Double Bay Residents’ Association Inc
P.O. Box 1684, Double Bay NSW 1360
Tel: 0413 888 685 Email: email@example.com
The General Manager,
Woollahra Municipal Council,
PO Box 61,
Double Bay NSW 1360
30 September 2017
DA 133/2017 – 8, Wiston Gardens, Double Bay
The Association has inspected the drawings, Statement of Environmental Effects and Geological Report filed by the Applicant in support of the above DA. Although this Association rarely involves itself with applications to erect dwelling houses, there is one aspect of this application to which adjoining owners have drawn our attention which concerns us greatly, namely the massive breach of the Excavation controls in the Woollahra DCP 2015 (see clause 3.4).
The maximum permissible volume of excavation under the DCP is 170m3. This proposal involves 1337m3 of excavation according to the table at p17 of the Statement of Environmental Effects, although at p24 of the same document the volume of excavation is stated to be 1258m3. This apparent contradiction is unexplained which is unsatisfactory in itself. It could possibly be explained by the difference between the in situ volume and the volume as loose spoil that has to be taken away but that is conjecture.
What is clear is that at something like 7-8 times the DCP maximum and with a depth of 8 metres below ground surface this volume of excavation is utterly unacceptable and contrary to the objectives of the control (cl 3.4):
- To minimize cut and fill
- To minimize excessive excavation
- To minimize noise, vibration, dust and other amenity impacts to adjoining and adjacent properties.
In connection with the last of those objectives we note that the Douglas Partners geotechnical report concedes at p4 that vibration from the rock ripping equipment or rock hammers that will have to be used may cause possible damage to adjacent structures. No Council could properly approve such a massive breach of its controls against such a warning.
We note that a substantial part of the excavated space is to be used for storage. There is no reason why any requirement for storage could not be satisfied without placing it 8 metres below natural ground, and indeed the same applies to the car parking.
The application in its present form should be rejected on that ground.
Malcolm Young, Vice President.