REPORT ON CONSULTATION

National Capital Authority REPORT ON CONSULTATION BLOCKS 7 & 8 SECTION 6 FORREST PROPOSED MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT June 2009 Report on Consultation 1 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority Contents Part 1 Part 2 2.1 2.2 Part 3 3.1 3.2 Introduction ……………………………………………………………….......3 Public Consultation Requirements ………..……..……………………….…3 National Capital Plan Requirements …………………………………………..3 Consultation Protocol Requirements …………………………………………..3 Summary of Public Consultation …………………………………………....4 Public Consultation …………………………………………………………....4 Submissions received, Comment and Response ……………………………....5 Part 4 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………..20 Report on Consultation 2 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority PART 1 - INTRODUCTION The National Capital Authority (NCA) prepares and administers the National Capital Plan (the Plan) to ensure Canberra and the Territory are planned and developed in accordance with their national significance. The Plan sets out the broad planning framework for all of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). Detailed planning policies and guidelines are set out for areas designated as having the special characteristics of the National Capital. Under the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act 1988 any buildings or structures, demolition, landscaping or excavation works in designated areas require the approval of the NCA. The NCA’s consideration of such proposals is based on the relevant provisions of the Plan. PART 2 - PUBLIC CONSULTATION REQUIREMENTS 2.1 National Capital Plan Requirements Appendix M – Residential of the National Capital Plan states that the NCA will require for any residential development or redevelopment, other than a single dwelling house for the applicant to notify the proposal in the principal daily newspaper circulating throughout Canberra inviting comments within two weeks of that notice. The NCA will take into consideration such comments received before approving the application. The NCA will also require written assurance from the applicant that neighbours have been separately informed in writing of the proposal and have been made aware of the intention to invite comments on the proposal by way of a notice appearing in the local newspaper and by a sign describing the proposal being prominently displayed at the front of the site. When comments are received they will be used to assist the NCA delegates to determine whether or not the stated performance criteria are satisfied and to establish if the intentions of the policy applying to the site regarding residential amenity can be met. 2.2 Consultation Protocol Requirements The Consultation Protocol (July 2007) aims to formalise, clarify and provide greater guidance for the community and stakeholders in the application of consultation requirements under the Australian Capital Territory (Planning and Land Management) Act and the National Capital Plan. The protocol sets out timeframes for amendments to the National Capital Plan, what is involved in drawing up a new development control plan, or changing a development control plan and how development applications which need to be notified are assessed and approved. Report on Consultation 3 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority Additional consultation may also be undertaken by the NCA or an applicant above what is required to be undertaken in accordance with the protocol. The protocol clarifies the consultation process for development applications (excluding applications for a telecommunication facility). The protocol requires the following steps to be taken: • a notice to be published in the principal daily newspaper circulating throughout the Territory stating: - the address and block and section details (including a map); - the name of the applicant; - what is proposed; - the places, time and period the application may be inspected and where information may be obtained; - invite properly made submissions to be made to the NCA; - the period to make properly made submissions; and - where properly made submissions may be forwarded to within the consultation period specified in the notice; and For the entire consultation period notice on a sign is: • placed on all road frontages of the site; positioned so that it is clearly visible from a public place; displayed on a signpost or board. • Notice is given to the lessees of all adjoining land. PART 3 – SUMMARY OF PUBLIC CONSULTATION 3.1 • The Public Consultation Process On 16 April 2008, Cox Humphries Moss on behalf of Village Building Company sent letters to the below listed residents on adjoining properties, advising them of the proposed new multi-unit residential development. Design drawings of the proposed development were attached to the letter for information. - The consultation process included: 1/15 State Circle; 2/15 State Circle; 2 Somers Crescent; and Somers Crescent. Report on Consultation 4 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority • On 16 May 2008 the NCA sent letters formally advising eight (8) adjoining neighbours that the plans were available for viewing and comments invited to be submitted by 6 June 2008. On 17 May 2008 a public notice was placed in the Canberra Times. On 18 May two (2) public notification signs were erected in front of Blocks 7 & 8 Section 6 Forrest. A period of 15 business days (being17 May 2008 to 6 June 2008) was given to receive submissions. • • • 3.2 Submissions Received, Comments and Response The NCA received eight (8) submissions. On 12 June 2008 the NCA sent letters of acknowledgment to all of the submitters advising them that their submissions will be taken into consideration before a decision is made on the application. A summary of the main points raised in the submissions and the NCA comments are outlined below. Submission No. . 01 and 02 (combined submission made by two separate neighbours). Submitter Comments Mr Vini & Mrs Dianne Khurana and Keith Snell • The proposal fails to take into consideration the privacy and sunlight considerations of the owners of 1/15 and 2/15 State Circle. NCA Response The amended works approval report illustrates on Page 40 that planter boxes will be added to the second and third level balconies of the development on the southern elevation (which is the only elevation of the proposal that contains balconies overlooking adjoining residences). The planter boxes will minimise the impact of direct visibility to adjacent properties, protecting the privacy of them. The proposed landscape plan also illustrates that new tree plantings are proposed to be installed along the perimeter of the fencing on the north, south and west boundaries of the site. Report on Consultation 5 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority • Duration and quality of sunlight will be impacted by proposed development. Refer to (Page 51) of the revised works approval report for shadow diagram. The proposal cast a slight shadow over the adjoining property being Block 6 Section 6, Forrest at 9am on 21st June by midday on the 21st of June no shadows will cast over Block 6 Section 6, Forrest. • The forward projection of the building enables direct visibility into our lawns, patios and balconies from the adjoining windows and balconies of the proposed building. In accordance with Conditions (Part iv - Architecture) in Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the National Capital Plan (NCP) the “architectural treatment should be modulated and provided with articulation elements such as porches, balconies, bay windows and shading devices to provide visual interest to the streetscape”. It is considered by the NCA that the balconies that project forward of the building lines articulate the building to provide visual interest. In accordance with Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP it also states in part (vii-setbacks) of the Conditions that “Building articulation elements such as balconies, entries and shading devices may be permitted forward of the primary setback”. The balconies that are situated forward of the building line are consistent with the provisions of the NCP. Report on Consultation 6 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority • Previous experience with construction worker parking obstructing garbage collection services and nature strips and lawns have been ruined during construction in the past. The NCA will take these points into consideration when assessing the temporary traffic management works associated with the proposed development. A separate application will be submitted for temporary traffic management works associated with the proposed redevelopment. The proposal is compliant with the 0.8% plot ratio requirement as outlined in the NCP. 03. Dr N Keith Boardman AO • The density of the proposed units is out of character with Deakin / Forrest area. • Predominance of one bedroom single units not providing for a variety of housing types and sizes. The proposed residential development will contain a total of 42 apartments, comprising eight (8) x two (2) bedroom apartments and 34 x one (1) bedroom apartments with six (6) apartment typologies throughout the development. It should be noted that there are no provisions in the NCP stipulating how many units can be erected on this site or any land in that matter. The NCA considers that the proposed mix of units meets the objective in the NCP which is to provide for a variety of housing types and styles. • Floor area of units was only used to calculate the plot ratio of the development. A greater Report on Consultation The same formula that was used to calculate the GFA and plot ratios for the development of Capital Residences and the Senator has been applied to 7 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority floor area than simply the sum of the floor area of the units should be used in calculation of the plot ratio. this application. There is no mention in the NCP what is included or excluded in the sum of the GFA for residential buildings other than detached houses. The principle for commercial, industrial or business buildings has been applied to this application as outlined in the definition of GFA in the definitions section of Appendix H – Design and Siting Conditions of the NCP. • The proposed development shows a fourth storey falsely labeled as a mezzanine when only three storeys are permitted in the Plan. The revised working drawing set illustrates a three (3) storey development with a mezzanine level. The NCA considers that the proposal is consistent with the provisions of the NCP. It should be noted that there is no definition for a ‘mezzanine’ or ‘storey’ in the NCP. The NCA therefore utilises the definitions from the Building Code of Australia (BCA) as a guide. In accordance with the BCA a ‘mezzanine’ is defined as: “a intermediate floor within a room”. The BCA definition of a ‘storey’ means: “a space within a building which is situated between one floor level and the floor level next above, or if there is no floor above, the ceiling or roof above, but not a) a space that contains onlyi) a lift shaft, stairway or meter room; or Report on Consultation 8 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority ii) a bathroom, shower room, laundry, water closet, or any other sanitary compartment; or iii) accommodation intended for intended for not more than three (3) vehicles; or iv) a combination of the above; or b) a mezzanine”. • The building envelope shown in Amendment 39 has a building height of 12 metres above natural ground level (ngl). The roof of the proposed development is 13.2m above ngl at State Circle, but appears to meet the 12m limit if measured from the ground level at the rear boundary. The General Development Conditions in Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP state that “the building height and plot ratio, may be varied where it can be demonstrated that this would result in the excellence in the urban design outcome”. In accordance with Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP, “buildings should be generally contained within the building envelopes depicted in Figure B”. Figure B illustrates a 12m general height for building envelopes. It should be noted that the provision is ‘general’ and not mandatory and the NCA believes that the changes in the height of the roof form provide visual interest to the aesthetic of the development and roof-scape. • A 10.5m setback should be provided on Hobart Avenue. Hobart Avenue is a side boundary for the proposed development. In accordance with the Conditions of Development in Chapter 1 Figure 7 “the minimum setback of the buildings from the side boundaries for a three storey 9 Report on Consultation TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority development is 6m. For a two storey development, the minimum side boundary setback may be less than 6m provided it is generally in accordance with the building envelope in Figure B”. The amended works approval report illustrates that the setback on Hobart Avenue is generally 6m. The NCA has applied the two storey setback provision on for this elevation of the building as it steps down to a two storeys scale. • The proposed plans show a setback to Hobart Avenue of 6m but even this setback is breached at the north-east corner of the building. The blade walls up to the second storey height on Hobart Ave extend within 4m of the boundary. In accordance with Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP it states in part (vii-setbacks) of the Conditions that “Building articulation elements such as balconies, entries and shading devices may be permitted forward of the primary setback”. The blade walls are considered to be articulation elements and therefore are consistent with the provisions of the NCP. In accordance with point (vii) of the Conditions of Chapter 1 (Figure 7) of the NCP, the minimum side setback from side boundaries is 6 metres. For two storey development the minimum side boundary setback may be less than 6m provided it is generally in accordance with the building envelopes depicted within. The building steps down to two storey development on the side boundary, therefore the setback may be less than 6m. 10 TRIM Ref: 52602 • The side boundary envelope is illustrated at 3m when it should be 4.5m . Report on Consultation National Capital Authority • The siting of the visitor parking is in the landscape zone and does not comply with Amendment 39. The visitor parking located within the landscape zone is necessary and forms part of the necessary vehicle driveway for the site. • Planter boxes have not been added for this development (like Becton development) and the walls of the rear balconies should be increased in height to reduce overlooking into neighbours. 04. Grahame and Caroline Rumble • Overall height of the building is well above recommended 12m. The applicant has agreed to construct planter boxes on the second and third levels of the development on the southern elevation. Refer to Page 40 of the amended works approval report. The General Development Conditions in Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP state that “the building height and plot ratio, may be varied where it can be demonstrated that this would result in the excellence in the urban design outcome”. In accordance with Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP, “buildings should be generally contained within the building envelopes depicted in Figure B”. Figure B illustrates a 12m general height for building envelopes. It should be noted that the provision is ‘general’ and not mandatory and the NCA believes that the changes in the height of the roof form provide visual interest to the aesthetic of the development and roof-scape. • The number of storeys should be kept to three (3) Report on Consultation The proposed development is three (3) storeys in height and 11 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority and not four levels which are shown as the mezzanine. complies with the provisions of the NCP. A ‘mezzanine’ is not a storey, it is a “a intermediate floor within a room”. • Little effort has been made to protect the privacy of rear neighbours. Planter boxes will be installed to all balconies located on the second and third floors of the southern elevation. Refer to Page 40 of the Revised Works Approval Report. • Not enough space for car parking. The proposed parking arrangements are inadequate: tandem car parking is unacceptable. Adequate car parking has been provided for the development. The proposal meets the requirements of the 2008 Territory Plan Parking and Vehicular Access General Code. The applicant amended the basement car parking layout to only provide tandem car parks for the two bedroom units. The tandem parks will not have a combined use as resident and visitor parking. • Setbacks from Hobart Avenue and rear boundary breach the guidelines. Hobart Avenue is a side boundary for the proposed development. In accordance with the Conditions of Development in Chapter 1 Figure 7 “the minimum setback of the buildings from the side boundaries for a three storey development is 6m. For a two storey development, the minimum side boundary setback may be less than 6m provided it is generally in accordance with the building envelope in Figure B”. 12 Report on Consultation TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority The amended works approval report illustrates that the setback on Hobart Avenue is generally 6m. The NCA has applied the two storey setback provision on for this elevation of the building as it steps down to a two storeys scale. The rear setback is generally 18m, the NCP permits building articulation elements to extend forward of the primary setback. • The development is larger than it should be with a “creative” calculation of the 0.8 plot ratio that does not include hallways, lifts and stairwells. In Appendix A of the NCP there is no definition for Gross Floor Area (GFA). The same formula that was used to calculate the GFA and plot ratios for the development of Capital Residences and The Senator has been applied to this application. There is no mention in the NCP what is included or excluded in the sum of the GFA for residential buildings other than detached houses. The principle for commercial, industrial or business buildings has been applied to this application as outlined in the definition of GFA in the definitions section of Appendix H – Design and Siting Conditions of the NCP. • A single in/out driveway onto Hobart Avenue will result in greatly increased traffic flow along Hobart Report on Consultation A traffic report was prepared by Brown Consulting (ACT) Pty Ltd on behalf of The Village Building Company for the proposed works. The traffic 13 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority Avenue and Somers Crescent. report outlined that the additional generated traffic volume plus the existing traffic volumes on the adjacent streets to the development site are still within the capacity of the road network. Therefore, the existing street will accommodate the additional generated traffic volume. The proposal meets the 0.8% plot ratio requirements as outlined in the NCP. 05. Graham and Karen Anderson • Proposed density is too high. • Proposal is in-consistent with the character of the precinct. The NCA considers the proposal to be a high quality residential development of a scale and character appropriate to the setting of Parliament House and the Main Avenue role of State Circle. The proposal is fitting with existing development on State Circle. • 0.8% plot ratio has been applied to exclude corridors, lifts and stair wells and other common areas. In Appendix A of the NCP there is no definition for Gross Floor Area (GFA). The same formula that was used to calculate the GFA and plot ratios for the development of Capital Residences and The Senator has been applied to this application. There is no mention in the NCP what is included or excluded in the sum of the GFA for residential buildings other than detached houses. The principle for commercial, industrial or business buildings has been applied to this application as outlined in the definition of GFA in the 14 Report on Consultation TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority definitions section of Appendix H – Design and Siting Conditions of the NCP. • Hobart Avenue setback is less than 6m when it should be 10.5m as a main avenue. Hobart Avenue is a side boundary for the proposed development. In accordance with the Conditions of Development in Chapter 1 Figure 7 “the minimum setback of the buildings from the side boundaries for a three storey development is 6m. For a two storey development, the minimum side boundary setback may be less than 6m provided it is generally in accordance with the building envelope in Figure B”. The amended works approval report illustrates that the setback on Hobart Avenue is generally 6m. The NCA has applied the two storey setback provision on for this elevation of the building as it steps down to a two storeys scale. • Balconies infringe on 10m and 18m setbacks on north and south boundaries. The front and rear setback are compliant, the NCP permits building articulation elements to extend forward of the primary setback. • No planter boxes have been incorporated on southern balconies. Planter boxes will be installed to all balconies located on the second and third floors of the southern elevation. Refer to Page 40 of the Revised Works Approval Report. Report on Consultation 15 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority • Four storey development The proposed development is three (3) storeys in height and breaches Amendment 39’s complies with the provisions three storey limit. of the NCP. A ‘mezzanine’ is not a storey, it is a “a intermediate floor within a room”. • Proposed basement car parking spears almost unworkable. • Tandem car parks will be a recipe for clogging up streets. Adequate car parking has been provided for the development. The proposal meets the requirements of the 2008 Territory Plan Parking and Vehicular Access General Code. The applicant amended the basement car parking layout to only provide tandem carparks for the two bedroom units. The tandem parks will not have a combined use as resident and visitor parking. Therefore the streets will not be clogged. On street parking will also be provided for on State Circle. • Adequacy of services (water, sewerage, gas and electricity). Has this been checked? 06. W.H. Hickson • The proposal is far too big for the site, almost certainly in breach of relevant regulations regarding setbacks. • Out of proportion with the population density of the district. Relevant ACT Government agencies have been consulted regarding the proposed works and they have been supported ‘principle’. The proposal meets the 0.8% plot ratio requirements as outlined in the NCP. The setbacks are compliant with the provisions of the NCP. The NCA considers the proposal to be a high quality residential development of a scale and character appropriate to the setting of Parliament 16 Report on Consultation TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority • Its barrack block appearance is quite our of keeping with adjacent properties. • Increase in traffic density on Hobart Avenue adding to the risk of accidents involving young children not well trained in road safety. House and the Main Avenue role of State Circle. A traffic report was prepared by Brown Consulting (ACT) Pty Ltd on behalf of The Village Building Company for the proposed works. The traffic report outlined that: the additional generated traffic volume plus the existing traffic volumes on the adjacent streets to the development site are still within the capacity of the road network. Therefore, the existing street will accommodate the additional generated traffic volume; and The pedestrian volume generated by the proposed development is 84 trips per day. The existing footpath on the verges of State Circle and Hobart Avenue will accommodate the additional pedestrian trips. 07. Prof. Peter Treacy and Dr Barbara Treacy • Concur with Graham and Karen Anderson’s submission (No. 5) • Number of units should be more like 19 not 42. Refer Response in Submission No. 04. The NCP does not stipulate how many units may be erected, however the proposal is consistent with the 0.8% plot ratio requirement. • Traffic congestion will increase Report on Consultation A traffic report was prepared by Brown Consulting (ACT) Pty Ltd on behalf of The 17 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority 08. Malcolm Grey and Marilyn Jessop • Building height and number of stories do not comply. Village Building Company for the proposed works. The traffic report outlined that: the additional generated traffic volume plus the existing traffic volumes on the adjacent streets to the development site are still within the capacity of the road network. Therefore, the existing street will accommodate the additional generated traffic volume. The General Development Conditions in Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP state that “the building height and plot ratio, may be varied where it can be demonstrated that this would result in the excellence in the urban design outcome”. In accordance with Chapter 1 Figure 7 of the NCP, “buildings should be generally contained within the building envelopes depicted in Figure B”. Figure B illustrates a 12m general height for building envelopes. It should be noted that the provision is ‘general’ and not mandatory and the NCA believes that the changes in the height of the roof form provide visual interest to the aesthetic of the development and roof-scape. The proposed development is three (3) storeys in height and complies with the provisions of the NCP. A ‘mezzanine’ is not a storey, it is a “a intermediate floor within a room”. Report on Consultation 18 TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority • No detail on plans regarding proposed metal cladding. The applicant provided a materials and finishes sample board. The proposed metal panel will be Scyon Matrix Panel (8mm thick) by James Hardie (Dulux – Mallard Grey in colour). The tree assessment outlines that tree rated ‘M’ are desirable to be retained however may be considered for removal if all other design options are exhausted. The trees are located within the driveway no other design option available – therefore the NCA supports their removal. Adequate car parking has been provided for the development. The proposal meets the requirements of the 2008 Territory Plan Parking and Vehicular Access General Code. The applicant amended the basement car parking layout to only provide tandem carparks for the two bedroom units. The tandem parks will not have a combined use as resident and visitor parking. • Trees on western boundary are rated ‘M’ and should be retained. • Tandem car parking not supported. • Bulk and scale of proposal is discordant with Forrest Area. The NCA considers the proposal to be a high quality residential development of a scale and character appropriate to the setting of Parliament House and the Main Avenue role of State Circle. The development is also consistent with the bulk and scale of the existing developments on State Circle being the Senator and 19 Report on Consultation TRIM Ref: 52602 National Capital Authority Capital Residences. 4 • • • • • CONCLUSION On 13 June 2008 a copy of all submissions received from the National Capital Authority (NCA) was forwarded to the applicant. 26 June 2009 to 6 August 2008 the applicant prepared a response to the public submissions. 6 August 2008 the applicant prepared and submitted a Consultation Report to the NCA. On 11 August 2008, the applicant submitter revised plans responding to the key issues raised by all of the submitters. On 16 October 2008 a final round of consultation was undertaken with the submitters. Key issues raised during consultation included: lease consolidation, moral rights, definition of “mezzanine”, confirmation of building height levels, basement car parking, confirmation of setback angle on building envelope, substation to be included on services plan, review extent, type and height of blade walls on Hobart Avenue, explore alternative external cladding, review external colour scheme, prepare longitudinal section through driveway and ramp and planter boxes to be included on balconies overlooking neighbours on rear elevation. On 20 October 2008 the NCA met with the applicant and requested them to address all of the issues raised by the submitters in the final round of consultation. On 22 October 2008the applicant submitted a revised works approval report and drawings addressing the issues raised by submitters. On 24 October 2008 the NCA advised the applicant that the information submitted on 22 October 2008 was consistent with the National Capital Plan. • • • Following review of the submissions and all common material, the application was approved. Report on Consultation 20 TRIM Ref: 52602