SDA International Pty Limited v Pittwater Council
[2001] NSWLEC 198
•08/24/2001
Land and Environment Court
of New South Wales
CITATION: SDA International Pty Limited v Pittwater Council [2001] NSWLEC 198 PARTIES: APPLICANT
RESPONDENT
SDA International Pty Limited
Pittwater CouncilFILE NUMBER(S): 10092 of 2001 CORAM: McEwen AJ KEY ISSUES: Development Application :- SEPP 5 LEGISLATION CITED: Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, s 95 CASES CITED: DATES OF HEARING: 10/08/2001, 13/08/2001 DATE OF JUDGMENT:
08/24/2001LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:
APPLICANT
Mr P Clay (Barrister)SOLICITORS
McKees Legal SolutionsRESPONDENT
SOLICITORS
Mr D Parry (Barrister)
Mallesons Stephen Jaques
JUDGMENT:
IN THE LAND AND 10092 of 2001
ENVIRONMENT COURT McEwen AJ
OF NEW SOUTH WALES 24 August 2001
- Applicant
- Respondent
Introduction
1. This appeal relates to a development application under State Environmental Planning Policy No 5 (“SEPP 5”) Housing for Older People or People with a Disability for a development containing 16 dwellings at 63-65 Central Road, Avalon (“the site”). The new building is to comprise two residential levels above a basement car park.
2. The essentially rectangular site has a frontage of 40.8 m to Central Road a depth of 58.6 m and an area of 2364 m2. It has a fall of some 4 m to the rear. It adjoins Toongarie Reserve at the rear which provides pedestrian access way to the Avalon town centre. The reserve and the access way are subject to flooding (1:100 yrs).
3. This application is preceded by two very similar SEPP 5 applications that were refused by the Council and the subject of unsuccessful appeals to the Court. (Tavenite Pty Limited v Pittwater Council, matter Nos 10879 of 1999 and 10452 of 2000). The most recent of these cases was unsuccessful mainly because it would appear as a “substantial medium density development” and was “not conveniently located for pedestrians” in relation to the services available in Avalon.
4. The locality is generally developed with one and two storey detached dwelling houses. There is a large multi unit retirement village on the opposite side of the access way and two three storey residential flat buildings immediately to the east of the site.
5. The site is located in the 2(a) Residential A zone under Pittwater Local Environmental Plan 1993 (“the LEP”) and in that zone residential flat buildings are prohibited. The proposal is however, permitted with consent pursuant to clauses 10 and 11 of SEPP 5.
6. The application was advertised and 36 objections were received. Expressed concerns included:
(i) Excessive height, bulk and scale;
(ii) Flood prone nature of the site and the adjoining access way;
(iii) Unsatisfactory access to shops and community facilities;
(iv) Traffic and parking impacts;
(v) Adverse impacts on flora and fauna.
7. Notwithstanding the 15 issues identified in the statement of issues the case was fought in relation to two principal issues:
1. Whether the application should be refused because the proposal does not have satisfactory pedestrian access to a nearby bus stop which provides access to facilities and support services in Avalon.
2. Whether the application should be refused because the proposed building would:
(i) have an unsatisfactory relationship in terms of its height and bulk in relation to adjoining development; and
(ii) not have an appropriate residential character in the area generally.
8. Other less significant issues were:
1. Whether the access/egress driveway is too steep and is thus unsafe; 2. Whether the landscaped area adjoining the access way is unsatisfactory because it is subject to flooding; 3. Whether all of the units would have satisfactory solar access.
9. On behalf of the respondent Council expert evidence was provided by:
· Mr S. Czeref – Town Planner
· Mr T. Beardsmore – Architect
· Mr N. Lawson – Civil Engineer
10. Resident objector evidence (in addition to the letters of objection which were tendered) was given by: -
· Ms V. Long
· Mr D. Wilkins
11. On behalf of the applicant expert evidence was given by: -
· Miss D. Laidlaw - Town Planner
· Mr P. Twinney - Traffic and Transport consultant
· Mr R. Sawyer – NSW Ageing and Disability Department Accredited Access Advisor
Access to Facilities and Services
Clause 12 of SEPP 5 deals with the matter of access to facilities and services and provides:
Matters for consideration
12. (1) Location, facilities and support services
The consent authority must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this Part unless the consent authority is satisfied, by written evidence, that residents of the proposed development will have access that complies with subclause (2) to:
(a) shops, banks and other retail and commercial services that residents may reasonably require; and
(c) the practice of a general medical practitioner.(b) community services and recreation facilities; and
(2) Access with this subclause if:
(b) there is a transport service available to the residents who will occupy the proposed development:(a) the facilities and services referred to in subclause (1) are located at a distance of not more than 400 metres from the site of the proposed development; or
(i) that is located at a distance of not more than 400 metres from the site of the proposed development; and
(iii) that is available both to and from the proposed development during daylight hours at least once per day from Monday to Friday (both days inclusive).(ii) that will take those residents to a place that is located of not more than 400 metres from the relevant facilities or services; and
12. It is acknowledged that all of the services and facilities referred to in cl 12 of SEPP 5 can be found in the Avalon business centre which is about one kilometre from the subject site. Hence cl 12(2)(a) is not met. However, there is a bus stop providing a regular bus service, located about 220 m walking distance from the site and which meets the requirements of cl 12(2)(b), that being an alternative to meeting the requirements of cl 12(2)(a). Thus the access requirements of cl 12 of SEPP 5 are met.
13. Also relevant to the matter of access to facilities and services is cl 25(f) of SEPP 5 which provides:
…Design of residential development
25. Consent must not be granted for development which this Part applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development demonstrates that adequate regard has been given to the following principles:
- (f) Accessibility: The proposed development should, where appropriate:
(i) have convenient, obvious and safe pedestrian and bicycle links from the site that provide access to public transport services and local facilities; and
(iii) where feasible, involve site layout and design that enables people with a disability to access, on one continuous accessible path of travel, the street frontage, car parking, and all buildings, facilities and open spaces within the site.(ii) provide attractive, yet safe, environments for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists with convenient access and parking for residents and visitors; and
14. In this regard Mr Beardsmore was of the opinion that this aspect was unsatisfactory for a number of reasons. It does not meet the criteria in the SEPP 5 Guide and cl 25(f) of SEPP 5 in relation to safe access. This is because Central Road is narrow, carries an average of one vehicle every 33.5 seconds between 8am and 8pm and is potentially dangerous. This road needs to be crossed twice to get to the bus stop if the available paved foot path on the north side is to be utilized.
15. The north side footpath in its present condition is unacceptable as it has steep cross-falls and there are no kerb crossings. There is no pavement at the corner of Central Road and Nandina Terace. The south side has no pavement and has steep declines with numerous trees. At present, neither side can be safely or conveniently utilized by a frail aged person or a person in a wheel chair.
16. Mr Beardsmore also noted that the alternate route to the Avalon business centre via the Toongarie Reserve was not suitable for frail or wheelchair bound people for reasons involving excess distance, flooding, unmade surfaces and road crossings.
17. Miss Laidlaw argued that because the bus stop is much less distant than the 400 m referred to in cl 12 of SEPP 5, the requirement in SEPP 5 of “reasonable access” is met as it is available and convenient. The buses run at a frequency that exceeds the cl 12 requirement.
18. As to convenience, she explained that the walk to the bus stop was along a gently graded footpath although she recognised that works are required to rectify a number of driveways which cross the footpath at excessive grades. These will, as agreed by the applicant, be reconstructed to provide appropriate grades. She also recognised that Central Road needs to be crossed twice and Nandina Terrace crossed once for each trip to and from the bus stop. New kerb crossings are also to be provided by the applicant. Pavement is to be provided at the corner of Central Road and Nandina Terrace. Miss Laidlaw agreed with Mr Twinney that the chosen locations for the crossings will allow both roads to be crossed safely given traffic volumes and sight distances.
19. Mr Twinney provided details of a formula which grounded his opinion that the carriageway width of 6 m meant that sight distances would be satisfactory. He explained that a pedestrian walking at a conservative 1 m per second would be able to cross Central Road without causing a vehicle travelling at the 85 percentile speed of 54.5 km/hr to slow down. (The speed limit here is 50 km/hr). He also noted that the more than 90 m sight distance available is twice the stopping sight distance of the vehicle on approach.
20. He accepted however that the road width he utilized in the calculation was 6 m, not the actual kerb to kerb width of 7.6 m. If the greater width is used then the required sight distance would not be achieved. He nevertheless believed that the sight distance would be satisfactory because pedestrians would normally check again for on coming cars when they leave the footpath. Moreover, the safe stopping distances available are such that should a pedestrian misjudge the situation then an oncoming car will be easily able to slow down or stop to avoid a collision.
21. Mr Twinney did not accept that the number of vehicles which use Central Road was a matter of concern. The average figure of one vehicle per 33.5 seconds is not something which would in reality be apparent with vehicles in busier times more likely to travel in “platoons” with significant time gaps between. This will always facilitate sufficient opportunities for pedestrians to cross the road safely.
22. Subject to the footpath on the north side being completed, gradients rectified and kerb crossings provided to an appropriate standard, I am satisfied that a convenient and obvious link from the site to the bus stop will be provided. As to the matter of safe use of the footpath, once the footpath works etc are complete it should be safe to use. As to the safety of road crossings the evidence of Mr Twinney is to be preferred due to his particular traffic expertise and evidence that the crossing of Central Road even by frail, elderly or wheelchair bound persons will be able to be effected safely. My assessment of site distances on the Court’s view of the road and the crossing points accords with this conclusion.
23. The proposal thus meets the requirements of cl 12 and cl 25(f) of SEPP 5 in terms of access to public transport services and local facilities and should not be rejected on this basis.
Impact on adjoining development
24. Clause 13 of SEPP 5 deals with building height and street frontage and provides that:
Development standards – building height and street frontage
13. (1) General
A consent authority must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this Part unless it complies with the standards specified in this clause.(2) Height in zones where residential flat buildings are not permitted
If the development is proposed in a residential zone where residential flat buildings are not permitted:(3) Site frontage(a) the height of all buildings in the proposed development must be 8 metres or less; and
(b) a building that is adjacent to a boundary of the site (being the site, not only of that particular development but also of any other associated development to which this Policy applies) must be not more than 2 storeys in height.
The site frontage must be at least 15 metres wide.
25. There was no dispute that the site meets the cl 13(3) site frontage requirements and that the proposed building meets the maximum 8 m height requirement in cl 13(2)(a). However, parts of the proposed building do not meet the maximum two storey height limit in cl 13(2)(b). Parts of the building are clearly three storeys but the extent to which the building is three storeys is not entirely clear. However the building’s northern elevation to Central Road is two storeys. Clause 13(2)(b) is a development standard and because of the non-compliance an objection under SEPP No 1 Development Standard has been provided.
26. In relation to impacts on adjoining development cl 25 of SEPP 5 relevantly provides:
(a) Neighbourhood amenity and street scape: The proposed development should:Design of residential development
25. Consent must not be granted for development which this Part applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development demonstrates that adequate regard has been given to the following principles:
…(iii) where possible, maintain reasonable neighbour amenity and appropriate residential character by providing building setbacks that progressively increase as wall heights increase to reduce bulk and overshadowing; and
…
(iv) where possible, maintain reasonable neighbour amenity and appropriate residential character by using building form and siting that relates to the site’s land form; and
(v) where possible, maintain reasonable neighbour amenity and appropriate residential character by adopting building heights at the street frontage that are compatible in scale with adjacent development; and
27. In the explanatory notes accompanying SEPP 5 the objectives of the development standard are:
· to control the visual impact of bulk and massing of development, and related impacts, at its interface with adjoining sites;
· to prevent significant change in the character of areas that do not permit residential flats.
28. The former of these objectives is relevant in dealing with the question of impacts on adjoining development and seems to have a closer relationship to the storeys control which directs itself to buildings which are “adjacent to a boundary of the site”.
29. The SEPP 1 objection assessed the extent of the non-compliance with the storeys control by applying the interpretation in cl 6A of SEPP 5 that only includes basement car parks as a storey where they project more then one metre above ground level. Also, under crofts as are proposed here along the southern part of the building are excluded.
30. On the worst case assumption that the structural floor/ceiling elements between the car park and the dwellings above are included in the one metre above ground level the SEPP 1 objection concluded that the non-compliance was:
· An 8 m length in the middle of the west elevation and about 12 m setback from the site boundary;
· A 21 m length in the middle of the east elevation and between 6 m and 13 m setback from the site boundary.
31. There is no non-compliance in relation to the southern elevation as this involves a two storey building above an open under croft. In essence the SEPP 1 objection justifies the non-compliance as follows:
To the extent that the standard is concerned with reducing the impact of bulk and massing at the site boundaries, that objective is met in an alternative manner by the proposal, through use of generous setbacks varying from, at a minimum (and worst case scenario) 6.5 metre, up to 13 metres. The proposal therefore reduces the bulk and massing impact on the neighbouring property by setting the building further away from the boundary. A great bulk and massing impact could ensure if the building had been reduced to two storeys, but closer to the boundary. Accordingly the strict application of the standard would, under the circumstances, be unnecessary and unreasonable.
It also notes that the setback areas generally allow for extensive landscaping to provide an appropriate setting and screening of the proposed building.
32. Mr Czeref was concerned with the non-compliance with the two storey control, particularly because the building would appear as being mostly three storeys when viewed from the west, south and east. This is not the kind of presentation to the site boundaries that the control anticipates. He was mainly concerned that the proposed building would present an excessive bulk and scale to its neighbours especially the Pittwater Palms development and the detached dwelling to the west at No 67. One of the owners of this house gave evidence and expressed similar concerns. Mr Czeref also believed that the building could have been stepped down the site in accordance with cl 25(a)(iv) of SEPP 5. He was also concerned that the building did not have setbacks that progressively increase as wall heights increase. He acknowledged however that in the south-western corner of the building these requirements had been met.
33. Miss Laidlaw continued to support the SEPP 1 objection which she prepared and which also contains the substance of her arguments that the proposal does not, in terms of its height and bulk adversely affect its neighbours. She emphasised the setbacks (6.5 m, 9 m and 11 m for the so called three storey components of the building) which are considerably greater than the BCA requirements for a building of this kind. These setbacks allow for the provision of a substantial landscaped setting. Miss Laidlaw also pointed out the fact that the building is to be lower than the residential flat building to the east (No 61) and those parts of the building nearest the south boundary are about the same height as the Pittwater Palms development.
34. I accept that some parts of the rear half of the proposed building when viewed from adjoining properties will read as being three storeys but this does not make it unacceptable. There were no sustainable concerns expressed in relation to overshadowing or loss of privacy but whilst one can understand the concerns about the bulk and scale of the building these are not such as to warrant refusal. I have reached this conclusion, preferring the evidence of Miss Laidlaw to that of Mr Czeref. Given the general height and scale of the residential flat building and Pittwater Palms it is difficult to conclude that the height and bulk of this proposal is excessive.
35. Mr Wilkins’ (No 67) concerns were mainly in relation to the outlook towards a large building from his backyard. This is the corner where the proposal steps down one storey. Given the setbacks and landscaping proposed, this cannot be sufficient a reason to refuse the application.
36. In relation to the SEPP 1 objection insofar as it relates to this aspect of the matter I am satisfied that it is well founded. I uphold it because I have been persuaded by its terms and the evidence provided by Miss Laidlaw that the proposal generally meets the relevant aims and objectives, and strict compliance with the development standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of this case.
37. As for cl 25(a)(iii) of SEPP 5 which seeks a progressively increasing setback as building height increases I am satisfied, given the significant setbacks provided, that this aspect is not so infringed as to warrant refusal.
38. As for cl 25(a)(iv) of SEPP 5 the fact that the building does not step down the site is not determinative. The rear part of the site is flood prone and habitable floors need to be kept above this. Further there is a clear benefit, given the nature of this kind of housing, to have each floor on the same level to provide access to the lift.
Impacts on the Character of the Area
39. In relation to impacts of the proposal on the character of the area it is important to note that the proposal complies with the height limit of 8 m as contained in cl 13(2)(a). It does not however comply (in part) with cl 13(2)(b) although given the reference in this subclause to buildings adjacent to boundaries of the site one could be excused for interpreting this as not being concerned with the character of the area, but rather the relationship to neighbours. Despite this it is appropriate to proceed on the basis that it is relevant, given the second of the two objectives referred to in the explanatory notes to SEPP 5 which seeks to avoid significant changes to the character of areas such as this where residential flats are not permitted.
40. The SEPP 1 objection recognises this objective and again refers to matters of setbacks and landscaping. More particularly in relation to the character of the area it refers to the surrounding medium density developments and how the proposal will achieve a transition between these and the lower scale development further to the west. The SEPP 1 objection concludes in this regard that in the circumstances of the site the proposal supports the objective of the standard. Again, compliance with the standard would be unreasonable and unnecessary.
41. Mr Czeref was of the opinion that the storeys standard was a means of controlling building bulk. By not complying with this standard the proposal would significantly expand on the intrusive nature of the nearby residential flat buildings and this would be detrimental to the character of the area. This is of concern given the predominance of one and two storey dwellings in the area. He agreed that if the building were to step down the site as envisaged by Development Control Plan No LP7 – Central Avalon Locality Plan (“DCP LP7”) this would reduce its overall height scale and visual bulk at the rear and would conform with cl 25(a)(iv).
42. Mr Czeref also expressed concern that the floor space ratio exceeded 0.75:1 suggesting that the exceedence of 0.5:1 floor space ratio in cl 14 of SEPP 5 signals a need for careful assessment. The actual floor space ratio is one further indication of inappropriate scale and appearance in terms of character of the area. Floor space ratio is not by itself an indicator of excessive bulk and scale. Instead the building needs to be considered in its appropriate context. There is no upper limit to floor space ratio in SEPP 5 but FSR remains an aid when considering and evaluating density. Indeed if this were a hostel or residential care facility with a floor space ratio of 0.75:1 it could not be refused.
43. Miss Laidlaw noted that DCP LP7 would not apply in the circumstances but is nevertheless of some assistance. It recognises that two storey buildings can be acceptable by making reference to the residential flats in Central Avenue which present as two storeys to the street even though they are actually four storeys. The proposal does not infringe this and in her opinion is consistent with cl 25(a)(i) of SEPP 5 which seeks an “attractive residential environment with clear character and identity”. It fits within the range of building heights which are already part of the character of this side of Central Road. The general street setback is maintained and landscaping will supplement existing canopy trees.
44. As for the presentation of the building to the park and walk way at the rear Miss Laidlaw believed this to be satisfactory even though it would present as being three storeys. This is acceptable as its immediate context includes the residential flat buildings and the Pittwater Palms, and the proposal will have substantial landscaped setbacks. The step down in the south western corner is also of benefit.
45. Insofar as the SEPP 1 objection deals with the matters of bulk and scale and the character of the area I am satisfied that it is well founded. I have been persuaded by it and the evidence given by Miss Laidlaw that it should be upheld. I am satisfied that the proposal meets the aims of the development standard in that whilst the proposal will affect the character of the immediate area it will not result in such a significant change which would need to be avoided. I agree that strict compliance with the development standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of this case.
46. In relation to cl 25(a)(iii) I accept Miss Laidlaw’s evidence that the significant setbacks are such as to effectively meet the requirement of increasing setbacks as wall heights increase in the context of maintaining residential character. I have dealt with cl 25(a)(iv) in the context of impacts on adjoining properties and accept that this is again met for the same reasons. Clause 25(a)(iv) which deals with building heights at the street frontage is clearly met by the two storey presentation of this proposal to the street.
47. In terms of merit generally in relation to the impacts on the character of the area I have been persuaded that even though this is a large building it will not be inappropriate on this site and in the context of the surrounding development within which it is located. Given the setbacks and the landscaped setting in the context of the residential flat buildings and Pittwater Palms the building will fit comfortably in the locality when viewed from Central Road and from the park.
The Driveway
48. It was submitted that the driveway, where it emerges from the site and crosses the footway onto the carriageway of Central Road, has an unsatisfactory gradient (according to Mr Czeref) of 1:9 or 11.5 per cent. Mr Twinney referred to cl 11.3 of Development Control Plan No E3 – Driveways and Internal Roadways (“DCP E3”) which indicates that such non-domestic driveways (more than 3 dwellings) should have a maximum gradient of 1:20 or 5 per cent. He referred to the provision relating to domestic driveways which states:
However if this cannot be achieved, the grades must comply with Council’s standard driveway profiles detailed in this Development Control Plan.
In this context he explained that the proposed driveway lies between the “extra low” and the “maximum low” standard profiles. He also said that it reflects the existing ground levels along the frontage and is much the same as other driveways on this side of Central Road.
49. Importantly he explained that the proposed driveway would accommodate reasonable visibility and ensure safety of pedestrians in the area. In principle it meets the objectives of DCP E3.
50. Despite the fact that the proposal may not strictly meet the requirements of DCP E3, I accept Mr Twinney’s evidence given his particular expertise in this area, that it meets the intent of the DCP.
- Landscaped Area
51. The landscaped area at the southern end of the site is flood prone but not in a floodway. Mr Czeref was concerned that if residents were denied access to this area because it is flood prone (1 in 5 yrs: 300 mm and 1 in 100yrs 700 mm) they would find this “frustrating and intolerable”. I do not accept this as being a sufficient reason to refuse the application, nor to restrict access to this rear area. Should this area flood to a depth of 300 mm (1 in 5 yrs) as it is not in a floodway there was no basis to suggest that residents’ lives would be at risk. The greater depth of 700 mm (1 in 100 yrs) is of increased concern but given the infrequency this is also not critical.
Solar Access to Dwellings
52. Mr Czeref was concerned about solar access at the winter solstice into units 3, 5, 8, 11, 13 and 16. He was especially concerned that unit 5 will receive no solar access at all.
53. Miss Laidlaw accepted that unit 5 was unsatisfactory and recommended that this unit be deleted and its floor space reallocated to adjoining units. On this basis I accept the evidence of Miss Laidlaw that in terms of solar access generally the development is acceptable. It will certainly meet the requirement of cl 25(c) of SEPP 5 in that all units will receive adequate daylight.
Conclusion
54. The various issues raised by the Council and the objectors have in my view been demonstrated no to be such as to warrant refusal of the application.
55. At the hearing I had the benefit of sitting with Commissioner Bly. His evaluation of the matters raised in this appeal was of considerable advantage in reaching a conclusion. I publish this judgment with his concurrence.
Conditions
56. The applicant offered four new conditions in exhibit 5 which were not opposed by the respondent and they are incorporated into Council’s without prejudice conditions.
57. Three of Council’s conditions were opposed. Condition B 52 which requires a bond or bank guarantee in relation to the protection of significant trees was opposed because the amounts were excessive ($2,000 for each tree). No evidence was provided to show that these values are excessive and this condition is retained.
58. Condition B19 is deleted as there was no evidence provided to support the provisions of detention for stormwater. In this regard I accept the principle that such facilities are not normally required where development occurs in such close proximity to the receiving waters (ie the ocean).
59. Condition F26 which limits the consent to two years is deleted because there was no evidence to persuade me that the normal five year period as contained in s 95 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act should not apply.
Orders
60. The orders of the Court are:
1. The appeal be upheld.
2. Development consent is granted for a State Environmental Planning Policy No 5 - Housing for Older People or People with a Disability development at 63-65 Central Road Avalon subject to the conditions in Annexure A hereto.
3. Exhibits K and O be retained.
Conditions of development consent
No 63-65 Central Road, Avalon
DA No 1247/00
A. PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS
A1. The proposed works are to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Clauses 78 A-I of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Amendment) Regulation, 1998.
A2. Compliance with the Building Code of Australia
2. 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, there is to be such a contract in force.1. All works are to be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.
A3. Excavations and backfilling
2. All excavations associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be property guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.1. All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely and in accordance with appropriate professional standards.
A4. Retaining walls and drainage
If the soil conditions require it:
2. adequate provision must be made for drainage.1. retaining walls associated with the erection or demolition of a building or other approved methods of preventing movement of the soil must be provided, and
A5. Support for neighbouring buildings
Where excavations extend below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must preserve and protect the building from damage and, if necessary, underpin and support the adjoining building in an approved manner. The person causing the excavation must give the owner of the adjoining property at least seven (7) days written notice of its intention to excavate below the level of the base of the footing. The person must also furnish the adjoining property owner with particulars of the proposed work.
A6. Protection of public places
1. If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building:
a. is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconveniently, or
b. building involves the enclosure of a public place,
a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.
2. If necessary, an awning or other structure is to be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the public place.
3. The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place.
NOTE: Hoardings and temporary awnings erected on or over public places are required to be subject to a separate approval from Council.4. Any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed when the work has been completed.
A7. Signs to be erected on building and demolition sites
1. stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited, and
A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is to be carried out other than when work is carried out inside an existing building or where the premises is to be continuously occupied (both during and outside working hours):
2. showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number at which that person may be contacted outside working hours.
A8. Toilet facilities
Toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site in accordance with section 78I of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Amendment) Regulation 1998.
- NOTE: All outstanding matters referred to in this section are to be submitted together. Incomplete Construction Certificate applications/details will not be accepted.
B10. Three sets of detailed working drawings that comply in all respects with the Building Code of Australia and the conditions of the Development Consent are to be submitted prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.
B16. Provide a map detailing areas where replacement and supplementary planting will take place. The south-western side of the property adjacent to Toongarie Reserve should be planted with local native species consistent with Toongarie Reserve. A range of trees, shrubs and ground covers should be selected. This will act as buffer and create a wildlife corridor assisting the movement of local fauna.
B17. Provide a tree survey detailing all native canopy species within 5 metres of the proposed development. This will assist in adequately protecting all remnant species.
B19. Deleted
B25. A Certificate is to be submitted by a qualified Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or who is eligible to become a Corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field, Architect or Surveyor confirming to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the proposed means of access to and within the site complies with the requirements of Council's policy DCP No. E3 "Driveways and Internal Roadways" and AS 2890.1 - 1993: Parking Facilities - Off-street Car Parking.
NOTE: Prior to the submission of the Construction Certificate, a crossing application with appropriate fees is to be made to Council for the levels required for the construction of the concrete footpath and gutter crossing. The levels provided by Council are to be incorporated into the design of the internal driveway.
B29. An Erosion and Sediment Management Plan is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises shall be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices such as catch drains, diversion drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, sedimentation basins. Such plan is to be a accompanied by a certification from an appropriately qualified person, that the plans/ details have been designed in accordance with the requirements of the N.S.W. Department of Land and Water Conservation's "Urban Erosion and Sediment Control" manual.
B37. A schedule of essential fire safety measures required to be installed within and/or in association with the building including the minimum standard for performance of each measure is to be submitted prior to release of the Construction Certificate. The schedule is to include a signed statement from an Accredited Certifier/Fire Engineer confirming that all essential fire safety measures as required by the Building Code of Australia have been listed so as to ensure the safety of persons in the building in the event of an outbreak of fire.
B45. Three sets of detailed landscape working drawings, which comply in all respects with the conditions of development consent, are to be submitted prior to release of the Construction Certificate. Each plan/sheet is to be certified by a qualified landscape architect, landscape designer/environmental designer or horticulturist, confirming that the plans/details provide for the works to be carried out in accordance with Development Control Plan No 23 – Landscape and Vegetation Management.
B45a. In particular, the landscape working drawing is to provide full details of the following:
1. the usage of the dominant tree species growing in the area or locally indigenous species.
2. all existing trees and vegetation to be retained, removed and proposed, including canopy spread, trunk location and condition;
3. a plant schedule including stratum, species/common names, species' numbers, pot size and staking details;
4. a schedule of materials (including such elements as turfing, edging, walling, paving and fencing);
5. the proposed finished treatment of garden areas, including soil depth and mulching details;
6. the location of underground/overhead services;
7. details of irrigation and any on-slab planting;
10. at least two (2) canopy trees within the front yard and one (1) canopy tree in the rear yard of the residential allotment, which at maturity achieve a canopy height greater than 8.5 metres, to visually reduce the height, bulk and scale of dwelling.
11. understorey planting of species growing in the area or locally indigenous species, which, after three years will in conjunction with the canopy planting screen 50% of the built form, when viewed the street.
B46. The landscape working drawing is to incorporate a landscape maintenance strategy for the owner/occupier to administer over a 2 year, establishment period. This strategy is to address maintenance issues such as irrigation, soil testing, weeding, plant staking, fertilising, pest and disease control, replanting, remedial pruning and the like.
Further, provision is to be made for the landscape designer to visit the site on a 3 monthly basis from the date of issue of the Occupation Certificate
A copy of this report is to be forwarded to Council or the accredited certifier. Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the letter of confirmation is to be forwarded by the certifier to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.After the inspection, the landscape designer is to issue a report to the owner/occupier certifying that all plant material is healthy and performing to expectation.
B49. As the works involve landscaping over a reinstated concrete slab, or include planter box planting, details of proposed watering systems, subsoil drainage and the waterproofing membrane are to be included in the landscape working drawing.
B51. During site excavation, topsoil which is to be used in later landscape works is to be stockpiled on site and stabilised during construction works. Stockpiles are to be stored outside of hazard areas and not located within the dripline of existing trees which are to be retained. Erosion controls are to be maintained around the stockpile, with full details being provided in the soil erosion and drainage management strategy to be submitted with the Construction Certificate details.
B52. In order to ensure retention of significant trees, a bond or bank guarantee of $2000 for each tree shown to be retained in landscape concept plan 1/1 revision E drawn by SDA International and dated 22 December 2000 is to be lodged with Council or the accredited certifier prior to release of the Construction Certificate. The bond or guarantee will be released not less than 12 months and no later than 2 years from the date of issue of the Occupation Certificate. The request for release of the bond is to be accompanied by a report prepared by a practising qualified arborist certifying that the tree is in a safe and healthy condition.
Where significant trees die or are damaged, the bond or guarantee is to be used to rehabilitate/regenerate the tree or replace damaged or dead trees, in accordance with the recommendations of a practising qualified Arborist.
A copy of the Arborist's report is to be forwarded to Council or the accredited certifier. Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the letter of confirmation is to be forwarded by the certifier to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
B60. Three sets of Structural Engineering details relating to the slabs, footings, retaining walls, structural framing are to be submitted prior to release of the Construction Certificate. Each plan/sheet is to be signed by a qualified practising Structural Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or is eligible to become a corporate member and has appropriate experience and competence in the related field.
B60a. The structural details relating to the slabs, footings, retaining walls, structural framing are to be endorsed by a qualified practising Geotechnical Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or is eligible to become a corporate member and has appropriate experience and competence in the related field.
B61. A Schedule of Works prepared by a qualified practicing Structural Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or is eligible to become a corporate member and has appropriate experience and competence in the related field is to be submitted in respect of the following items:
1. The details and location of all intercept drains, provided uphill of the excavation, to control runoff through the cut area.
2. The proposed method of disposal of collected surface waters is to be clearly detailed;
3. Procedures for excavation and retention of cuts, to ensure the site stability is maintained during earthworks.
B66. The applicant is to consult with Sydney Water to establish whether there are any Section 73 Compliance Certificate requirements for this proposal, under the provisions of the Sydney Water Act, 1994. A copy of any Notice of Requirements letter which may be issued by Sydney Water, is to be forwarded to Council or the Accredited Certifier, prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.
NOTE: It is an offence to commence works prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.
C6. A certificate prepared by an appropriate qualified person is to be submitted for the following building components, certifying to the satisfaction of Council or the Accredited Certifier that the nominated works have been carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, relevant Australian Standards and any conditions of Development Consent. Works are not to progress past this point until Council or the Accredited Certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied (see copy of form attached).
Where this confirmation of compliance is issued by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the letter is to be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
C6a. Building setout BS-1
C6b. Erosion Controls ER-1
C6c. Protection fencing (landscaping) PF-1
C10. So as to achieve safe and proper means of disposal of asbestos materials from buildings, only depots and contractors authorised by the Waste Services Authority are to be utilised. Approval must be obtained from the Service before disposal of any asbestos materials.
C14. Prior to commencement of work, the applicant is to supply Council/Accredited Certifier and relevant adjoining property owners with a dilapidation report relating to the buildings at 61 and 67 Central Road.
C18. Prior to commencement of site works, the project manager is to submit evidence of a preorder for the supply of the plant material shown on the approved landscape working drawing , to Council or the accredited certifier.
Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the preorder is to be forwarded by the certifier to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
C19. Prior to commencement of site works, a qualified arborist, horticulturist or landscape architect is to certify that protective fencing consisting of chain wire mesh fencing, a minimum 1.5 metres high with steel pipe support posts has been provided, a minimum distance of 1 metre outside of the dripline of those trees or landscaped areas shown on the approved landscape working drawing. No further site works are to take place until this certification has been obtained and a copy forwarded to the accredited certifier or Council (see copy of form TP-1 attached).
Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the certification is to be forwarded by the certifier to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
Further, the project manager is to erect signs advising all contractors and visitors to the site that no works or storage are to take place within the dripline of existing trees.
D. CONDITIONS TO MINIMISE THE IMPACT OF THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NATURAL AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT
D4. Car parking spaces shall have clear minimum dimensions of 3.2m x 6m. The two parking spaces nominated as being provided for the two adaptable units shall have clear minimum dimensions of 3.8m x 6m. The whole of the basement carpark is to have a minimum ceiling height of 2.5m.
D11. Any proposed demolition works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of AS2601-1991 "The Demolition of Structures".
Amongst others, precautions to be taken shall include compliance with the requirements of the WorkCover Authority of New South Wales, including but not limited to:
1. Protection of site workers and the general public.
2. Erection of hoardings where appropriate.
3. Asbestos handling and disposal where applicable.
4. Any disused service connections shall be capped off.
Council is to be given 48 hours written notice of the destination/s of any excavation or demolition material. The disposal of refuse is to be to an approved waste disposal depot.
D12. In order to ensure safe handling of asbestos materials, the re-use or sale of asbestos building materials is prohibited.
D16. Water conservation devices with an AAA rating must be installed, including tap flow regulators, shower head roses and dual flush toilets. All new hot water systems are to have a minimum rating of 3.5 stars.
D20. Temporary sedimentation and erosion controls are to be constructed prior to commencement of any work to eliminate the discharge of sediment from the site
D21. Sedimentation and erosion controls are to be effectively maintained at all times during the course of construction and shall not be removed until the site has been stabilised or landscaped to the Principal Certifying Authority's satisfaction.
D22. An all weather accessway at the front of the property consisting of 50-75mm aggregate or similar material at a minimum thickness of 200mm and 15 metres long laid over geotechnical fabric is to be constructed prior to commencement of works.
D23. Adequate measures shall be undertaken to remove clay from vehicles leaving the site so as to maintain public roads in a clean condition.
D29. The fill material imported to the site is to consist of clean fill material only, that is, non-contaminated excavated material and soil, rock or similar material. Putrescible and non-putrescible solid waste (including demolition material) is not permitted.
D32. No fill is to be introduced within the drip line of canopy trees on the site.
D41. Materials and colour schemes are to be in accordance with the samples submitted to Council with the application. No white or light coloured roofs are permitted.
D60. The footpath and adjacent roadway is to be kept free of obstruction by building materials and/or plant. All concrete trucks, pumps and associated plant are to be kept wholly within the site. No concrete or slurry is to be discharged into the street or the street drainage system.
D70. All Residential (containing three (3) or more units), Commercial and Industrial garbage enclosures/stores shall be constructed and fitted out in accordance with the following:
- 1. A separate room or an appropriately constructed area outside the building is to be provided for the storage of garbage and recyclables.
2. The area used for the storage and washing down of garbage receptacles shall be constructed of solid material (brick, concrete, concrete blocks, structural fibrous cement or other similar homogeneous material) so as to prevent the formation of cavities which become possible harbourages for insects and vermin. Framing in timber is not permitted.
3. The walls of the enclosure shall be cement rendered and steel trowelled to a smooth, even surface.
4. The floor shall be of impervious material coved at the intersection with the walls, graded and drained to an approved floor waste within the room/enclosure.
5. Stormwaters shall not enter the floor of the garbage enclosure such that the sewer system may be contaminated by rainwaters.
6. The garbage enclosure shall be made vermin proof.
7. Garbage rooms shall be vented to the external air by natural or artificial means. The installation and operation of the mechanical ventilation system shall comply with AS 1668, Parts 1 & 2.
8. Hot and cold water hose cocks shall be located within a garbage enclosure or in close proximity to Council's satisfaction.
9. Racks shall be provided for storage and drainage where domestic type garbage bins are used. The racks may be fixed or freestanding, with the lowest shelf 300mm above floor level. Racks shall be constructed of galvanised piping, "T" iron, angle iron or solid flat steel or other approved material and preferably designed to be demountable for ease of cleaning.
D71. In residential developments containing three (3) or more units garbage and recycling facilities shall be provided in accordance with "Pittwater Council's Revised Waste Service Information Sheet". The current residential waste/recycling service allows for a once a week collection based on the following volumes per individual household.
- 1. Garbage 80 litres per unit,
2. Paper 50 litres per unit, and
3. Recycling (glass etc) 50 litres per unit.
D72. The garbage enclosure is required to be roofed. Roofwaters shall be directed to the approved stormwater disposal system.
D76. A stamped copy of the approved plans is to be kept on the site at all times, during construction.
D81. The installation of in-sink food waste disposal units is prohibited due to the increased loading placed on the Warriewood Sewage Treatment Plant particularly during wet weather.
D89. The hours of construction are restricted to between the hours of 7.00am and 5.00pm Monday – Friday and 7.00am to 1.00pm on Saturdays. No works are to be carried out on Sundays or Public Holidays. Internal building work may be carried out at any time outside these hours, subject to noise emissions from the building or works not being audible at any adjoining boundary.
D105. The landscaping is to be maintained for the life of the development.
D106. No storage of building materials or building waste, excavated fill or topsoil storage is to occur within the dripline of trees shown on the approved landscape working drawing(s) as being retained or within protective fenced areas.
Drainage is to be arranged such that fill, building materials or contaminants are not washed into protective fenced areas.
Further, the project manager is to erect signs advising all contractors and visitors to the site that no works or storage are to take place within the dripline of existing trees.
D108. In accordance with Pittwater Council's Tree Preservation and Management Order, all existing trees as indicated on Plan No DA02, Revision B dated 20/7/01 as shown to be retained shall be retained except where Council's prior written consent has been obtained, or where after approval of the relevant Construction Certificate Application/s, trees stand within the envelope of approved buildings or within the alignment of approved permanent paved vehicular access roads and parking areas.
D195. Tree guards are to be provided around all trees as indicated on Plan No DA02, Revision B dated 20/7/01 other than where Council's prior written consent has been obtained, or where after approval of the relevant Construction Certificate Application/s, trees stand within the envelope of approved buildings or within the alignment of approved permanent paved vehicular access roads and parking areas. The tree guards are to be installed prior to the commencement of any work on the site. Any works, including utility installations (eg water, sewer, telephone, drainage), are not to be undertaken within 4 metres of the trunk of any such trees. The tree guards shall be a minimum 1200mm high at least four (4) metres from the base of the nominated tree/s and constructed from timber posts and rails or posts and suitable plywood panels.
D198. The developer or contractor will take all measures to prevent damage to trees and root systems during site works and construction activities including provision of water, sewerage and stormwater drainage services. In particular, works, erection of structures, excavation or changes to soil levels within 5 metres of the trunks of trees to be retained are not permitted unless part of the development as approved, and the storage of spoil, building materials, soils or the driving or parking of any vehicle or machinery within 5 metres of the trunk of a tree to be retained, is not permitted.
Failure to comply with the requirements of the Pittwater Council Tree Preservation and Management Order may result in a penalty up to a maximum of $20,000.00 .
NOTE: Trees that are part of an Endangered Ecological Community or are habitat for threatened species and endangered populations must comply with the requirements of the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995. Failure to do so may result in a penalty up to a maximum of $250,000.00 and jail sentences.
D199. All works within 5 metres of the existing trees to be retained including pruning, demolition, excavation, civil works, fencing and the like must be carried out by hand under the supervision of an experienced and qualified Arborist. Should roots larger than 50mm be encountered all excavation works are to cease immediately and a qualified Arborist is to advise on the impacts of the roots removal on the tree's survival and report to Council's Landscape Architect.
If tree roots are present a pier and beam method of footing construction is to be adopted so as to bridge/span any identified lateral roots.
D200. When working within the drip line of the trees, hand digging is to occur in sensitive areas. Liaison on a daily basis is to be maintained during the excavation works between the Builder and Arborist. No filling or compaction shall occur over tree roots within the area defined by the outer drip line of the crown. Root protection/ compaction mitigation in the form of planks or metal decking supported clear of the ground fixed to scaffolding is to be installed as required.
D201. Advise contractors and visitors to the site of the purpose for the tree/native vegetation/habitat protection/exclusion fencing installed in accordance with this consent by the placement of a suitable warning sign.
D203. Construction access to the property is to be via the approved driveway entrance only.
D212. Access to the property through the adjoining Park/Reserve is prohibited without prior permission of Council and compliance with any relevant conditions.
D213. Permanent or protective fences, a minimum of 1.2m high, shall be constructed along boundaries that are common with adjacent reserve prior to major site works or building works commencing.
D214. The applicant is to ensure that no spoil or fill encroaches upon the adjacent reserve.
D215. That pursuant to section 88E of the conveyancing Act, the use of the land for anything other than housing for older residents &/or residents with disabilities be prohibited.
D216. Kerb ramps to be constructed outside the site that align directly across the road on both sides to reach the pathway on the northern side of the road, then crossing Nandina Terrace , avoiding the storm water drain, and then crossing to the southern side of the road adjacent to the bus stop.
D217. A level landing to be constructed at the bus stop with rest seating and shelter. Circulation space must be sufficient to accommodate a wheelchair user.
D218. All ramps and landings must include tactile ground surface indicators to assist people with a vision impairment and comply with the relevant parts of AS 1428.
D219. Listening system required in the common room where public announcements are made.
D220. Documentation by an accredited access adviser at construction certificate stage that full compliance with the development standards set out in clause 13 of Sepp No 5 (amendment 1) has been met.
NOTE: It is an offence to occupy a building prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.
E1. A restriction on use of the land is to be created on the title of any new lots, the terms of which burden the said lots, benefit Council and restrict the occupancy of the lot to persons defined in State Environment Planning Policy No.5 as "older people" or "people with a disability". All matters relating to this restriction on use of the land are to be finalised prior to release of the Occupation Certificate.
E10. A certificate prepared by an appropriate qualified person is to be submitted for the following building components, certifying to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the nominated works have been carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, relevant Australian Standards and any conditions of Development Consent. Works are not to progress past this point until Council or the Accredited Certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied (see copy of form attached).
Where this confirmation of compliance is issued by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the letter is to be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
E10a. Pest control PST-1
E10b. Geotechnical requirements GO-1
E10c. Ground floor levels FL-1
E10d. Footings/slabs/piers/retaining walls FN-1
E10e. Bearers and joists and subfloor ventilation BJ-1
E10f. Wall, roof frames and window location FM-1
E10g. Wet areas WA-1
E10h. Masonry construction, accessories and weatherproofing MC-1
E10i. Subsequent floor levels FL-2
E10j. Stair construction ST-1
E10k. Balustrading adequacy BA-1
E10m. Artificial lighting and mechanical ventilation LV-1
E10n. Roof cladding RC-1
E10o. Roof ridge levels RL-1
E10p. Smoke alarms SA-1
E10r. Onsite stormwater detention OSD-1
E10s. Driveway construction DW-1
E10t. Excavation and/or filling EX-1
E10w. Landscaping LS-1
E10x. Mechanical ventilation (Noise levels) MVN-1
E11b. Bushland management strategy BM-1
E11c. Native vegetation planting NV-1
E11d. Arborist AR-1
E12b. BCA certification BCA-1
E12c. Structural certification SC-1
E12d. Disabled facilities (Public Buildings/SEPP5) DF-1
E16. On completion of the erection of the building, the Owner of the building shall submit to Council or the accredited certifier a Fire Safety Certificate with respect to each essential fire safety measure installed in association with the building – as listed on the Fire Safety Schedule. Such certificate must be received by Council or the accredited certifier prior to occupation of the building.
Copies of the Fire Safety Certificate(s) must also be forwarded by the Owner to the Commissioner of the NSW Fire Brigades, and copies displayed in a prominent location specified in the schedule, within the building.
E36. Screen planting is to be provided which, after three years will in conjunction with the canopy planting screen 50% of the built form, when viewed the street. Species selection is to incorporate the dominant species growing in the area or locally indigenous species. Full details in this regard are to be submitted with the Construction Certificate.
E38. Screen planting having a maturity height of between 2 and 8 metres, is to be provided to reduce the bulk and scale of the building when viewed from the reserve and public footway at the rear of the site. Species selection is to incorporate the dominant tree species growing in the area or locally indigenous species.
E40. A certificate is to be submitted by a qualified practising landscape architect, landscape/environmental designer or horticulturist, certifying that the proposed automatic watering system and/or subsoil drainage and any associated waterproofing membrane have been installed in accordance with the details shown on the approved landscape working drawing and/or the manufacturer's specification. Works are not to progress past this point until Council or the accredited certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied (see copy of form attached).
Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the certification to be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
E41. A landscape practical completion report is to be prepared by the consultant landscape architect/designer and submitted to Council or the accredited certifier within 7 working days of the date of practical completion of all landscape works. This report is to certify that all landscape works have been completed in accordance with the landscape working drawing. A copy of this report is to accompany the request for issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the report is to be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
E42. Prior to issue of the Certificate of Occupation, the applicant is to submit evidence of an agreement for the maintenance of all site landscaping by a qualified horticulturist, landscape contractor or landscape architect, for a period of 2 years, from the date of issue of the Certificate of Occupation.
E43. At the completion of the landscape maintenance period, the consultant landscape architect/designer is to submit a final report to Council or the accredited certifier within 7 working days, certifying that all plant material has been successfully established and that all of the outstanding maintenance works or defects have been rectified prior to preparation of the report.
Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the report is to be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.
E51. Street numbers are to be affixed to the building prior to occupation.
E52. All external face brick walls are to be properly cleaned down following completion of the wall and prior to occupation.
E53. The redundant driveway is to be reinstated with kerb, footpath and suitably landscaped.
E54. New electrical connections are to be carried out using underground cabling.
E70. A copy of the Section 73 Compliance Certificate issued under the provisions of the Sydney Water Act, 1994, is to be forwarded to Council or the accredited certifier, prior to release of the Occupation Certificate.
E86. The building is not to be occupied or used until an Occupation Certificate has been issued, confirming that the project complies with the relevant standards and the conditions of development consent. The request for an Occupation Certificate is to be accompanied by a copy of all of the Compliance Certificates required by the conditions of development consent (see copy of form attached).
F. MATTERS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO ISSUE OF SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE
F18. A Certificate is to be submitted by a qualified practicing Civil Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or who is eligible to become a Corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field confirming to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the on site stormwater detention has been constructed in accordance with the plans nominated on the Development Consent and relevant conditions of Development Consent. The Subdivision Certificate will not be released until this certification has been submitted and Council or the accredited certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied (see copy of form OSD-1 attached).
F19. A Certificate is to be submitted by a qualified Engineer practicing Civil Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or who is eligible to become a Corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field confirming to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the driveway has been constructed in accordance with the approved plans and /or Council's DCP-E3and/or AS 2890.1-1993 and relevant conditions of Development Consent. The Subdivision Certificate will not be released until this certification has been submitted and Council or the accredited certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied (see copy of form DW-1 attached).
F20. A copy of the Section 73 Compliance Certificate issued under the provisions of the Sydney Water Act, 1994, is to be forwarded to Council or the accredited certifier, prior to release of the Subdivision Certificate.
F21. The applicant is to lodge an application for a Subdivision Certificate with Council or an accredited certifier. The Subdivision Certificate is to be obtained prior to lodgement of the plans with the Land Titles Office.
F26. Deleted
G. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS
G1. The applicant shall repair or construct the footpath (including any driveway crossings) along the northern side of Central Road from the crossing opposite the subject site to the crossing opposite the bus stop to the east of the site so that the footpath:
a. is not less than 1 metre wide at any point;
b. has a cross fall of no greater than 1:40.
G2. The applicant shall construct points of crossing Central Avenue in accordance with the plans which are exhibits P and Q.
G3. The applicant shall construct access to and a platform with seat at the bus stop generally in accordance with exhibit Q.
G4. The plans shall be amended in accordance with exhibit O so as to:
a. delete unit 5;
b. reverse the living area and bedroom for units 8 and 16;
c. provide toilet facilities adjacent to the common room.
0
0
1