262 Bondi Rd, Bondi – Section 82A Review to delete condition relating to dormer window (DA 686/2009\2) Report dated 1 July 2010 from the Development and Building Unit. Recommendation: That the application be refused in accordance with the conditions contained in this report. Referred to DCC as the application is for Review.

Development Assessment Report Development Application No. DA 696/2009/2

Address 262 Bondi Road BONDI

Lodgement Date Strata Plan 64191

Proposal M.C. Design Architects

Zoning and relevant controls 20 March 2006

Owner

Section 82A review to delete condition 2 from development consent.

Applicant 2(c1) - Residential

Submissions None

Issues Streetscape

Recommendation Refusal

Site Map

385

1. Preamble 1.1 The Site and its Locality

The site is located on the northern corner of Bondi Road and Imperial Avenue. The site has a total site area of 472m2. Existing on the site is a four storey mixed-use building comprising four (4) terrace style dwellings and on the corner of Bondi Road a shop with a flat above. The site is not listed as an item of heritage significance, is not within a heritage conservation area and is not located within a residential character study area. The site is located to the south of a heritage-listed site. Development within the vicinity of the site comprises of mixed residential, commercial and retail character.

1.2 Background BA 526/1998 APPROVED 25 May 1999 To erect four townhouses and small shop with underground parking four 10 cars BA 74/1998 APPROVED 1 July 2002 Section 96 modification DA 74/1998/A APPROVED 23 September 2002 Change the ceiling space creating new mezzanine floor and new dormer windows unit 5 DA 858/2002 APPPROVED 16 December 2002 Change of use lemonade shop and fit out DA 558/2004 APPROVED 11 May 2005 Alterations and additions including an attic addition – this was to construct a flat above the

existing shop. DA 686/2009 APPROVED 10 February 2010 Dormer window and balcony to lot 1, dormer window to lot 5 and internal alterations. This

consent allowed for a skillion dormer to the rear and tradition dormer, as per the other dwellings in this row of buildings, to the front. These works are now built.

DA 686/2009/1 REFUSED 11 May 2010 Review of determination to delete condition 2 relating to dormer window.

Reasons for refusal

1. The proposed development does not comply with the 2(c1) zone objectives of Waverley Local Environmental Plan 1996 in that it does not maintain the improve the amenity of the locality.

2. The proposal will have a detrimental affect upon the appearance of the building, the streetscape, characteristics of the locality and its setting.

3. The provision of a skillion dormer to the front of the existing row of terraces would

break the uniform appearance of this building and is contrary to Council’s policy for dormers in Part D1 cl. 5.4.5c of Waverley Development Control Plan 2006 (Amendment No. 4).

386

4. The proposal is not considered to be in the public interest.

1.3 Proposal Description

The Section 82A Review application proposes modifications to the approved development consent to remove condition 2 from development consent relating the front dormer window on the western side of unit 5. The application is to remove the traditionally proportioned front dormer to the Imperial Avenue frontage of the site and replace it with a larger skillion style dormer.

2. Assessment The following matters are to be considered in the assessment of this development application under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

2.1 Section 79C(1)(a) Planning Instruments 2.1.1 State/Regional Environmental Planning Policies

No State Environmental Planning Policies or Regional Environmental Plans are relevant in the assessment of this application.

2.3 Waverley Local Environmental Plan 1996

LEP 1996 – Compliance Check Control

Compliance

Clause 3 – Specific Aims Yes Clause 10 – Zone Objectives No Clauses 21-26 – Environmental Considerations Yes Clause 30 – Aesthetic Appearance of Development N/A Part 4 – Heritage Provisions No

The deletion of condition 2 is not in the interest of the desired character of the built form in the locality. Objective (b) of the 2 (c1) zones is “to maintain and improve the amenity of the locality”. It is not envisaged that the dormer window proposed will maintain or improve the amenity of the locality and will in fact contribute to additional unreasonable bulk and scale to the existing building. The proposal is not a heritage item, nor is it within a heritage conservation area. The proposed dormer window will detract from the neat character of the building and will not improve the relationship of the building with the heritage item at 28 Imperial Ave. The application has been assessed having regard to the relevant provisions of the LEP and is not acceptable.

387

2.4 Development Control Plan 2 – Dwelling House Development DCP 2 - Compliance Check Control

Standard

Proposed

Compliance

5.4.5c Attic conversions

Tradition to front Skillion to rear

Skillion Skillion

No Yes

Floor Space Ratio Site - 472m2

0.9:1 Existing building approx. 1.1:1

1.1:1 No

2.5 DISCUSSION

FSR and DCP Dormer Policy The modification will result in an increase of the habitable floor space area within the attic by 7m2. This increase is modest and considered to have an urban design streetscape impact only. The DCP has controls for terrace style housing that are considered relevant to this application; the policy is quoted below.

5.4.5c Attic conversions should maintain the existing roof-form and not contribute excessively to the bulk of the building

The main roof envelope of the existing dwelling shall remain intact. Attics shall not extend past the ridge of the roof. Attics are not to incorporate balconies, however in-roof balconies facing the street may be acceptable in certain circumstances.

Front attic dormer windows must be proportioned at a ratio of 1.5:1 measured from sill to ceiling of the window frame, and be constructed of material to match the existing dwelling.

In terrace houses, attic windows may be permitted to the front of the roof of the existing buildings if the window is a traditional dormer style with a single vertically proportioned window. A rear skillion dormer may be permitted at the rear of the roof, provided the existing ridge capping is retained, the addition is set below the ridge and a side setback of minimum 600mm is maintained. In addition, the rear skillion dormer is not to extend beyond the rear gutter line.

In a simplified, sense it states a traditional ‘vertically proportioned’ dormer should be provided to the main frontage, in this case Imperial Avenue, and a larger skillion is acceptable to the rear. The dormer approved on this building currently complies with this policy and what the applicant wants is to put the approved rear dormer on the front of this building. All the other buildings in this row have traditionally proportioned front dormers and a bulky skillion dormer is considered to create a visually abrasive and clumsy form in the front façade of this building.

388

Streetscape As stated above, the front of dwellings are required under the DCP (see diagram below) to have a traditionally proportioned dormer in their front façade.

The proposed dormer window is not consistent with the existing smaller traditional dormer windows on other dwellings in this row building and does not create rhythm or increase the architectural integrity of the development. The proposed works seek to modify the design of the first floor western elevation dormer windows. The proposed skillion dormer window at the western elevation is not supported given that the dormer is utilitarian and bulky in design. More over, the dormer is inconsistent with the rhythm, design intent and consistency of the surrounding terraces that are located within a prominent location along Bondi Road. As such, the proposed dormer window at the western elevation is not supported. Western elevation (site on far right)

389

Section 79C(1)(b) - The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality. There are likely adverse impacts of the development on the natural or built environment as well as social and economic impacts predicted. The proposal is not consistent with Section 79C(1)(b) of the EP&A Act 1979. Section 79C(1)(c) - The suitability of the site for the development. The site is not considered suitable for the proposed works. Section 79C(1)(e) - The public interest. No objections to the development were received. The proposal is not considered to be in the public interest as it will result in additional bulk, inconsistency in the roof line and an unattractive and insensitive dormer addition to the building. Conclusion The application has been assessed under the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including Council’s LEP and relevant DCPs/policies and is not considered satisfactory.

3. DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING UNIT (DBU) REVIEW There are no reasonable planning grounds for this application. Council’s DCP clearly states that front dormers should be traditionally proportioned and as a compromise, to allow for improved accommodation, a skillion dormer is allowed on the rear of the dwelling. Under this consent, Council’s DBU has approved dormers on this building that comply with policy. These dormers are built, including a traditionally portioned dormer to the front of this dwelling, as are similar dormer to all the other dwellings in this row building. The applicant is seeking to take a pleasant rhythm of front dormers that comply with Council’s policy and place a bulky skillion dormer into the front façade for a minor increase in accommodation. In respect to the reasonableness of this request, it should be noted that the existing building is well above the floor space control for the site (at approximately 1.1:1) and Council’s DBU has been willing to support minor increases in floor space for compliant attic additions but not for additions that have no policy or urban design merit. This application is recommended for refusal.

390

4. Recommendation

That Development Application No. 626/2009/2 at 262 Bondi Road, Bondi for a Section 82A review application to modify development consent by means of deleting condition 2 be refused by Development Control Committee, subject to the following conditions: REASONS FOR REFUSAL

1. The proposed development does not comply with the 2(c1) zone objectives of Waverley Local Environmental Plan 1996 in that it does not maintain the improve the amenity of the locality.

2. The proposal will have a detrimental affect upon the appearance of the building, the

streetscape, characteristics of the locality and its setting.

3. The provision of a skillion dormer to the front of the existing row of terraces would break the uniform appearance of this building and is contrary to Council’s policy for dormers in Part D1 cl. 5.4.5c of Waverley Development Control Plan 2006 (Amendment No. 4).

4. The proposal is not considered to be in the public interest.

J:\HOME\PES\reports\South Team\Philip Bull\DCC2010\June\262 Bondi road.doc

391

392

393

394

395

396