stormwater is disposed of in a controlled and sustainable
manner. Standard Condition: C51
C.16 Flood Protection
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required by Clause 139 of the
Regulation, must include a Flood Risk Management Plan on the basis of a 1:100 year flood as
defined by the Rose Bay Catchment Flood Study dated September 2010 at RL 4.94m AHD
along New South Head Road (the flood level), and including the following:
The flood depth in the car park is to be limited to 0.3m.
Flood Evacuation Plan is to be prepared for the site.
Suitable signage indicating that the site is flood affected is to be erected.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 104
Note: The revised driveway profile, gradients and transitions must be in accordance with Australian Standard
2890.1 – 2004, Part 1 (Off-street car parking). The driveway profile submitted to Council must contain all
relevant details: reduced levels, proposed grades and distances. Council will not allow alteration to
existing reduced levels within the road or any other public place to achieve flood protection. Standard Condition: C54
C.17 Light & Ventilation
The Construction Certificate plans and specifications, required to be submitted to the
Certifying Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation, must detail all a lighting,
mechanical ventilation or air-conditioning systems complying with Part F.4 of the BCA or
clause 3.8.4 and 3.8.5 of the BCA Housing Provisions, inclusive of AS 1668.1, AS 1668.2 and
AS/NZS 3666.1. If an alternate solution is proposed then the Construction Certificate
application must include a statement as to how the performance requirements of the BCA are
to be complied with and support the performance based solution by expert evidence of
suitability. This condition does not set aside the mandatory requirements of the Public Health
(Microbial Control) Regulation2000 in relation to regulated systems. This condition does not
set aside the effect of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 in relation to
offensive noise or odour.
Note: Clause 98 of the Regulation requires compliance with the BCA. Clause 145 of the Regulation prevents
the issue of a Construction Certificate unless the Accredited Certifier/Council is satisfied that compliance
has been achieved. Schedule 1, Part 3 of the Regulation details what information must be submitted with
any Construction Certificate. It is the Applicant's responsibility to demonstrate compliance through the
Construction Certificate application process. Applicants must also consider possible noise and odour
nuisances that may arise. The provisions of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 have
overriding effect if offensive noise or odour arises from the use. Applicant's must pay attention to the
location of air intakes and air exhausts relative to sources of potentially contaminated air and
neighbouring windows and air intakes respectively, see section 2 and 3 of AS 1668.2.
Standard Condition C59
C.18 Acoustic Certification of Mechanical Plant & Equipment
The Construction Certificate plans and specification required to be submitted pursuant to
clause 139 of the Regulation must be accompanied by a certificate from a professional
engineer (acoustic engineer) certifying that the noise level measured at any boundary of the
site at any time while the proposed mechanical plant and equipment is operating will not
exceed the background noise level. Where noise sensitive receivers are located within the
site, the noise level is measured from the nearest strata, stratum or community title land and
must not exceed background noise level, at any time.
The background noise level is the underlying level present in the ambient noise, excluding the
subject noise source, when extraneous noise is removed.
Where sound attenuation is required this must be detailed.
Note: Further information including lists of Acoustic Engineers can be obtained from:
1. Australian Acoustical Society—professional society of noise-related professionals
(www.acoustics.asn.au /index.php).
2. Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants—professional society of noise related
professionals (www.aaac.org.au). Standard Condition: C62
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 105
C.19 Amended Noise Management Plan
To ensure an adequate level of acoustic privacy is maintained to the neighbouring properties,
the Noise Management Plan contained within the DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose
Bay, prepared by Aecom Acoustic, dated 23.11.2011, must be amended to include
management strategies for the noise arising from the loading and unloading of waste from the
trade waste rooms. The amended Noise Management Plan must be submitted to Council, and
approved in writing prior to the issue of the construction certificate.
C.20 Details of Acoustic Mitigation
The following information and samples must be provided to Council staff and approved in
writing prior to the issue of the construction certificate:
a) Samples of the sound absorptive material(s), which is/are being proposed for the
internal surfaces of barrier walls type A, B1, B2, together with a copy of the NATA
Laboratory test certificate, which confirms its acoustical performance characteristics.
b) Precise details of the impact noise control measures which will be provided for all
drainage grates, which are to be installed, at either the entrance to, or within the main
area of the car park.
c) Detailed professional engineering plans and/or specifications, for the acoustic barriers,
must be submitted to the Certifying Authority with the application for any Construction
Certificate as required by condition C.11 of this consent.
C.21 Food Premises – Construction Certificate Plans & Specifications
The person with the benefit of this consent must submit to Council details for the construction
and fit out of food premises. Such details must demonstrate compliance with the Food Act
2003, Food Regulation 2004; the Food Standards Code as published by Food Standards
Australia and New Zealand and Australian Standard AS 4674-2004: Construction and fit out
of food premises.
No Construction Certificate relating to the construction or fitout of food premises must be
issued until Council‘s Environmental Health Officers‘ have advised in writing that the plans
and specification are considered satisfactory.
The details for the construction and fit out of food premises, as considered satisfactory by
Council‘s Environmental Health Officers‘ must form part of any Construction Certificate.
Note: The assessment of food premises fitout plans and specifications is subject to an adopted fee. The
construction and fitout of food premises is not listed under clause 161 of the Environmental Planning &
Assessment Regulation 2000 as a matter that a Certifying Authority may be satisfied as to. Hence, the
detailed plans & specifications must be referred to Council and be to Council‘s satisfaction prior to the
issue of any Construction Certificate for such works. Standard Condition: C65
C.22 Building upgrade (Clause 94 of the Regulation)
Council considers pursuant to clause 94 of the Regulation that it is appropriate to require the
existing building to be brought into total or partial conformity with the BCA.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 106
The Construction Certificate plans and specification required to be submitted to the Certifying
Authority pursuant to clause 139 of the Regulation must detail building upgrade works
required by this condition.
The Certifying Authority must be satisfied that such work, to be implemented as part of the
development, will upgrade the building to bring it into compliance with the following
provisions of the BCA as in force at the date of the Construction Certificate application:
That a system of emergency lighting shall be installed throughout the building to
provide sufficient light in an emergency in accordance with the requirements of Part E4
of the BCA;
That exit signs shall be installed above all required exit doors. Signs shall be
illuminated at all times and generally be of sufficient number that direction of travel to
all exits is clearly visible from any part of the major egress routes. Exit signs shall be
installed to the standard expressed in Clauses E4.5, E4.6 and E4.8 of the BCA;
That hydrants shall be installed throughout the building in accordance with the
requirements of Clause E1.3 of the BCA,
If an internal fire hydrant is required within the building hose reels shall be installed
throughout the building to the standard expressed in Clause E1.4 of the BCA. Hose
reels shall not be located within rooms but rather in common areas such as
passageways, lobbies or foyers, so that their location is obvious and always available to
all occupants. If it is desired to enclose the hose reels, the cabinets shall be of a size with
sufficient clearance between reel and cabinet to allow the hose to be drawn off in any
direction and rewound without difficulty. Cabinets enclosing hose reels shall have a
conspicuously displayed sign fitted to the door, with lettering at least 50mm in height
reading "Fire Hose Reel". All cabinets are to comply with the relevant requirements of
AS1221 and AS 2441;
Note: The Certifying Authority issuing the Construction Certificate has no power to remove the requirement to
upgrade the existing building as required by this condition. Where this conditions specifies compliance
with performance requirements of the BCA the Certifying Authority, subject to their level of accreditation,
may be satisfied as to such matters. Where this condition specifies compliance with prescriptive (deemed
to satisfied) provisions of the BCA these prescriptive requirements must be satisfied and cannot be varied
unless this condition is reviewed under section 82A or amended under section 96 of the Act.
Note: This condition does not set aside the Certifying Authorities responsibility to ensure compliance with
clause 143 of the Regulation in relation to Fire Protection and Structural Adequacy.
Note: AS 4655 Guidelines for fire safety audits for buildings (or any succeeding AS) should form the basis of
any fire upgrade report.
Standard Condition: C10
D. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the commencement of any development
work
D.1 Compliance with Building Code of Australia and insurance requirements under the
Home Building Act 1989
For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Act, the following conditions are prescribed in
relation to a development consent for development that involves any building work:
a) that the work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building
Code of Australia,
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 107
b) in the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires
there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that
such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be
carried out by the consent commences.
This condition does not apply:
a) to the extent to which an exemption is in force under clause 187 or 188, subject to the
terms of any condition or requirement referred to in clause 187 (6) or 188 (4),
b) to the erection of a temporary building.
In this condition, a reference to the BCA is a reference to that code as in force on the date the
application for the relevant construction certificate is made.
Note: This condition must be satisfied prior to commencement of any work in relation to the contract of
insurance under the Home Building Act 1989. This condition also has effect during the carrying out of all
building work with respect to compliance with the Building Code of Australia.
Note: All new guttering is to comply with the provisions of Part 3.5.2 of the Building Code of Australia. Standard Condition: D1
D.2 Dilapidation Reports for existing buildings
Dilapidation surveys must be conducted and dilapidation reports prepared by a professional
engineer (structural) of all buildings on land whose title boundary abuts the site and of such
further buildings located within the likely ―zone of influence‖ of any excavation, dewatering
and/or construction induced vibration.
These properties must include (but not limited to):
a. 745 New South Head Road
b. 10 Richmond Road
c. 11-19 Newcastle Street
d. 21 Newcastle Street
e. 23 Newcastle Street
The dilapidation reports must be completed and submitted to Council with the Notice of
Commencement prior to the commencement of any development work.
Where excavation of the site will extend below the level of any immediately adjoining
building the principal contractor or owner builder must give the adjoining building owner(s)
a copy of the dilapidation report for their building(s) and a copy of the notice of
commencement required by S81A(2) of the Act not less than two (2) days prior to the
commencement of any work. Standard Condition: D4
D.3 Dilapidation Reports for Public Infrastructure
To clarify the existing state of public infrastructure prior to the commencement of any
development (including prior to any demolition), the Principal Contractor must submit a
dilapidation report, prepared by a professional engineer, on Council‘s infrastructure within
and near the development site and include the site frontage to New South Head Road and for
the full length and width of Richmond Road.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 108
The dilapidation report must be submitted to Council prior to the commencement of any work
and include:
a) Photographs showing any existing damage to the road pavement fronting the site.
b) Photographs showing any existing damage to the kerb and gutter fronting the site.
c) Photographs showing any existing damage to the footway including footpath pavement
fronting the site.
d) Photographs showing any existing damage to retaining walls within the footway or
road.
e) Closed circuit television/video inspection (in DVD format) of public stormwater
drainage systems fronting, adjoining or within the site.
f) The full name and signature of the professional engineer.
The reports are to be supplied in both paper copy and electronic format in Word. Photographs
are to be in colour, digital and date stamped.
The dilapidation report must specify (with supporting photographic/DVD evidence) the exact
location and extent of any damaged or defective public infrastructure prior to the
commencement of any work. If the required report is not submitted then Council will assume
there was no damage to any infrastructure in the immediate vicinity of the site prior to the
commencement of any work under this consent.
Note: If the Principal Contractor fails to submit the dilapidation report required by this condition and damage is
occasioned to public assets adjoining the site Council will deduct from security any costs associated with
remedying, repairing or replacing damaged public infrastructure. Nothing in this condition prevents
Council making any claim against security held for this purpose Standard Condition: D5
D.4 Adjoining buildings founded on loose foundation materials
The principal contractor must ensure that a professional engineer determines the possibility
of any adjoining buildings founded on loose foundation materials being affected by piling,
piers or excavation. The professional engineer (geotechnical consultant) must assess the
requirements for underpinning any adjoining or adjacent buildings founded on such soil on a
case by case basis and the principal contractor must comply with any reasonable direction of
the professional engineer.
Note: A failure by contractors to adequately assess and seek professional engineering (geotechnical) advice to
ensure that appropriate underpinning and support to adjoining land is maintained prior to commencement
may result in damage to adjoining land and buildings. Such contractors are likely to be held responsible
for any damages arising from the removal of any support to supported land as defined by section 177 of
the Conveyancing Act 1919. Standard Condition: D6
D.5 Construction Management Plan – Approval & Implementation
As a result of the site constraints, limited space and access a Construction Management Plan
(CMP) is to be submitted to Council. Also, due to the lack of on-street parking a Work Zone
may be required during construction.
It should be noted that access by construction vehicles via Richmond Road is to be minimised
and the CMP is reflect this action.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 109
A construction management plan must be submitted and approved by Council‘s Development
Engineer. The plan must:-
a) Describe the anticipated impact of the demolition, excavation and construction works
on:
Local traffic routes.
Pedestrian circulation adjacent to the building site.
On-street parking in the local area.
b) Describe the means proposed to:
Manage construction works to minimise such impacts.
Provide for the standing of vehicles during construction.
Provide for the movement of trucks to and from the site, and deliveries to the site.
c) Show the location of:
Any site sheds and any anticipated use of cranes and concrete pumps.
Any areas of Council property on which it is proposed to install a Works Zone
(Construction Zone).
Structures to be erected such as hoardings, scaffolding or shoring.
Any excavation.
d) Describe the excavation impact on the area including
Number and types of trucks to be used.
Time frame.
Streets to be used.
Routes to be taken.
Directions of travel.
Truck storage areas.
It is recommended that vehicle routes be shared.
Excavation is to only be carried out outside peak and school hours between
9.30am to 2.30pm week days.
e) Protect Trees, Bushland and Public Open Space:
Show the location of all Tree Protection (Exclusion) Zones as required within the
conditions of this development consent.
The Plan must make provision for all materials, plant, etc. to be stored within the
development site at all times during construction. Structures or works on Council property
such as hoardings, scaffolding, shoring or excavation need separate approval from Council.
Standing of cranes and concrete pumps on Council property will need approval on each
occasion.
Note: A minimum of eight weeks will be required for assessment. Work must not commence until the
Construction Management Plan is approved. Failure to comply with this condition may result in fines and
proceedings to stop work. Standard Condition: D9
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 110
D.6 Security Fencing, Hoarding and Overhead Protection
Security fencing must be provided around the perimeter of the development site, including
any additional precautionary measures taken to prevent unauthorised entry to the site at all
times during the demolition, excavation and construction period. Security fencing must be the
equivalent 1.8m high chain wire as specified in AS 1725.
Where the development site adjoins a public thoroughfare, the common boundary between
them must be fenced for its full length with a hoarding, unless the least horizontal distance
between the common boundary and the nearest parts of the structure is greater than twice the
height of the structure. The hoarding must be constructed of solid materials (chain wire or the
like is not acceptable) to a height of not less than 1.8 m adjacent to the thoroughfare.
Where a development site adjoins a public thoroughfare with a footpath alongside the
common boundary then, in addition to the hoarding required above, the footpath must be
covered by an overhead protective structure and the facing facade protected by heavy-duty
scaffolding, unless either:
a) The vertical height above footpath level of the structure being demolished is less than
4.0 m; or
b) The least horizontal distance between footpath and the nearest part of the structure is
greater than half the height of the structure.
The overhead structure must consist of a horizontal platform of solid construction and vertical
supports, and the platform must:
a) Extend from the common boundary to 200mm from the edge of the carriageway for the
full length of the boundary;
b) Have a clear height above the footpath of not less than 2.1 m;
c) Terminate 200mm from the edge of the carriageway (clearance to be left to prevent
impact from passing vehicles) with a continuous solid upstand projecting not less than
0.5 m above the platform surface; and
d) Together with its supports, be designed for a uniformly distributed live load of not less
than 7 kPa.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 111
The principal contractor or owner builder must pay all fees associated with the application
and occupation and use of the road (footway) for required hoarding or overhead protection.
The principal contractor or owner builder must ensure that Overhead Protective Structures
are installed and maintained in accordance with WorkCover NSW Code of Practice -
Overhead Protective Structures, gazetted 16 December 1994, as commenced 20 March 1995.
This can be downloaded from:
http://www.workcover.nsw.gov.au/Publications/LawAndPolicy/CodesofPractice/oheadprotstr
ucts.htm.
Security fencing, hoarding and overhead protective structure must not obstruct access to
utilities services including but not limited to man holes, pits, stop valves, fire hydrants or the
like.
Note: The principal contractor or owner must allow not less than two (2) weeks from the date of making a
hoarding application for determination. Any approval for a hoarding or overhead protection under the
Roads Act 1993 will be subject to its own conditions and fees.
Standard Condition: D11
D.7 Toilet Facilities
Toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site on which work
involved in the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out, at the rate of one
toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. Each toilet provided:
a) must be a standard flushing toilet, and
b) must be connected to a public sewer, or
c) if connection to a public sewer is not practicable, to an accredited sewage management
facility approved by the council, or
d) if connection to a public sewer or an accredited sewage management facility is not
practicable, to some other sewage management facility approved by the council.
The provision of toilet facilities in accordance with this condition must be completed before
any other work is commenced.
In this condition:
accredited sewage management facility means a sewage management facility to which
Division 4A of Part 3 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993 applies, being a
sewage management facility that is installed or constructed to a design or plan the subject of a
certificate of accreditation referred to in clause 95B of the Local Government (Approvals)
Regulation 1993.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 112
approved by the council means the subject of an approval in force under Division 1 of Part 3
of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993.
public sewer has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation
1993.
sewage management facility has the same meaning as it has in the Local Government
(Approvals) Regulation 1993.
Note: This condition does not set aside the requirement to comply with Workcover NSW requirements.
Standard Condition: D13
D.8 Erosion and Sediment Controls – Installation
The principal contractor or owner builder must install and maintain water pollution, erosion
and sedimentation controls in accordance with:
a) The Soil and Water Management Plan if required under this consent;
b) ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2001; and
c) ―Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction‖ published by the NSW
Department of Housing 4th Edition‖ ('The Blue Book').
Where there is any conflict The Blue Book takes precedence.
Note: The International Erosion Control Association – Australasia (http://www.austieca.com.au/) lists
consultant experts who can assist in ensuring compliance with this condition. Where Soil and Water
Management Plan is required for larger projects it is recommended that this be produced by a member of
the International Erosion Control Association – Australasia.
Note: The ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖ publications can be
down loaded free of charge from www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au.
Note: A failure to comply with this condition may result in penalty infringement notices, prosecution, notices
and orders under the Act and/or the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 without any
further warning. It is a criminal offence to cause, permit or allow pollution.
Note: Section 257 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 provides inter alia that ―the
occupier of premises at or from which any pollution occurs is taken to have caused the pollution‖
Warning: Irrespective of this condition any person occupying the site may be subject to proceedings
under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 where pollution is caused, permitted or
allowed as the result of their occupation of the land being developed. Standard Condition: D14
D.9 Building - Construction Certificate, Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority,
Appointment of Principal Contractor and Notice of Commencement (s81A(2) of the Act)
The erection of the building in accordance with this development consent must not be
commenced until:
a) A construction certificate for the building work has been issued by the consent
authority, the council (if the council is not the consent authority) or an accredited
Certifier, and
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 113
b) The person having the benefit of the development consent has:
Appointed a principal certifying authority for the building work, and
Notified the principal certifying authority that the person will carry out the
building work as an owner-builder, if that is the case, and
c) the principal certifying authority has, no later than 2 days before the building work
commences:
Notified the consent authority and the council (if the council is not the consent
authority) of his or her appointment, and
Notified the person having the benefit of the development consent of any critical
stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the
building work, and
d) The person having the benefit of the development consent, if not carrying out the work
as an owner-builder, has:
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 principal certifying authority 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
Given at least 2 days‘ notice to the council of the person‘s intention to commence
the erection of the building.
Note: building has the same meaning as in section 4 of the Act and includes part of a building and any structure
or part of a structure.
Note: new building has the same meaning as in section 109H of the Act and includes an altered portion of, or an
extension to, an existing building.
Note: The commencement of demolition works associated with an altered portion of, or an extension to, an
existing building is considered to be the commencement of building work requiring compliance with
section 82A(2) of the Act (including the need for a Construction Certificate) prior to any demolition
work. See: Over our Dead Body Society Inc v Byron Bay Community Association Inc [2001] NSWLEC
125.
Note: Construction Certificate Application, PCA Service Agreement and Notice of Commencement forms can
be downloaded from Council‘s website www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au .
Note: It is an offence for any person to carry out the erection of a building in breach of this condition and in
breach of section 81A(2) of the Act. Standard Condition: D15
D.10 Establishment of boundary location, building location and datum
Prior to the commencement of any work the principal contractor or owner builder must ensure
that a surveyor registered under the Surveying Act 2002 sets out:
a) the boundaries of the site by permanent marks (including permanent recovery points);
b) the location and level of foundation excavations, footings, walls and slabs by permanent
marks, pegs or profiles relative to the boundaries of the land and relative to Australian
Height Datum (―AHD‖) in compliance with the approved plans;
c) establishes a permanent datum point (bench mark) within the boundaries of the site
relative to AHD; and
d) provides a copy of a survey report by the registered surveyor detailing, the title
boundaries, pegs/profiles, recovery points and bench mark locations as established
pursuant to this condition to the PCA.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 114
Note: Where the principal contractor or owner builder notes any discrepancy between the approved
development consent and the Construction Certificate, especially in relation to the height, location or
external configuration of the building (but not limited to these issues) the principal contractor or owner
builder should not proceed until satisfied that the variations as shown are consistent with the consent.
Failure to do so may result in a breach of development consent.
Note: On larger developments, or where boundary redefinition is required, the placement of new State Survey
Marks as permanent marks should be considered by the registered surveyor. Standard Condition: D18
E. Conditions which must be satisfied during any development work
E.1 Compliance with Building Code of Australia and insurance requirements under the
Home Building Act 1989
For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Act, the following condition is prescribed in
relation to a development consent for development that involves any building work:
a) That the work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building
Code of Australia,
b) In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires
there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that
such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be
carried out by the consent commences.
This condition does not apply:
a) To the extent to which an exemption is in force under clause 187 or 188, subject to the
terms of any condition or requirement referred to in clause 187 (6) or 188 (4) of the
Regulation, or
b) To the erection of a temporary building.
In this clause, a reference to the BCA is a reference to that Code as in force on the date the
application for the relevant construction certificate is made.
Note: All new guttering is to comply with the provisions of Part 3.5.2 of the Building Code of Australia.
Standard Condition: E1
E.2 Compliance with Australian Standard for Demolition
Demolition of buildings and structures must comply with Australian Standard AS 2601—
1991: The Demolition of Structures, published by Standards Australia, and as in force at 1
July 1993. Standard Condition: E2
E.3 Compliance with Construction Management Plan
All development activities and traffic movements must be carried out in accordance with the
approved construction management plan. All controls in the Plan must be maintained at all
times. A copy of the Plan must be kept on-site at all times and made available to the PCA or
Council on request.
Note: Irrespective of the provisions of the Construction Management Plan the provisions of traffic and parking
legislation prevails. Standard Condition: E3
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 115
E.4 Requirement to notify about new evidence
Any new information which comes to light during remediation, demolition or construction
works which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination, heritage
significance, threatened species or other relevant matters must be immediately notified to
Council and the Principal Certifying Authority.. Standard Condition: E4
E.5 Critical Stage Inspections
Critical stage inspections must be called for by the principal contractor or owner builder as
required by the PCA, any PCA service agreement, the Act and the Regulation.
Work must not proceed beyond each critical stage until the PCA is satisfied that work is
proceeding in accordance with this consent, the Construction Certificate(s) and the Act.
critical stage inspections means the inspections prescribed by the Regulations for the
purposes of section 109E(3)(d) of the Act or as required by the PCA and any PCA Service
Agreement.
Note: The PCA may require inspections beyond mandatory critical stage inspections in order that the PCA be
satisfied that work is proceeding in accordance with this consent.
Note: The PCA may, in addition to inspections, require the submission of Compliance Certificates, survey
reports or evidence of suitability in accordance with Part A2.2 of the BCA in relation to any matter
relevant to the development. Standard Condition: E5
E.6 Hours of Work –Amenity of the neighbourhood
a) No work must take place on any Sunday or public holiday,
b) No work must take place before 7am or after 5pm any weekday,
c) No work must take place before 7am or after 1pm any Saturday,
d) The following work must not take place before 9am or after 4pm any weekday, or
before 9am or after 1pm any Saturday or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday;
(i) Piling;
(ii) Piering;
(iii) Rock or concrete cutting, boring or drilling;
(iv) Rock breaking;
(v) Rock sawing;
(vi) Jack hammering; or
(vii) Machine excavation,
e) No loading or unloading of material or equipment associated with the activities listed in
part d) above must take place before 9am or after 4pm any weekday, or before 9am or
after 1pm any Saturday or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday.
f) No operation of any equipment associated with the activities listed in part d) above must
take place before 9am or after 4pm any weekday, or before 9am or after 1pm any
Saturday or at any time on a Sunday or public holiday
g) No rock excavation being cutting, boring, drilling, breaking, sawing , jack hammering
or bulk excavation of rock, must occur without a 15 minute break every hour.
This condition has been imposed to mitigate the impact of work upon the amenity of the
neighbourhood. Impact of work includes, but is not limited to, noise, vibration, dust, odour,
traffic and parking impacts.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 116
Note: The use of noise and vibration generating plant and equipment and vehicular traffic, including trucks in
particular, significantly degrade the amenity of neighbourhoods and more onerous restrictions apply to
these activities. This more invasive work generally occurs during the foundation and bulk excavation
stages of development. If you are in doubt as to whether or not a particular activity is considered to be
subject to the more onerous requirement (9am to 4pm weekdays and 9am to 1pm Saturdays) please
consult with Council.
Note: Each and every breach of this condition by any person may be subject to separate penalty infringement
notice or prosecution.
Note: The delivery and removal of plant, equipment and machinery associated with wide loads subject to RTA
and Police restrictions on their movement out side the approved hours of work will be considered on a
case by case basis.
Note: Compliance with these hours of work does not affect the rights of any person to seek a remedy to
offensive noise as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the Protection of
the Environment Operations (Noise Control) Regulation 2000.
Note: EPA Guidelines can be down loaded from http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/noise/nglg.htm .
Note: see http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/resources/ci_build_sheet7.pdf Standard Condition: E6
E.7 Public Footpaths – Safety, Access and Maintenance (Apply to all development)
The principal contractor or owner builder and any other person acting with the benefit of this
consent must:
a) Not erect or maintain any gate or fence swing out or encroaching upon the road or the
footway.
b) Not use the road or footway for the storage of any article, material, matter, waste or
thing.
c) Not use the road or footway for any work.
d) Keep the road and footway in good repair free of any trip hazard or obstruction.
e) Not stand any plant and equipment upon the road or footway.
f) Provide a clear safe pedestrian route a minimum of 1.5m wide.
g) Protect street name inlays in the footpath which are not to be removed or damaged
during development.
This condition does not apply to the extent that a permit or approval exists under the section
73 of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999, section 138 of the
Roads Act 1993 or section 94 of the Local Government Act 1993 except that at all time
compliance is required with:
a) Australian Standard AS 1742 (Set) Manual of uniform traffic control devices and all
relevant parts of this set of standards.
b) Australian Road Rules to the extent they are adopted under the Road Transport (Safety
and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999.
Note: Section 73 of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999 allows the Police to close
any road or road related area to traffic during any temporary obstruction or danger to traffic or for any
temporary purpose. Any road closure requires Police approval.
Note: Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 provides that a person must not:
erect a structure or carry out a work in, on or over a public road, or
dig up or disturb the surface of a public road, or
remove or interfere with a structure, work or tree on a public road, or
pump water into a public road from any land adjoining the road, or
connect a road (whether public or private) to a classified road,
otherwise than with the consent of the appropriate roads authority.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 117
Note: Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 provides that a person may carry out certain activities only
with the prior approval of the council including:
Part C Management of Waste:
a. For fee or reward, transport waste over or under a public place
b. Place waste in a public place
c. Place a waste storage container in a public place.‖
Part E Public roads:
a. 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
b. Expose or allow to be exposed (whether for sale or otherwise) 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 hang
an article beneath an awning over the road.‖
c. Any work in, on or over the Road or Footway requires Council Approval and in the case of
classified roads the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority. Road includes that portion of the road
uses as a footway. Standard Condition: E7
E.8 Maintenance of Environmental Controls
The principal contractor or owner builder must ensure that the following monitoring,
measures and controls are maintained:
a) Erosion and sediment controls.
b) Dust controls.
c) Dewatering discharges.
d) Noise controls.
e) Vibration monitoring and controls.
f) Ablutions.
Note: See http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/small_business/builders.htm for additional information. Standard Condition: E11
E.9 Erosion and Sediment Controls – Maintenance
The principal contractor or owner builder must maintain water pollution, erosion and
sedimentation controls in accordance with:
a) The Soil and Water Management Plan required under this consent;
b) ―Do it Right On Site, Soil and Water Management for the Construction Industry‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils, 2001; and
c) ―Managing Urban Stormwater - Soils and Construction‖ published by the NSW
Department of Housing 4th Edition (―The Blue Book‖).
Where there is any conflict The Blue Book takes precedence.
Note: A failure to comply with this condition may result in penalty infringement notices, prosecution, notices
and orders under the Act and/or the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 without any
further warning. It is a criminal offence to cause, permit or allow pollution.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 118
Note: Section 257 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 provides that ―the occupier of
premises at or from which any pollution occurs is taken to have caused the pollution‖.
Warning: Irrespective of this condition any person occupying the site may be subject to proceedings under the
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 where pollution is caused, permitted or allowed as the result
of the occupation of the land being developed whether or not they actually cause the pollution. Standard Condition:
E15
E.10 Disposal of site water during construction
The principal contractor or owner builder must ensure:
a) Prior to pumping any water into the road or public stormwater system that approval is
obtained from Council under section 138(1)(d) of the Roads Act 1993;
b) That water pollution, as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act
1997, does not occur as the result of the discharge to the road, public stormwater system
or other place or any site water;
c) That stormwater from any roof or other impervious areas is linked, via temporary
downpipes and stormwater pipes, to a Council approved stormwater disposal system
immediately upon completion of the roof installation or work creating other impervious
areas.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that adjoining and neighbouring land is not adversely affected
by unreasonable overland flows of stormwater and that site water does not concentrate water such that
they cause erosion and water pollution. Standard Condition: E17
E.11 Filling of site
To the extent that this consent permits filling of the site such fill must be virgin excavated
natural material (“VENM”).
VENM means ―Virgin excavated natural material (such as clay, gravel, sand, soil and rock)
that is not mixed with any other type of waste and which has been excavated from areas of
land that are not contaminated with human-made chemicals as a result of industrial,
commercial, mining or agricultural activities and which do not contain sulphidic ores or
soils.‖
Note: This definition is the same as in Schedule 1 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997,
Appendix IX: Types of waste.
Note: Sulphidic ores and soils are commonly known as Acid Sulphate Soils.
Note: If a person transports waste to a place (the site) that cannot lawfully be used as a waste facility for that
waste: (a) the person, and, (b) if the person is not the owner of the waste, the owner, are each guilty of an
offence under section 143 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.
Note: A person who is the owner or occupier (principal contractor) of any land that cannot lawfully be used as a
waste facility and who permits the land to be used as a waste facility is guilty of an offence under section
144 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.
Note: Additional information is available from the following websites:
Illegal waste dumping - http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/waste/dumping.htm
Is that fill legal? http://www.epa.nsw.gov.au/resources/012648web.epa%20fill.dl%20bro.pdf Standard Condition: E18
E.12 Site Cranes
Site Crane(s) and hoist(s) may be erected within the boundary of the land being developed
subject to compliance with Australian Standards AS 1418, AS 2549 and AS 2550 and all
relevant parts to these standards.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 119
Cranes must not swing or hoist over any public place unless the principal contractor or owner
builder have the relevant approval under the Local Government Act 1993, Crown Lands Act
1989 or Roads Act 1993.
The crane must not be illuminated outside approved working hours other than in relation to
safety beacons required by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority under the Civil Aviation Act
1988 (Cth).
No illuminated sign(s) must be erected upon or displayed upon any site crane.
Note: Where it is proposed to swing a crane over a public place the principal contractor or owner builder must
make a separate application to Council under section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 and obtain
activity approval from Council prior to swinging or hoisting over the public place.
Note: Where it is proposed to swing a crane over private land the consent of the owner of that private land is
required. Alternatively, the principal contractor or owner builder must obtain an access order under the
Access to Neighbouring Land Act 2000 or easement under section 88K of the Conveyancing Act 1919 or
section 40 of the Land & Environment Court Act 1979 as appropriate. The encroachment of cranes or the
like is a civil matter of trespass and encroachment. Council does not adjudicate or regulate such
trespasses or encroachments. Standard Condition: E19
E.13 Check Surveys - boundary location, building location, building height, stormwater
drainage system and flood protection measures relative to Australian Height Datum
The Principal Contractor or Owner Builder must ensure that a surveyor registered under the
Surveying Act 2002 carries out check surveys and provides survey certificates confirming the
location of the building(s), ancillary works, flood protection works and the stormwater
drainage system relative to the boundaries of the site and that the height of buildings, ancillary
works, flood protection works and the stormwater drainage system relative to Australian
Height Datum complies with this consent at the following critical stages.
The Principal Contractor or Owner Builder must ensure that work must not proceed beyond
each of the following critical stages until compliance has been demonstrated to the PCA‟s
satisfaction:
a) Upon the completion of foundation walls prior to the laying of any floor or the pouring
of any floor slab and generally at damp proof course level;
b) Upon the completion of formwork for floor slabs prior to the laying of any floor or the
pouring of any concrete and generally at each storey;
c) Upon the completion of formwork or framework for the roof(s) prior to the laying of
any roofing or the pouring of any concrete roof;
d) Upon the completion of formwork and steel fixing prior to pouring of any concrete for
any ancillary structure, flood protection work, swimming pool or spa pool or the like;
e) Upon the completion of formwork and steel fixing prior to pouring of any concrete for
driveways showing transitions and crest thresholds confirming that driveway levels
match Council approved driveway crossing levels and minimum flood levels.;
f) Stormwater Drainage Systems prior to back filling over pipes confirming location,
height and capacity of works.
g) Flood protection measures are in place confirming location, height and capacity.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 120
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that development occurs in the location and at the height
approved under this consent. This is critical to ensure that building are constructed to minimum heights
for flood protection and maximum heights to protect views and the amenity of neighbours. Standard Condition: E20
E.14 Placement and use of Skip Bins
The principal contractor or owner builder must ensure that all waste storage containers,
including but not limited to skip bins, must be stored within the site unless:
a) Activity Approval has been issued by Council under section 94 of the Local
Government Act 1993 to place the waste storage container in a public place, and
b) Where located on the road it is located only in a positions where a vehicle may lawfully
park in accordance with the Australian Road Rules to the extent they are adopted under
the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) (Road Rules) Regulation 1999.
Note: Waste storage containers must not be located on the footpath without a site specific activity approval.
Where such site specific activity approval is granted a 1.5m wide clear path of travel is maintained free of
any trip hazards. Standard Condition: E21
E.15 Prohibition of burning
There must be no burning of any waste or other materials. The burning of CCA (copper
chrome arsenate) or PCP (pentachlorophenol) treated timber is prohibited in all parts of NSW.
All burning is prohibited in the Woollahra local government area.
Note: Pursuant to the Protection of the Environment Operations (Control of Burning) Regulation 2000 all
burning (including burning of vegetation and domestic waste) is prohibited except with approval. No
approval is granted under this consent for any burning. Standard Condition: E22
E.16 Dust Mitigation
Dust mitigation must be implemented in accordance with ―Dust Control - Do it right on site‖
published by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils.
This generally requires:
a) Dust screens to all hoardings and site fences.
b) All stockpiles or loose materials to be covered when not being used.
c) All equipment, where capable, being fitted with dust catchers.
d) All loose materials being placed bags before placing into waste or skip bins.
e) All waste and skip bins being kept covered when not being filled or emptied.
f) The surface of excavation work being kept wet to minimise dust.
g) Landscaping incorporating trees, dense shrubs and grass being implemented as soon as
practically possible to minimise dust.
Note: ―Dust Control - Do it right on site‖ can be down loaded free of charge from Council‘s web site
www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au or obtained from Council‘s office.
Note: Special precautions must be taken when removing asbestos or lead materials from development sites.
Additional information can be obtained from www.workcover.nsw.gov.au and www.epa.nsw.gov.au .
Other specific condition and advice may apply.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 121
Note: Demolition and construction activities may affect local air quality and contribute to urban air pollution.
The causes are dust, smoke and fumes coming from equipment or activities, and airborne chemicals when
spraying for pest management. Precautions must be taken to prevent air pollution. Standard Condition: E23
E.17 Compliance with Council’s Specification for Roadworks, Drainage and Miscellaneous
Works Road works and work within the Road and Footway
All work carried out on assets which are under Council ownership or will revert to the
ownership, care, control or management of Council in connection with the development to
which this consent relates must comply with Council‘s Specification for Roadworks,
Drainage and Miscellaneous Works dated January 2003.
The owner, principal contractor or owner builder must meet all costs associated with such
works.
This condition does not set aside the need to obtain relevant approvals under the Roads Act
1993 or Local Government Act 1993 for works within Roads and other public places.
Note: A copy of Council‘s ―Specification for Roadworks, Drainage and Miscellaneous Works‖ can be down
loaded free of charge from Council‘s website www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au Standard Condition: E24
E.18 Food Premises – Construction & Fitout
The principal contractor or owner builder must ensure that all construction and fitout of the
food premises complies with the details for the food premises submitted to and considered
satisfactory by Council's Environmental Health Officers but no less compliant than with the
Food Act 2003, Food Regulation 2004; the Food Standards Code as published by Food
Standards Australia and New Zealand and AS 4674-2004: Construction and fit out of food
premises.
This condition has been imposed to protect public health and ensure that food premises are
easily maintained in a clean condition fit for food preparation and consumption. Standard Condition: E29
E.19 Discovery of additional information during remediation, demolition or construction
(contamination)
Any new information which comes to light during demolition, or construction works which
has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site contamination detailed in the
Targeted Environmental Site Assessment and Preliminary Acid Sulfate Soils Assessment
(Ref: 1683 and 1683/2 dated February 2007) prepared by Aargus Pty Ltd, must be notified to
Woollahra Council and the accredited certifier immediately after discovery.
E.20 Discovery of additional information during remediation, demolition or construction
(acid sulfate soils)
Any new information which comes to light during demolition or excavation works which has
the potential to alter previous conclusions about acid sulfate soils on the site or soil
disturbance below a depth of 7m is planned, Environmental Investigation Services should be
contacted for advice.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 122
E.21 Disposal of soil from the site
Any proposed disposal of soil from the site, such soil must be tested and classified in
accordance with the provisions of both the Protection of the Environment Operations Act
1997 and the NSW EPA Guidelines: Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid
and Non-Liquid Wastes (1999).
E.22 Tree Preservation & Approved Landscaping Works
All landscape works must be undertaken in accordance with the approved landscape plan,
arborist report, tree management plan and transplant method statement as applicable.
a) The following trees must be retained
Trees on Council Land
Council
Ref No
Species Location Dimension
(metres)
Tree
Value
($)
1 Cinnamomum camphora
(Camphor Laurel)
Road reserve Richmond
Road
15 height x
12 spread
9,000.00
Note: The tree/s required to be retained should appear coloured green on the construction certificate
plans.
E.23 Driveways/car parking areas in the vicinity of trees
The driveway/car parking area must be constructed utilising materials/techniques designed to
ensure that the existing water infiltration and gaseous exchange to the trees root system is
maintained. Driveways are to be designed in consultation with a qualified Arborist (minimum
qualification of Australian Qualification Framework Level 4 or recognised equivalent) and are
to utilise such measures as semiporous material.
E.24 Heritage conservation works
To ensure the proposal adequately retains the heritage significance of the subject heritage item
at No. 757 New South Head Road (the former post office) the following works must be
undertaken:
- All ceilings and cornices to the former Post Office are to be retained.
- All brick arches and round head openings to the existing windows of the south and
west elevations are to be retained. Infill material of round arch window frames is to be
in new timber.
- Skirtings are to be retained where existing, and to be reconstructed and reinstated to
the remainder of original walling being retained in the former Post Office.
- The black railings to the front steps are to be retained, along with the former Post
Office white lettering ‗Rose Bay 2029‘ to the façade.
- The sandstone base is to be properly conserved and repaired by a heritage
conservation specialist.
- Sandstone is not to be painted.
- The brickwork where required is to be repaired. Unsympathetic repairs are to be
reversed and properly repaired (such as the damage to the brickwork and mortar
associated with the addition of the security bars to the windows).
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 123
- The timber arch windows are to be conserved and continue to be painted white.
- The security bars to the windows are to be removed, and the associated brickwork
repaired.
- The timber eaves soffits are to be repaired and repainted to match existing colour.
- The yellow metal plates to the corners of the building are to be removed, and the
brickwork repaired as necessary.
- The Post Office principal building form is to retain its current colour scheme, that is:
Unpainted facebrick where existing is to remain unpainted.
Stone is to remain unpainted.
Timber joinery is to remain white.
External ‗cornice‘ and external ‗skirting‘ are to remain existing white/off-white
colour.
Eaves soffits are to remain existing white/off-white colour.
Where currently external brickwork becomes internal it is to remain unpainted.
E.25 Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997
During demolition works, no equipment, building materials or other articles are to be used or
placed in a manner on or off the site that will cause or likely to cause a ‗pollution incident‘ as
defined under the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.
F. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to any use of the development (Part 4A of the
Act and Part 8 Division 3 of the Regulation)
F.1 Occupation Certificate (section 109M of the Act)
A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building
(within the meaning of section 109H (4) of the Act) unless an occupation certificate has been
issued in relation to the building or part.
Note: New building includes an altered portion of, or an extension to, an existing building.
Standard Condition: F1
F.2 Amenity Landscaping
The owner or principal contractor must install all approved amenity landscaping (screen
planting, soil stabilisation planting, etc.) prior to any occupation or use of the site.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that the environmental impacts of the development are
mitigated by approved landscaping prior to any occupation of the development. Standard Condition: F6
F.3 Commissioning and Certification of Systems and Works
The principal contractor or owner builder must submit to the satisfaction of the PCA works-
as-executed (―WAE‖) plans, Compliance Certificates and evidence of suitability in
accordance with Part A2.2 of the BCA confirming that the works, as executed and as detailed,
comply with the requirement of this consent, the Act, the Regulations, any relevant
construction certificate, the BCA and relevant Australian Standards.
Works-as-executed (―WAE‖) plans, Compliance Certificates and evidence of suitability in
accordance with Part A2.2 of the BCA must include but may not be limited to:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 124
a) Certification from the supervising professional engineer that the requirement of the
Geotechnical / Hydrogeological conditions and report recommendations were
implemented and satisfied during development work.
b) All flood protection measures.
c) All garage/car park/basement car park, driveways and access ramps comply with
Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – ―Off-Street car parking.‖
d) Traffic (parking ) signal system
e) All stormwater drainage and storage systems.
f) All mechanical ventilation systems.
g) All hydraulic systems.
h) All structural work.
i) All acoustic attenuation work.
j) All waterproofing.
k) Such further matters as the Principal Certifying Authority may require.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that systems and works as completed meet development
standards as defined by the Act, comply with the BCA, comply with this consent and so that a public
record of works as execute is maintained.
Note: The PCA may require any number of WAE plans, certificates, or other evidence of suitability as
necessary to confirm compliance with the Act, Regulation, Development Standards, BCA, and relevant
Australia Standards. As a minimum WAE plans and certification is required for stormwater drainage and
detention, mechanical ventilation work, hydraulic services (including but not limited to fire services).
Note: The PCA must submit to Council, with any Occupation Certificate, copies of works-as-executed
(―WAE‖) plans, Compliance Certificates and evidence of suitability in accordance with Part A2.2 of the
BCA upon which the PCA has relied in issuing any Occupation Certificate. Standard Condition: F7
F.4 Commissioning and Certification of Public Infrastructure Works
The principal contractor or owner builder must submit, to the satisfaction of Woollahra
Municipal Council, certification from a professional engineer that all public infrastructure
works have been executed in compliance with this consent and with Council‘s Specification
for Roadworks, Drainage and Miscellaneous Works dated January 2003.
The certification must be supported by closed circuit television / video inspection provided on
DVD of all stormwater drainage together with Works As Executed engineering plans and a
survey report detailing all finished reduced levels. Standard Condition: F9
F.5 Food Premises - Inspection and Registration
Prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate or occupation or use of any food premises:
a) The Principal Contractor or owner must arrange an inspection of the fit out of the Food
Premises by Council's Environmental Health Officer;
b) A satisfactory final inspection must have been undertaken by Council's Environmental
Health Officer; and
c) The owner or occupier must have registered the Food Premises (Notification of conduct
under section 100 of the Food Act 2003).
Note: Notification can be done on-line at www.foodnotify.nsw.gov.au
Note: Inspections are subject to payment of the adopted inspection fee.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 125
Note: Section 100 of the Food Act 2003 requires:
―100 Notification of conduct of food businesses
(1) The proprietor of a food business must not conduct the food business unless the proprietor has given
written notice, in the approved form, of the information specified in the Food Safety Standards that is to
be notified to the appropriate enforcement agency before the business is conducted. Maximum penalty:
500 penalty units in the case of an individual and 2,500 penalty units in the case of a corporation.‖
Note: Accredited Certifiers are unable to issue Compliance Certificates in relation to compliance with the Food
Act 2003, Food Regulation 2004; the Food Standards Code and the Australian Standard AS 4674-2004:
Construction and fit out of food premises; since these are not matters which an Accredited Certifier can be
satisfied in relation to under Clause 161 of the Regulation. This condition can only be satisfied following
an inspection and sign off from Council‘s Environmental Health Officers. Standard Condition: F15
F.6 Traffic Signal System
To minimise traffic congestion in the car park during peak operating periods, a traffic signal
system indicating to approaching drivers that the car park is fully occupied, must be installed
and operational prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate.
The traffic signal system must:
be operational at all operating hours of the development,
the entire system must be contained within the site and,
the signal must be visible to a driver on Richmond Road approaching the car park entry
from either direction, at any hour of the day.
Details and specifications of the signal system must be submitted to the Accredited Certifier
at the completion of work.
F.7 Trolley Management Plan
In an attempt to preserve both visual amenity and noise amenity of residential areas within the
vicinity of the proposed development from the abandonment of shopping trolleys and to
facilitate shopping trolleys not to be taken from the subject site. Prior to the use of the
development, a Trolley Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by a member of
Council‘s planning staff. The plan must detail:
1. Measures to ensure shopping trolleys shall remain on the premises of the subject site.
2. The implementation of ―containment‖ systems that encourage the confinement of
trolleys to the retailer‘s premises. Containment systems may include:
Coin/token operated systems with refund.
Trolleys with wheel locks activated by a radio signal or magnetic strip.
Cattle grids at carpark entrances and exits.
Any other system which demonstrates a commitment to contain trolleys to the owners
premises, or to within the boundaries of a shopping centre and may include staff
permanently stationed at exits during trading hours.
3. In the event that trolleys are taken outside of the subject site, Woolworths shall have a
management program which ensures that shopping trolleys taken from the retail
premises are collected at least daily.
4. Note: Council may impound trolleys following the procedures under the Impounding
Act 1993 where a shopping trolley has been abandoned or left unattended and
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 126
(i) is likely to cause imminent danger to a member of the public and
(ii) the trolley has not been collected by the owner or their collective agent after due
notification has been forwarded by Council of the location of the trolley at least
twenty-four hours previously.
In addition the following must be provided with the Trolley Management Plan
1. Two samples of the proposed plastic and/or the plastic coated steel framed shopping
trolleys, shall be provided to Council for assessment and approval.
F.8 Certification of Acoustic Barriers
Prior to the use of the development, a report prepared by a acoustic engineer shall be provided
to Council. The report must confirm that the barriers accord with the noise control measures
detailed in the acoustic report, reference DA Acoustic Assessment Woolworths Rose Bay,
prepared by Aecom, dated 23 November 2011.
G. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the issue of any Subdivision Certificate
G.1 Electricity Substations – Dedication as road and/or easements for access
If an electricity substation, is required on the site the owner must dedicate to the appropriate
energy authority (to its satisfaction), free of cost, an area of land adjoining the street
alignment to enable an electricity substation to be established. The size and location of the
electricity substation is to be in accordance with the requirements of the appropriate energy
authority and Council. The opening of any access doors are not to intrude onto the public
road (footway or road pavement).
Documentary evidence of compliance, including correspondence from the energy authority is
to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Construction
Certificate detailing energy authority requirements.
The Accredited Certifier must be satisfied that the requirements of energy authority have been
met prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.
Where an electricity substation is provided on the site adjoining the road boundary, the area
within which the electricity substation is located must be dedicated as public road. Where
access is required across the site to access an electricity substation an easement for access
across the site from the public place must be created upon the linen plans burdening the
subject site and benefiting the Crown in right of New South Wales and any Statutory
Corporation requiring access to the electricity substation. Standard Condition: G4
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 127
H. Conditions which must be satisfied prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate
(s109C(1)(c))
H.1 Landscaping
All landscape work including all planting must be completed by the principal contractor or
owner in compliance with the approved landscape plan, arborist report, transplant method
statement and tree management plan. The principal contractor or owner must provide to PCA
a works-as-executed landscape plan and certification from a qualified landscape
architect/designer, horticulturist and/or arborist as applicable to the effect that the works as
completed comply with this consent.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that all Landscaping work is completed prior to the issue of
the Final Occupation Certificate. Standard Condition: H9
H.2 Removal of Ancillary Works and Structures
The principal contractor or owner must remove from the land and any adjoining public place:
a) The site sign;
b) Ablutions;
c) Hoarding;
d) Scaffolding; and
e) Waste materials, matter, article or thing.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that all ancillary matter is removed prior to the issue of the
Final Occupation Certificate. Standard Condition: H12
H.3 Bush Regeneration
Bush regeneration must be completed in accordance with the approved bush regeneration
plan. The principal contractor or owner must provide to PCA certification from a qualified
bush regenerator that the works as completed comply with this consent.
Note: This condition has been imposed to ensure that bush regeneration work required under the consent have
been completed prior to the issue of any Final Occupation Certificate. Standard Condition: H10
H.4 Road Works (including footpaths)
The following works must be completed to the satisfaction of Council, in accordance with the
Roads Act 1993 approvals and comply with Council‘s “Specification for Roadworks,
Drainage and Miscellaneous Works” dated January 2003 unless expressly provided otherwise
by these conditions at the principal contractor‟s or owner‟s expense:
a) Stormwater pipes, pits and connections to public stormwater systems within the road;
b) Driveways and vehicular crossings within the road;
c) Removal of redundant driveways and vehicular crossings;
d) New footpaths within the road;
e) Relocation of existing power/light pole
f) relocation/provision of street signs
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 128
g) New or replacement street trees;
h) New footway verges, where a grass verge exists, the balance of the area between the
footpath and the kerb or site boundary over the full frontage of the proposed
development must be turfed. The grass verge must be constructed to contain a uniform
minimum 75mm of friable growing medium and have a total cover of turf predominant
within the street.
i) New or reinstated kerb and guttering within the road; and
j) New or reinstated road surface pavement within the road.
k) The section of footpath to link the proposed car park and Richmond Road must be
constructed to minimise the noise impacts of vehicles entering and exiting the subject
site.
l) The section of Richmond Road adjacent to the proposed vehicular entrance must be
resurfaced to minimise noise impacts of vehicles entering and existing the subject site.
Note: Security held by Council pursuant to section 80A(6) of the Act will not be release by Council until
compliance has been achieved with this condition. An application for refund of security must be
submitted with the Final Occupation Certificate to Council. This form can be downloaded from
Council‘s website www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au or obtained from Council‘s customer service centre. Standard Condition: H13
H.5 Dilapidation Report for public infrastructure works
The Principal Contractor must submit a follow up dilapidation report, prepared by a
professional engineer, on Council‘s infrastructure within and near the development site to
Council upon completion of the work.
The Final Occupation Certificate must not be issued until Council‘s Civil Works Engineer is
satisfied that the works have been satisfactorily completed and the PCA has been provided
with correspondence from Council to this effect.
The dilapidation report must include:
a) Photographs showing any existing damage to the road pavement fronting the site,
b) Photographs showing any existing damage to the kerb and gutter fronting the site,
c) Photographs showing any existing damage to the footway including footpath pavement
fronting the site,
d) Photographs showing any existing damage to retaining walls within the footway or
road, and
e) Closed circuit television/video inspection (in DVD format) of public stormwater
drainage systems fronting, adjoining or within the site, and
f) The full name and signature of the professional engineer.
The reports are to be supplied in both paper copy and electronic format in Word. Photographs
are to be in colour, digital and date stamped.
The dilapidation report must specify (with supporting photographic/DVD evidence) the exact
location and extent of any damaged or defective public infrastructure. If the required report is
not submitted then Council will assume any damage to any infrastructure in the immediate
vicinity of the site was caused by the principle contractor and owner carrying out work under
this consent.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 129
Note: If the Principal Contractor fails to submit the dilapidation report required by this condition and damage is
occasioned to public assets adjoining the site Council will deduct from security any costs associated with
remedying, repairing or replacing damaged public infrastructure. Nothing in this condition prevents
Council making any claim against security held for this purpose. Standard Condition: H14
H.6 Covenant for Private Works on Council Property
A positive covenant, pursuant to Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act, must be created on the
title of the subject property, providing for the indemnification of Council from any claims or
actions, and the on-going maintenance of any private structures on or over Council property
for which consent has been given, such as steps, retaining walls, access ways, overhang,
balconies, awnings, signs and the like.
The wording of the Instrument must be in accordance with Council‘s standard format and the
Instrument must be registered at the Land Property Information Office prior to the issuance of
any Occupation Certificate.
Note: The required wording of the Instrument can be downloaded from Council‘s web site
www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au . The PCA must supply a copy of the WAE Plans to Council together with
the Occupation Certificate. No Occupation Certificate must be issued until this condition has been
satisfied. Standard Condition: H19
H.7 Fire Safety
To ensure that adequate provision has been made for fire safety, prior to the occupation of the
building, the following works must be completed:
A system of emergency lighting must be installed throughout the building to provide
sufficient light in an emergency in accordance with the requirements of Part E4 of the
BCA;
Exit signs shall be installed above all required exit doors. Signs shall be illuminated at
all times and generally be of sufficient number that direction of travel to all exits is
clearly visible from any part of the major egress routes. Exit signs shall be installed to
the standard expressed in Clauses E4.5, E4.6 and E4.8 of the BCA;
Hydrants shall be installed throughout the building in accordance with the requirements
of Clause E1.3 of the BCA,
If an internal fire hydrant is required within the building hose reels shall be installed
throughout the building to the standard expressed in Clause E1.4 of the BCA. Hose
reels shall not be located within rooms but rather in common areas such as
passageways, lobbies or foyers, so that their location is obvious and always available to
all occupants. If it is desired to enclose the hose reels, the cabinets shall be of a size with
sufficient clearance between reel and cabinet to allow the hose to be drawn off in any
direction and rewound without difficulty. Cabinets enclosing hose reels shall have a
conspicuously displayed sign fitted to the door, with lettering at least 50mm in height
reading "Fire Hose Reel". All cabinets are to comply with the relevant requirements of
AS1221 and AS 2441;
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 130
H.8 Consolidation of Allotments
Prior to the Occupation Certificate a final Plan of Survey prepared and certified by a
Registered Surveyor must be submitted and approved by the Accredited Certifier showing the
consolidation of the 3 lots (LOT: 5 SEC: 1 DP: 976493, LOT: 1 SEC: 1 DP: 776799, and
LOT: 2 DP: 776799) into a single lot.
A new deposited plan of the consolidated lot must be registered at the Land Titles Office and
a copy provided to Council with copies of certificates of title, prior to the issue of the
Occupation Certificate.
I. Conditions which must be satisfied during the ongoing use of the development
I.1 Hours of use
This condition provides a trial period for the proposed hours of use. This is to ensure that the
proposed use would not adversely impact upon the acoustic privacy, or residential amenity, of
the neighbouring properties.
For the first 12 months that the supermarket is in operation, the hours of use are limited to the
following:
a) Monday to Friday: 7am-10pm
b) Saturday: 7am-10pm
c) Sunday and Public Holiday: 7am-10pm
After the first 12 months that the supermarket is in operation, the hours of use are limited to
the following:
a) Monday to Friday: 7am-7pm
b) Saturday: 7am-7pm
c) Sunday and Public Holiday: 7am-7pm
If a section 96 application is submitted to Council to amended condition I.1 to maintain the
longer opening hours, Council will review the hours of use to assess the magnitude of that
operational regime on the adjacent residential properties.
Note: Deliveries to or dispatches from the site must not be made outside these hours. Trading Hours may be
more onerous than these general hours of use. This condition does not apply to activities such as cleaning
which takes place wholly within the building and which are not audible within any adjoining residential
dwelling. If internal activities are audible within any adjoining residential dwelling such that they cause a
nuisance to the occupiers of such dwelling than such internal activities must not occur outside these hours
of use. This condition does not restrict the operation of noise pollution laws. Standard Condition: I1
I.2 Loading dock operating hours
To ensure an adequate level of acoustic privacy is maintained to the neighbouring properties,
the use of the loading dock area by trucks, refrigerated vans and other vehicles for the purpose
of goods deliveries and the movement of such goods shall be strictly restricted to the
following hours:
7:00 am - 6:00 pm from Monday to Saturday.
8:00 am – 6:00 pm on Sunday
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 131
I.3 Waste collection hours and requirements
To ensure an adequate level of acoustic privacy is maintained to the neighbouring properties,
the collection of waste materials, recyclables and the collection of fat oil and grease trap
services shall only occur during the following hours:
9:00am - 3:00 pm from Monday to Saturday.
The occupier shall maintain a log to be kept on the premises which details the names of waste
contractors and dates and times that have entered and left the site.
Any glass bins must be located within the building. The glass bin must be emptied into the
refuse bin area a maximum of once per day to minimise noise associated with the transfer of
glass.
I.4 Car park use
To ensure an adequate level of residential amenity is maintained to the neighbouring
properties, the use of the car park is restricted to the approved hours of use of the
supermarket. The car parking spaces within the car park must be kept available for customer
use.
I.5 Compliance with the Transport Delivery Management Plan (TDMP)
All service delivery and waste collection traffic movements and activities must be undertaken
in accordance with the approved Transport Delivery Management Plan (TDMP).
I.6 Provision of off-street Public and Visitor Parking
The owner and occupier, in compliance with AS/NZS 2890.1:2004: Parking facilities - Off-
street car parking, must maintain unimpeded public access to off-street parking as approved
This condition has been imposed to ensure adequate on site parking is maintained. Standard Condition: I4
I.7 Illumination of signage
To protect the amenity of neighbours and limit the obtrusive effects of signage illumination
on public places, the illumination of any signage between 10pm and 7am is prohibited.
I.8 Maintenance of Landscaping
All landscaping must be maintained in general accordance with this consent.
This condition does not prohibit the planting of additional trees or shrubs subject that they are
native species endemic to the immediate locality.
Reason: This condition has been imposed to ensure that the landscaping design intent is not eroded over time
by the removal of landscaping or inappropriate exotic planting.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 132
Note: This condition also acknowledges that development consent is not required to plant vegetation and
that over time additional vegetation may be planted to replace vegetation or enhance the amenity of
the locality. Owners should have regard to the amenity impact of trees upon the site and neighbouring
land. Further, drought proof vegetation being native species endemic to the immediate locality is
encouraged. Suggested native species endemic to the immediate locality are listed in the Brochure
Titled ―Local Native Plants for Sydney‘s Eastern Suburbs‖ published by Woollahra, Waverley,
Randwick and Botany Bay Councils. Standard Condition: I8
I.9 Waste Management - Commercial
The owner and/or occupier must comply with the approved Site Waste Minimisation and
Management Plan (SWMMP) and with Council‘s Site Waste Minimisation and Management
Development Control Plan 2010.
All waste must be presented for collection in a receptacle. Waste receptacles must be
presented no earlier than the close of business on the day before collection. Waste and
recycling bins/crates must be removed from the road or footpath within 1 hour of collection or
otherwise is accordance with the approved SWMMP.
Receptacles are not to be stored in any public place at anytime. Waste and recycling
receptacles must be stored at all times within the boundaries of the site.
This condition does not apply to the extent that Activity Approval exists under the Local
Government Act 1993 or the Roads Act 1993 and subject that all conditions of such
approval(s) are complied with.
This condition has been imposed to ensure that the provisions of the approved SWMMP and
of Council‘s Site Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan 2010 are
complied with during the ongoing operations of the development.
Note: No waste will be collected by Council that isn‘t presented properly. The waste must be presented with lid
closed to reduce littering. Standard Condition: I15
I.10 Annual Fire Safety Statements (Class 1b to 9c buildings inclusive)
Each year, the owner of a building to which an essential fire safety measure is applicable must
provide an annual fire safety statement to Council and the Commissioner of the NSW Fire
Brigades. The annual fire safety statement must be prominently displayed in the building.
Note: Essential fire safety measure has the same meaning as in clause 165 of the Regulation. Annual fire safety
statement has the same meaning as in clause 175 of the Regulation. Part 9 Division 5 of the Regulation
applies in addition to this condition at the date of this consent. Visit Council‘s web site for additional
information in relation to fire safety www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au. Standard Condition: I22
I.11 Food Premises - Maintenance of Food Premises
The food premises must be maintained in accordance with the Food Act 2003, Food
Regulation 2004; the Food Standards Code as published by Food Standards Australia and
New Zealand and Australian Standard AS 4674-2004: Construction and fit out of food
premises.
This condition has been imposed to protect public health.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 133
Note: The provisions of the Food Act 2003 may change over time and irrespective of this condition compliance
with this Act, regulations, food standards and other standards adopted under the Food Act (as amended)
are mandatory. The Food Act and applicable regulations can be accessed free of charge at
www.legislation.nsw.gov.au. Standard Condition: I30
I.12 Outdoor lighting – Commercial
Outdoor lighting must comply with AS 4282-1997: Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor
lighting. The maximum luminous intensity from each luminare must not exceed the level 1
control relevant under table 2.2 of AS 4282. The maximum illuminance and the threshold
limits must be in accordance with Table 2.1 of AS 4282.
This condition has been imposed to protect the amenity of neighbours and limit the obtrusive
effects of outdoor lighting in public places.
Note: Council may consider, subject to an appropriate section 96 application relaxation of this condition where
it can be demonstrated, by expert report, that the level of lighting in the existing area already exceeds the
above criteria, where physical shielding is present or physical shielding is reasonably possible. Standard Condition: I43
I.13 Delivery vehicles
To ensure an adequate level of acoustic privacy is maintained to the neighbouring properties,
no trucks, refrigerated vans or any other vehicles shall be parked within the vicinity of the
loading dock area awaiting delivery or accepting of goods prior to or after the approved
loading dock operating hours. Similarly, no trucks, refrigerated vans or any other vehicles
shall leave engines idle when delivering or accepting goods within the loading dock area.
Large articulated truck deliveries to the loading dock are not permitted at the proposed
development.
I.14 Noise management plan
The recommendations of the noise management plan must be complied with during the
ongoing use of the development.
I.15 Noise Control
The use of the premises must not give rise to the transmission of offensive noise to any place
of different occupancy. Offensive noise is defined in the Protection of the Environment
Operations Act 1997.
This condition has been imposed to protect the amenity of the neighbourhood.
Note: Council will generally enforce this condition in accordance with the Noise Guide for Local Government
(http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise/nglg.htm) and the Industrial Noise Guidelines
(http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise/industrial.htm) publish by the Department of Environment
and Conservation. Other state government authorities also regulate the Protection of the Environment
Operations Act 1997.
Useful links:
Community Justice Centres—free mediation service provided by the NSW Government
(www.cjc.nsw.gov.au).
Department of Environment and Conservation NSW, Noise Policy Section web page
(www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise).
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 134
New South Wales Government Legislation home page for access to all NSW legislation, including the
Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and the Protection of the Environment Noise Control
Regulation 2000 (www.legislation.nsw.gov.au).
Australian Acoustical Society—professional society of noise-related professionals (www.acoustics.asn.au
/index.php).
Association of Australian Acoustical Consultants—professional society of noise related professionals
(www.aaac.org.au).
Department of Gaming and Racing - (www.dgr.nsw.gov.au). Standard Condition: I50
I.16 Noise from mechanical plant and equipment
The noise level measured at any boundary of the site at any time while the mechanical plant
and equipment is operating must not exceed the background noise level. Where noise
sensitive receivers are located within the site, the noise level is measured from the nearest
strata, stratum or community title land and must not exceed background noise level at any
time.
The background noise level is the underlying level present in the ambient noise, excluding the
subject noise source, when extraneous noise is removed.
This condition has been imposed to protect the amenity of the neighbourhood.
Note: Words in this condition have the same meaning as in the:
NSW Industrial Noise Policy (http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/ind_noise.pdf)
ISBN 0 7313 2715 2, dated January 2000, and
Noise Guide for Local Government (http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/noise/nglg.htm)
ISBN 1741370671 , dated December 2004. Standard Condition: I53
I.17 Car park area signage
The car park area must include clear signage which indicates customer parking, and customer
entry and exit points. This signage should clearly state that customers are restricted from
entering or exiting the site via New South Head Road.
I.18 Compliance with the Trolley Management Plan
The owner and/or occupier must comply with the approved Site approved trolley management
plan.
J. Miscellaneous Conditions
No relevant conditions.
K. Advisings
K.1 Criminal Offences – Breach of Development Consent & Environmental laws
Failure to comply with this development consent and any condition of this consent is a
criminal offence. Failure to comply with other environmental laws is also a criminal offence.
Where there is any breach Council may without any further warning:
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 135
a) Issue Penalty Infringement Notices (On-the-spot fines);
b) Issue notices and orders;
c) Prosecute any person breaching this consent; and/or
d) Seek injunctions/orders before the courts to restrain and remedy any breach.
Warnings as to potential maximum penalties
Maximum Penalties under NSW Environmental Laws include fines up to $1.1 Million and/or
custodial sentences for serious offences.
Warning as to enforcement and legal costs
Should Council have to take any action to enforced compliance with this consent or other
environmental laws Council‘s policy is to seek from the Court appropriate orders requiring
the payments of its costs beyond any penalty or remedy the Court may order.
This consent and this specific advice will be tendered to the Court when seeking costs orders
from the Court where Council is successful in any necessary enforcement action.
Note: The payment of environmental penalty infringement notices does not result in any criminal offence being
recorded. If a penalty infringement notice is challenged in Court and the person is found guilty of the
offence by the Court, subject to section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, a criminal
conviction is recorded. The effect of a criminal conviction beyond any fine is serious. You can obtain
further information from the following web sites:
http://www.theshopfront.org/documents/ConvictionsCriminalRecords.pdf and the Attorney General‘s
www.agd.nsw.gov.au. Standard Advising: K1
K.2 Dial before you dig
The principal contractor, owner builder or any person digging may be held financially
responsible by the asset owner should they damage underground pipe or cable networks.
Minimise your risk and Dial 1100 Before You Dig or visit www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au.
When you contact Dial Before You Dig, you will be sent details of all Dial Before You Dig
members who have underground assets in the vicinity of your proposed excavation. Standard Advising: K2
K.3 Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (“DDA”)
The Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) makes it against the law for public places to
be inaccessible to people with a disability. Compliance with this development consent,
Council‘s Access DCP and the BCA does not necessarily satisfy compliance with the DDA.
The DDA applies to existing places as well as places under construction. Existing places must
be modified and be accessible (except where this would involve "unjustifiable hardship‖).
Further detailed advice can be obtained from the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity
Commission (―HEROC‖):
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 136
a) http://www.hreoc.gov.au/index.html
b) http://www.hreoc.gov.au/disability_rights/dda_guide/ins/ins.html
If you have any further questions relating to the application of the DDA you can send and
email to HEROC at [email protected]. Standard Advising: K3
K.4 Builders Licences and Owner Builders Permits
Section 81A of the Act requires among other matters that the person having the benefit of the
development consent, if not carrying out the work as an owner-builder, must appointed a
principal contractor for residential building work who must be the holder of a contractor
licence.
Further information can be obtained from the NSW Office of Fair Trading website about how
you obtain an owner builders permit or find a principal contractor (builder):
http://www.dft.nsw.gov.au/building.html .
The Owner(s) must appoint the PCA. The PCA must check that Home Building Act
insurance is in place before the commencement of building work. The Principal Contractor
(Builder) must provide the Owners with a certificate of insurance evidencing the contract of
insurance under the Home Building Act 1989 for the residential building work. Standard Condition: K5
K.5 Building Standards - Guide to Standards and Tolerances
The PCA does not undertake detailed quality control inspections and the role of the PCA is
primarily to ensure that the development proceeds in accordance with this consent,
Construction Certificates and that the development is fit for occupation in accordance with its
classification under the Building Code of Australia. Critical Stage Inspections do not provide
the level of supervision required to ensure that the minimum standards and tolerances
specified by the ―Guide to Standards and Tolerances©‖ ISBN 0 7347 6010 8 are achieved.
The quality of any development is a function of the quality of the principal contractor‟s or
owner builder‟s supervision of individual contractors and trades on a daily basis during the
development. The PCA does not undertake this role.
The NSW Office of Fair Trading have published a ―Guide to Standards and Tolerances©‖
ISBN 0 7347 6010 8. The guide can be obtained from the Office of Fair Trading by calling
13 32 20 or by Fax: 9619 8618 or by post to: Marketing Branch, PO Box 972, Parramatta
NSW 2124.
The Guide can be down loaded from:
http://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/pdfs/corporate/publications/dft242.pdf
Council, as the PCA or otherwise, does not adjudicate building contract disputes between the
principal contractor, contractors and the owner. Standard Condition: K6
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 137
K.6 Workcover requirements
The Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 No 40 and subordinate regulations, codes of
practice and guidelines control and regulate the development industry.
Note: Further information can be obtained from Workcover NSW‘s website:
http://www.workcover.nsw.gov.au/Industry/Construction/default.htm or through their head office:
Location: Workcover NSW, 92-100 Donnison Street, GOSFORD 2250 Postal address: WorkCover
NSW, Locked Bag 2906, LISAROW 2252, Phone (02) 4321 5000, Fax (02) 4325 4145. Standard Condition: K7
K.7 Asbestos Removal, Repair or Disturbance
Anyone who removes, repairs or disturbs bonded or a friable asbestos material must hold a
current removal licence from Workcover NSW.
Before starting work, a work site-specific permit approving each asbestos project must be
obtained from Workcover NSW. A permit will not be granted without a current Workcover
licence.
All removal, repair or disturbance of or to asbestos material must comply with:
a) The Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000;
b) The Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001;
c) The Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos [NOHSC: 2002 (1998)];
d) The Guide to the Control of Asbestos Hazards in Buildings and Structures [NOHSC:
3002 (1998)] http://www.nohsc.gov.au/ ];
e) The Workcover NSW Guidelines for Licensed Asbestos Removal Contractors.
Note: The Code of Practice and Guide referred to above are known collectively as the Worksafe Code of
Practice and Guidance Notes on Asbestos. They are specifically referenced in the Occupational Health
and Safety Regulation 2001 under Clause 259. Under the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation
2001, the Worksafe Code of Practice and Guidance Notes on Asbestos are the minimum standards for
asbestos removal work. Council does not control or regulate the Worksafe Code of Practice and
Guidance Notes on Asbestos. You should make yourself aware of the requirements by visiting
www.workcover.nsw.gov.au or one of Workcover NSW‘s offices for further advice. Standard Advising: K8
K.8 Lead Paint
It is beyond the scope of this consent to provide detailed information about dealing with lead
paint. Painters working in an area containing lead-based paint should refer to Australian
Standard AS 4361.1–1995, Guide to Lead Paint Management—Industrial Applications, or AS
4361.2–1998, Guide to Lead Paint Management—Residential and Commercial Buildings.
Industrial paints, may contain lead. Lead is used in some specialised sign-writing and artist
paints, and road marking paints, and anti-corrosive paints. Lead was a major ingredient in
commercial and residential paints from the late 1800s to 1970. Most Australian commercial
buildings and residential homes built before 1970 contain lead paint. These paints were used
both inside and outside buildings.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 138
Lead hazards - Lead particles are released when old lead paint flakes and peels and collects as
dust in ceiling, wall and floor voids. If dust is generated it must be contained. If runoff
contains lead particles it must be contained. Lead is extremely hazardous, and stripping of
lead-based paint and the disposal of contaminated waste must be carried out with all care.
Lead is a cumulative poison and even small levels in the body can have severe effects. Standard Advising: K9
K.9 Dividing Fences
The erection of dividing fences under this consent does not affect the provisions of the
Dividing Fences Act 1991. Council does not adjudicate civil disputes relating to the provision
of, or payment for, the erection of dividing fences.
Note: Further information can be obtained from the NSW Department of Lands -
http://www.lands.nsw.gov.au/LandManagement/Dividing+Fences.htm. Community Justice Centres
provide a free mediation service to the community to help people resolve a wide range of disputes,
including dividing fences matters. Their service is free, confidential, voluntary, timely and easy to use.
Mediation sessions are conducted by two impartial, trained mediators who help people work together to
reach an agreement. Over 85% of mediations result in an agreement being reached. Mediation sessions
can be arranged at convenient times during the day, evening or weekends. Contact the Community Justice
Centre either by phone on 1800 671 964 or at http://www.cjc.nsw.gov.au/. Standard Advising: K10
K.10 Appeal
Council is always prepared to discuss its decisions and, in this regard, please do not hesitate to
contact Eleanor Killey, Assessment Officer, on (02) 9391 7090.
However, if you wish to pursue your rights of appeal in the Land & Environment Court you
are advised that Council generally seeks resolution of such appeals through a Section 34
Conference, site hearings and the use of Court Appointed Experts, instead of a full Court
hearing.
This approach is less adversarial, it achieves a quicker decision than would be the case
through a full Court hearing and it can give rise to considerable cost and time savings for all
parties involved. The use of the Section 34 Conference approach requires the appellant to
agree, in writing, to the Court appointed commissioner having the full authority to completely
determine the matter at the conference. Standard Condition: K14
K.11 Release of Security
An application must be made to Council by the person who paid the security for release of the
securities held under section 80A of the Act.
The securities will not be released until a Final Occupation Certificate has lodged with
Council, Council has inspected the site and Council is satisfied that the public works have
been carried out to Council‘s requirements. Council may use part or all of the security to
complete the works to its satisfaction if the works do not meet Council‘s requirements.
Council will only release the security upon being satisfied that all damage or all works, the
purpose for which the security has been held have been remedied or completed to Council‘s
satisfaction as the case may be.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 139
Council may retain a portion of the security to remedy any defects in any such public work
that arise within 6 months after the work is completed.
Upon completion of each section of road, drainage and landscape work to Council's
satisfaction, 90% of the Bond monies held by Council for these works will be released upon
application. 10% may be retained by Council for a further 6 month period and may be used by
Council to repair or rectify any defects or temporary works during the 6 month period.
Note: The Application for Refund of Security form can be downloaded from
http://www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au/pdf/Forms/Planning/RefundofSecurity.pdf Standard Condition: K15
K.12 Recycling of Demolition and Building Material
It is estimated that building waste, including disposable materials, resulting from demolition,
excavation, construction and renovation, accounts for almost 70% of landfill. Such waste is
also a problem in the generation of dust and the pollution of stormwater. Council encourages
the recycling of demolition and building materials. Standard Condition: K17
K.13 Pruning or Removing a Tree Growing on Private Property
Woollahra Municipal Council's Tree Preservation Order 2006 (TPO) may require that an
application be made to Council prior to pruning or removing any tree. The aim is to secure the
amenity of trees and preserve the existing landscape within our urban environment.
Before you prune or remove a tree, make sure you read all relevant conditions. You can
obtain a copy of the TPO from Council's website www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au or you may
contact Council on 9391-7000 for further advice. Standard Condition: K19
K.14 Dilapidation Report Condition
Please note the following in relation to the condition for a dilapidation report:
a) The dilapidation report will be made available to affected property owners on requested
and may be used by them in the event of a dispute relating to damage allegedly due to
the carrying out of the development.
b) This condition cannot prevent neighbouring buildings being damaged by the carrying
out of the development.
c) Council will not be held responsible for any damage which may be caused to adjoining
buildings as a consequence of the development being carried out.
d) Council will not become directly involved in disputes between the Developer, its
contractors and the owners of neighbouring buildings.
e) In the event that access for undertaking the dilapidation survey is denied the applicant is
to demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the Council that all reasonable steps were
taken to obtain access to the adjoining property. The dilapidation report will need to be
based on a survey of what can be observed externally. Standard Advising: K23
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 140
K.15 Roads Act Application
Works or structures over, on or under public roads or footpaths are subject to Sections 138,
139 & 218 of the Roads Act 1993 and specifically:
Construction of driveways and/or new or alterations to footpath paving
Alteration and/or extension to Council drainage infrastructure
Alteration and/or addition of retaining walls
Pumping of water to Council‘s roadway
Installation of soil/rock anchors under the roadway
An ―Application to carry out works in a Public Road‖ form must be completed and lodged,
with the Application fee, at Council‘s Customer Services counter. Detailed plans and
specifications of all works (including but not limited to structures, road works, driveway
crossings, footpaths and stormwater drainage etc) within existing roads, must be attached,
submitted to and approved by Council under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993, before the
issue of any Construction Certificate.
Detailed engineering plans and specifications of the works required by this Condition must
accompany the Application form. The plans must clearly show the following:
Engineering drawings (plan, sections and elevation views) and specifications of the
footpath, driveways, kerb & gutter, new gully pit showing clearly the connection point
of site outlet pipe(s). Note, the connection drainage lines must be as direct as possible
and generally run perpendicular to the kerb alignment.
Engineering drawings of the new drainage line to be constructed joining the new and
existing drainage pits including services.
All driveways must include a design longitudinal surface profile for the proposed driveway
for assessment. The driveway profile is to start from the road centreline and be along the
worst case edge of the proposed driveway. Gradients and transitions must be in accordance
with Clause 2.5.3, 2.6 of AS 2890.1 – 2004, Part 1 – Off-street car parking. The driveway
profile submitted to Council must be to (1:25) scale (for template checking purposes) and
contain all relevant details: reduced levels, proposed grades and distances.
The existing footpath level and grade at the street alignment of the property must be
maintained unless otherwise specified by Council. Your driveway levels are to comply with
AS2890.1 and Council‘s Standard Drawings. There may be occasions where these
requirements conflict with your development and you are required to carefully check the
driveway/garage slab and footpath levels for any variations.
Note: any adjustments required from the garage slab and the street levels are to be carried out
internally on private property
Drainage design works must comply with the Council‘s draft Development Control Plan
Stormwater Drainage Management (Draft Version 1.1, Public Exhibition Copy dated 14
December 2006), and
Temporary ground anchors may be permitted, in accordance with Council‘s “Rock Anchor
Policy”.
DA 845/2008/1 Woollahra Council Development Control Committee
751-755, 757 and 759 New South Head Road, Monday 5 March 2012
and 12 and 14 Richmond Road, Rose Bay
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\D4.doc 141
All public domain works must comply with Council‘s ―Specification for Roadworks,
Drainage and Miscellaneous Works‖ dated January 2003 unless expressly provided otherwise
by these conditions. This specification and the application form can be downloaded from
www.woollahra.nsw.gov.au .
Note: To ensure that this work is completed to Council‘s satisfaction, this consent by separate condition, may
impose one or more Infrastructure Works Bonds.
Note: When a large Roads Act is required, then four (4) weeks is to be allowed for assessment.
Note: Road has the same meaning as in the Roads Act 1993.
Note: The intent of this condition is that the design of the road, footpaths, driveway crossings and public
stormwater drainage works must be detailed and approved prior to the issue of any Construction
Certificate. Changes in levels may arise from the detailed design of buildings, road, footpath, driveway
crossing grades and stormwater. Changes required under Road Act 1993 approvals may necessitate design
and levels changes under this consent. This may in turn require the applicant to seek to amend this
consent. Standard Advising: K24
Mrs E Killey Mr N Economou
ASSESSMENT OFFICER TEAM LEADER
ANNEXURES
1. Plans and elevations
2. Development Engineer‘s referral response.
3. Landscaping Officer‘s referral response.
4. Environmental Health Officer‘s referral response.
5. Heritage Officer‘s referral response.
6. Urban Design Planner‘s referral response.
7. Fire Safety Officer‘s referral response.
8. Advertising and Signage Officer‘s referral response.
9. RTA referral response.
10. Acoustic Peer Review.
11. Traffic Peer Review.
12. Submissions matrix.
Woollahra Municipal Council
Development Control Committee 5 March 2012
H:\Development Control Committee\AGENDAS\2012\Working Agenda\mar5-12dccage.docx 3
Matter before Committee or
Council meeting
Did the applicant, owner (if not the applicant) or
someone close to the applicant make a donation in
excess of $1,000 that directly benefited your election
campaign? (Code of Conduct Cl 7.23)
Action
Declare a significant non-
pecuniary conflict of interest,
absent yourself from the meeting
and take no further part in the
debate or vote on the matter
(Code of Conduct Cl 7.17(b))
Did the applicant or someone close to the
applicant make a donation less than $1,000 that
directly benefited your election campaign?
(Code of Conduct Cl 7.23)
Do you believe the political
contribution creates a significant non-
pecuniary conflict of interest for you?
(Code of Conduct Cl 7.24)
Action
Declare a significant non-
pecuniary conflict of interest,
absent yourself from the meeting
and take no further part in the
debate or vote on the matter
(Code of Conduct Cl 7.17(b))
Action
Participate in debate and vote on
the matter
Yes
No
YesYes
No
Is the matter before the
meeting a Planning Matter?Yes
No
Staff to record decision process
(motions/amendments) and Division
of votes for the determinative
resolution or recommendation in the
meeting minutes
Staff to record decision process
(motions/amendments) and
determinative resolution or
recommendation in the meeting
minutes
Action
Consider appropriate action required.
This could include limiting involvement by:
1. participating in discussion but not in decision
making (vote),
2. participating in decision making (vote) but not in
the discussion
3. not participating in the discussion or decision
making (vote)
4. removing the source of the conflict
No
or
POLITICAL DONATIONS DECISION MAKING FLOWCHART
FOR THE INFORMATION OF COUNCILLORS