52 brougham place pty ltd 020/a080/15 - dac.sa.gov.au€¦ · description of levels ground floor...

Development Assessment Commission

11 February 2016

1

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

52 Brougham Place Pty Ltd 020/A080/15 Mixed use development comprising four towers accommodating serviced apartments,

retirement living units, retail and restaurant; works (including partial demolition)

affecting State and Local Heritage places.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AGENDA REPORT

ATTACHMENTS

1: APPLICATION & PLANS

a. Application Form, CTs & Planning Report – Phillip Brunning & Associates

b. Plans – Pruszinski Architects

c. Architect’s Statement – Pruszinski Architects

d. Heritage Significance & Conservation Report – Ron Danvers Cultural

Landscapes

e. Heritage Impact Report - Ron Danvers Cultural Landscapes

f. Acoustic Report – Resonate Acoustics

g. Traffic Impact Assessment – GTA Consultants

h. ESD Statement – Lucid Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd

i. Building Services Statement – Lucid Consulting Australia

j. Waste Management Statement – Pruszinski Architects

k. Landscape & Public Realm Concept Design – Oxigen

l. Pedestrian Wind Environment Statement - Windtech

m. Apartment Data Analysis – Pruszinski Architects

n. Apartment Storage Analysis - Pruszinski Architects

o. Structural Condition – Wallbridge & Gilbert Consulting Engineers

p. Preliminary Site Investigation – LBW Environmental Projects

2: AGENCY COMMENTS – Government Architect

3: REPRESENTATIONS

4: RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS


11 February 2016

2

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

OVERVIEW

Application No 020/A080/15

Unique ID/KNET ID 2015/17541/01 (Unique Id: 10200514)

Applicant 52 Brougham Place Pty Ltd

Proposal The demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a

mixed use development comprising the following:

(a) Three towers for retirement living with a ground level

cafe and wellness centre

(b) A tower for serviced apartments with ground level

retail, cafe and restaurant land uses

(c) Basement carparking and site works

(d) Works affecting State and Local heritage places

including partial demolition

Subject Land 49 Brougham Place North Adelaide

52-56 Brougham Place North Adelaide

57-60 Brougham Place North Adelaide

12-20 O’Connell Street North Adelaide

95-101 Ward Street North Adelaide

Zone/Policy Area Main Street (O’Connell) Zone in the Adelaide (City)

Development Plan consolidated 24 September 2015

Relevant Authority Development Assessment Commission

Lodgement Date 3 November 2015

Council Adelaide City Council

Development Plan Adelaide (City) Development Plan consolidated 24 September

2015

Type of Development Merit

Public Notification Category 2

Representations 9 representations and 2 wish to be heard

Statutory Referral

Agencies

Government Architect

State Heritage Unit

Report Author Concetta Parisi

Senior Planning Officer

RECOMMENDATION Development Plan Consent subject to conditions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The applicant is seeking to construct a mixed use development comprising four towers

which will accommodate serviced apartments and retirement living units. The highest

tower will measure some 16 storeys (53.7 metres) with the lowest tower measuring

some 9 storeys (29 metres).

The subject land is located within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone, and bordered by

O’Connell Street, Ward Street and Brougham Place, a significant gateway site to the city.

The site currently accommodates a number of residential and commercial uses. A State

Heritage place and a Local Heritage place are also situated within the site. The subject

land is subject to the catalyst site provisions given its size (in excess of 1500 square

metres).

The proposal will involve the partial demolition of State Heritage fabric as well as a fence

which is Local Heritage listed. However, the proposed development will result in the

reuse of the listed buildings as a dwelling and office (respectively).


11 February 2016

3

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The proposal involves some departures from policy regarding apartment amenity but

generally satisfies policy regarding technical matters like vehicle access, waste

management, wind conditions, crime prevention and energy efficiency.

On balance, the proposal is considered to sufficiently satisfy the intent of the zone for a

more intense form of development and activation along O’Connell Street. It is

recommended that the proposal be granted Development Plan Consent.

ASSESSMENT REPORT

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 Strategic Context

In March 2012, the Minister for Planning rezoned land along O’Connell Street to increase

building heights and provide additional development opportunities that would help

enliven this main street precinct. As part of this initiative, catalyst site policies were

introduced that provide for a more performance based planning approach and place a

stronger emphasis on the overall planning and design merit of an individual proposal. In

particular, the policies place an emphasis on design quality, interface relationships and

remove prescriptive requirements around height and setbacks.

1.2 Pre-Lodgement Process

The project team participated in the pre lodgement service concluding with a total of 5

pre lodgement panel meetings and 5 Design Review Panel sessions.

As a result of the service, a significant number of amendments were made to respond to

the issues raised by agencies. Namely:

significant variations to the massing and scale of buildings

improved height transition to the adjacent Historic (Conservation) Zone

improved design response to the State and Local heritage places

evolution of amendments to the expression of each tower

design refinement of the communal and public spaces

design of the commercial tenancy frontages to complement the fine grain of

built form along O’Connell Street.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

Application details are contained in the ATTACHMENTS.

The applicant is seeking consent for a development involving the demolition of existing

buildings and the construction of a mixed use development comprising the following:

(a) three towers for retirement living with a ground level cafe and wellness centre

(b) a tower for serviced apartments with ground level retail, cafe and restaurant land

uses

(c) basement carparking and site works

(d) works affecting State and Local Heritage places including partial demolition.

The retirement village will be subject to a license granted under the South Australian

Retirement Villages Act 1987.


11 February 2016

4

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The applicant is also seeking to develop the proposal in stages over a period of 9 years

beyond the operative approval date; namely:

Stage 1 3 years

Stage 2A and 2B 3 years

Stage 3 3 years

A summary of the proposal is as follows:

Tower 1: Retirement Living and Stables Conversion (Stage 1)

Land Use

Description

Retirement Living (34 units) together with a reception lobby for

both visitors and residents (2-3 bedrooms)

Partial demolition of the State Heritage Place for use as a

dwelling and licensed cafe

Building Height 11 storeys (38 metres)

Description of levels Ground Floor Level 1: Entry Lobby

Levels 2-9: Retirement Living Units

Level 10: Club Lounge and private dining area with associated

facilities for use by residents and guests

State Heritage Place (former Stables): converted and extended

for a licensed cafe; existing dwelling to be partially demolished

and extended and renovated to a dwelling

Side Boundary

Setback

4 metres

Tower 2: Retirement Living and Wellness Centre (Stage 2A)

Land Use

Description

Retirement Living (24 units) (2 bedrooms)

Wellness Centre

Building Height 9 storeys (29 metres)

Description of levels Ground Floor Level 1: Wellness Centre, comprising gymnasium,

consulting, indoor swimming pool and a specialist centre with

entrance from Ward Street but also via the complex

Tower 3: Retirement Living and Common Facilities for residents (Stage 2B)

Land Use

Description

Retirement Living (36 units) and common facilities for residents

Building Height 16 storeys (53.7 metres)

Description of levels Ground Floor Level 1: Porte Cochere leading to a Lobby

Entrance, reception and common facilities

Levels 2-15: retirement living units

Tower 4: Serviced Apartments, cafe and retail outlets

Land Use

Description

Serviced Apartments (120 apartments) with ground floor lobby,

retail and restaurant/cafe land uses

Renovations to the existing Local Heritage Place for continued

use as an office and consulting rooms as well as modifications

to the local heritage listed fence

Building Height 12 storeys (41.20 metres)

Description of levels Ground Level 1: restaurants, cafes and shops in addition to the

reception lobby for the serviced apartments

Levels 2-11: Serviced Apartments

Resident and visitor access to the retirement living complex will be from Brougham Place

along a landscaped walkway initially, until such time as Stage 2A and 2B are completed.


11 February 2016

5

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The primary access will then be via Brougham Place and into the tower constructed in

Stage 2B.

Vehicle access to the basement carpark will be via Ward Street. A total of 218 vehicle

parks are proposed, including 8 disabled spaces and 18 Gopher Parks.

A total of 69 bicycle parking spaces are provided for the entire complex. The total

capacity for bike spaces is 168 if storage cages are factored in.

The proposal also includes a communal open space area for residents, incorporating a

number of linkages to each of the various tower elements in the proposed development.

A shared and public space is provided parallel with the serviced apartment development;

this space provides vehicle access as well as a pedestrian and cyclist link. Speed will be

limited to walking space along this linkage as it is predominantly a space for

walking/cycling. Another shared space for outdoor dining is provided adjacent the

‘stables’ for both occupants of the development and the general public.

3. SITE AND LOCALITY

3.1 Site Description

The site consistent of 7 allotments, described as follows:

Street Suburb Hundred Title Reference

49 Brougham Place North

Adelaide

Yatala V5444 F250

52-56 Brougham Place North

Adelaide

Yatala V5093 F268

57-60 Brougham Place North

Adelaide

Yatala V6153 F93

12-20 O’Connell Street North

Adelaide

Yatala V6153 F94

95-101 Ward Street North

Adelaide

Yatala V5444 F304

V5444 F305

V5444 F306

The subject site is bound by Ward Street to the north, O’Connell Street to the west and

Brougham Place North Adelaide to the south.

The subject site measures some 5,400 square metres.

The site currently contains commercial and residential buildings; of particular note is the

existing 9 storey residential apartment complex constructed during the 1970s. In

addition, the site contains both a State Heritage place and a Local Heritage place.

More specifically:

State Heritage Place, 49 Brougham Place North Adelaide

Single Storey Dwelling (Brougham House) and former stables


11 February 2016

6

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Local Heritage Place, 58 Brougham Place North Adelaide

Two Storey Dwelling and masonry wall to Brougham Place and O’Connell

Street

The subject site is generally flat with a fall across the site towards the east by

approximately 1 metre. The site contains a number of trees/shrubs.

3.2 Locality

The locality is characterised by the following:

North: Ward Street predominantly comprising of small shops and dwellings of low scale

South: Brougham Place and Adelaide Parklands

West: Multi storey mixed use development comprising shops on the ground floor facing

O’Connell Street and residential apartments above

East: Lincoln College Institution

Figure 1 – Location Map

4. COUNCIL COMMENTS

4.1 Adelaide City Council

While no statutory referral to Adelaide City Council is required, advice was sought

from Council’s Administration regarding technical matters. The following comments

were provided with respect to the proposal:

Council administration is generally supportive of the waste collection process and

the Transport Impact Statement (subject to certain matters being addressed

which will be discussed in detail later in the report)


11 February 2016

7

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The building canopies proposed over Council land are supported and meet

Council’s Encroachment Policy

Retention of the Local Heritage Place and front fence is supported as this retains

the heritage value of the Local Heritage Place and reinforces the ‘dress circle of

grand dwellings’ on Palmer Place and Brougham Place

Demolition of the remnant stone wall and cresting of the Local Heritage Place is

not supported noting that the intent is to open views in this location. This wall is

part of the heritage listing for this site and should be retained. (The wrought iron

palisade is non-original and may be removed).

Council’s administration has requested an advisory note with regard to removal or

pruning of Council’s trees. This has been recommended to be included should consent be

granted.

Council has lodged a representation which is contained in the ATTACHMENTS.

5. STATUTORY REFERRAL BODY COMMENTS

Referral responses are contained in the ATTACHMENTS.

5.1 State Heritage Unit, DEWNR

No comment was received during the statutory referral timeframe.

5.2 Associate Government Architect

The Associate Government Architect strongly supports the integrated retirement living

approach to the proposal. The height and architectural expression is also supported. The

following condition/reserved matter is recommended to protect the design quality of the

proposal:

“Details of the refinement to the facade treatment, to ensure the final execution is

consistent with the current intent”.

A condition has been recommended which seeks to achieve the intent of the

recommendation sought above.

6. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The application was notified as a Category 2 development pursuant to Main Street

(O’Connell) Zone Principle of Development Control 35(b)(iii). Public notification was

undertaken (by directly contacting adjoining owners and occupiers of the land) and nine

(9) representations were received.

A summary of the issues raised and the applicant’s response is contained in the table

below:

Representor

ID

Issue Applicant’s Response

R1 Supports the development

Replaces an unattractive 1960s

cream brick sky scraper with a

modern development

Land use is supported

Reuse and retention of listed

buildings

No further comment


11 February 2016

8

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Representor

ID


Complements Brougham

Gardens

Close to facilities (shops, cafes,

etc)

Adequate on site parking


Benefit the community

No further comment


Breathe new life into this part of

the city

Sensitive response to listed

buildings

Improves current appearance of

site

Adequate on site parking

No further comment

R4 Supports the development No further comment

R5 Supports the development No further comment


Satisfy the demand for

retirement living

Good level of serviced

apartments particularly in

relation to Adelaide Oval

Stadium

Comprises a good mix of land

uses and improve activation

Gateway site deserves a

development of this nature

Development has been designed

to a high standard

No further comment

R7 Supportive but subject to height

limited to 7 storeys

No further comment

R8 Not supportive of the

development

Impact on visual streetscape

Impact on character and

amenity of the area

No merit for residents

Supported by Government Architect

Development is lower than the

approved development on the former

Le Cornu site

Catalyst site provisions seek a more

intense form of development

R9 Supportive of a mixed land use

development but concerned

with:

Massing of stage 2B building

The development will read as a

single large mass as the space

between the buildings will not be

legible

Not exceptional quality given its

prominence

Definition between the podiums

is insufficient

Insufficient delineation between

the building base and upper

level

Stronger articulation between

The design does provide for suitable

separation, adequate setbacks and

landscaped open space

Supported by Government Architect

Development is lower than the

approved development on the former

Le Cornu site

Facilitates the adaptive reuse of the

State Heritage Place; building will

continue to make a positive

contribution to streetscape character

The ‘historical link’ between the

dwelling and stables should not

preclude the development of the

catalyst site

Applicant is offering to prepare a


11 February 2016

9

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Representor

ID


the buildings base and tower is

essential

Support the several small scale

tenancies

Support the solid to void along

the ground floor frontage

Wide awning is supported

Mid-block link supported

Adequate solar access to

adjacent properties

Retention of Local Heritage Place

supported as well as front fence

Demolition of remnant stone

wall and cresting of the Local

Heritage Place is not supported

A rigorous assessment of the

State Heritage Place has not

been undertaken – accordingly,

partial demolition is not

supported

Traffic Impact Statement and

Waste Management supported

Conservation Plan for 49 Brougham

Place

Heritage adjacency is but one

element in the assessment of this

proposal which must be reconciled

with the overarching strategic intent

of the Zone

A total of 2 representors wish to be heard by the Commission.

A copy of each representation and the applicant’s response is contained in the

ATTACHMENTS

7. POLICY OVERVIEW

The subject site is within the Main Street (O’Connell Zone) as described within the

Adelaide (City) Development Plan Consolidated 24 September 2015.

Relevant planning policies are contained in the ATTACHMENTS and are summarised

below.

Figure 2 – Zoning Map


11 February 2016

10

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

7.1 Zone

The subject site is located within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone Development Plan

consolidated on 24 September 2015. The site directly abuts the North Adelaide Historic

(Conservation) Zone to the east.

The desired character for the zone encourages a main focus for retailing; tourist

accommodation; restaurants and cafés; and commercial, community and entertainment

activities in North Adelaide and the surrounding suburbs. Medium to high scale residential

development is desirable in areas south of Tynte Street, particularly at upper levels with

active uses on lower levels.

The site is a catalyst site (exceeds 1500 square metres in site area). Catalyst sites

provide opportunities for integrated developments on large sites to assist in the

transformation of a locality. Such developments will facilitate an increase in the

residential population of the City, while also activating the public realm and creating a

vibrant main street feel and a range of land uses. Developments on catalyst sites will

exemplify quality and contemporary design that is generally greater in intensity than its

surroundings.

It is desired that development complement the existing linear shopping pattern, the

traditional main street character and amenity. The zone generally envisages development

up to 22 metres south of Tynte Street, and 14 metres north of Tynte Street although the

policies envisage a higher built form proximate to the North Adelaide Village and on

catalyst sites. The subject land is south of Tynte Street.

The site abuts the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone and therefore the

proposal is required to have particular regard to massing, proportion, overshadowing,

traffic and noise related impacts on the residential amenity of adjacent landowners.

Interface considerations are fundamental in the assessment of the application.

7.2 Council Wide

There are a number of Council Wide Polices relating to amenity for high scale serviced

apartment development, design and appearance of development, crime prevention,

heritage protection and impact, activation of street frontages and transport and access.

8. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

The application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Adelaide (City)

Development Plan Consolidated 24 September 2015, which are contained in the

ATTACHMENTS.

8.1 Quantitative Provisions

Development Plan

Guideline

Proposed Guideline

Achieved

Comment

Site Area 1 500 for a catalyst site

5 400 square metres

YES NO

PARTIAL

The site is subject to

catalyst site policy where the

site measures greater than 1500 square metres


11 February 2016

11

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Building Height

No height restriction for a ‘catalyst’ site

Varies from 9, 11, 12 and 16 levels

YES NO PARTIAL

Refer to assessment relating to Height

Land Use Capital City Land Uses Retirement Village, Serviced

Apartments, retail, office, restaurant/cafe

YES NO

PARTIAL

Refer to Land Use assessment

Car Parking Table Adel/7 – 225 spaces sought

218 spaces YES NO

PARTIAL

Refer to technical assessment

Bicycle Parking

Table Adel/6 - 43 spaces sought

168 spaces (69 dedicated; 99 in storage cages)

YES NO PARTIAL

As above

Front

Setback

Complement the

existing linear shopping pattern, the traditional main street character and amenity.

Development on

O’Connell Street is built to the front boundary to reflect the ‘fine grain’ character of the street

YES

NO PARTIAL

Refer to

assessment on Design and Appearance

Side Setback 3 metres to balcony, window

4 metres YES NO PARTIAL

Refer to assessment on Design and Appearance

Private Open

Space (Serviced Apartment)

Studio: no minimum

but some provision is desirable 1 Bedroom: 8 square metres 2 bedroom: 11 square metres

3+ bedroom: 15 square metres

Not all serviced

apartments are provided with balcony space

YES

NO PARTIAL

Refer to

assessment on Residential Amenity

Apartment Size (Serviced

Apartments)

Studio (where there is no separate bedroom): 35 square metres.

1 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 50 square metres 2 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 65 square metres 3+ bedroom

dwelling/apartment: 80 square metres plus an additional 15 square metres for every additional bedroom over 3

bedrooms. Note:

dwelling/apartment “unit size” includes internal storage areas but does not include balconies or car

parking as part of the calculation.

7 studio apartments are short of

satisfying the minimum apartment size

YES NO PARTIAL

Refer to assessment on Residential

Amenity


11 February 2016

12

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Storage (Serviced Apartments)

Studio: 6 cubic metres 1 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 8 cubic metres 2 bedroom dwelling/apartment:

10 cubic metres 3+ bedroom dwelling/apartment: 12 cubic metres

50 percent of the

storage space should be provided within the dwelling/apartment with the remainder provided in the basement or other communal areas.

Serviced Apartments are of adequate size to accommodate storage within each apartment

(apart from the 7 studio apartments which are undersized)

YES NO PARTIAL

Refer to assessment on Residential Amenity

8.2 Land Use and Character

The Desired Character Statement for the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone anticipates a

range of retail, commercial, entertainment and community activities, restaurants, cafes

residential and tourist accommodation. This is reinforced by Objective 1 and Principle of

Development Control (PDC) 1, which specifically envisage all of the land use elements

proposed as part of the development, including:

Consulting Rooms

Dwellings

Offices

Restaurants

Residential flat buildings

Retirement Village

Shop or group of shops

Tourist accommodation

Importantly, the Desired Character Statement also anticipates:

Uses that generate a high frequency of pedestrian activity and activate the street such as shops, restaurants and cafés will be located on the ground floor. Active street frontages will be promoted through a high proportion of display windows and frequent pedestrian entrances. The mix of complementary land uses will extend activity into the evening to

enhance the vibrancy and safety of the area and provide visual interest after hours, including by having no external shutters. Residential development above ground level is envisaged.

Further, for catalyst sites (sites greater than 1500 square metres), the Desired Character

Statement also envisages a range of land uses to increase the economic activity, extend

use of the site throughout the entire day and provide an active public realm.

Higher density living is specifically identified as desirable on integrated development sites

and land south of Tynte Street (including the subject site), while medium scale

development is desirable elsewhere.


11 February 2016

13

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Retirement Living is desirable in locations within easy walking distances to essential

facilities, and as such, the city is an ideal environment for such development. The

Associate Government Architect also states: “The desire to integrate a retired independent living community within the proposed residential use is a welcome and appropriate land use for the location, particularly given its proximity to the CBD and essential services.”

In summary, the diversity of uses (retirement living, serviced apartments, commercial

offices, retail, and restaurant land uses will) contribute to the vibrancy of the main

street, are consistent with the land use mix envisaged in the Main Street (O’Connell)

Zone and are therefore supported.

8.3 Design and Appearance

The Main Street (O’Connell) Zone includes specific policies around design and

appearance. In summary, development is expected to complement the closely developed

historic commercial built form edge to O’Connell Street and acknowledge the low rise

horizontal massing of built form with the continuity of parapets, verandahs, balconies

and with podium elements on the street frontage and setbacks at upper levels.

Development on corner sites should include buildings that present a strong built form

edge to the secondary street boundary.

Development on catalyst sites will exemplify quality and contemporary design that is

generally greater in intensity that its surroundings.

The following provisions in the Development Plan are particularly relevant:

PDC 9: Development should enhance the cohesive streetscapes along O'Connell, Ward and Archer

streets through built form massing and frontage proportions consistent with the Zone's traditional commercial architecture.

10 Buildings should: (a) complement the streetscape character with regard to scale, massing, siting, composition, architectural detailing, materials and colour. (b) be modelled and incorporate design elements such as verandahs and balconies, decoration and ornamentation. (c) exhibit a high proportion of solid to void in the composition of façades above verandah

or awning level of the podium element.

(d) incorporate pedestrian shelters along O'Connell Street and other major street frontages. (e) maintain or re-establish the continuity of low-scale buildings situated close to or abutting the major streets. (f) on corner sites of the major streets reinforce the townscape importance of these sites with appropriately scaled buildings abutting the street frontages.

11 The street wall height of buildings fronting O’Connell Street should be designed to reinforce the prevailing datum heights and parapet levels of the street through design elements that reflect the street wall heights of adjacent buildings and provide a clear distinction between the levels below and above the prevailing datum line.

12 The continuity of parapets, verandahs and balconies should emphasise the horizontality of

the townscape. Podium elements should maintain the horizontal massing of built form while incorporating vertical proportions in the composition of façades.

13 Long, blank façades which are unsympathetic to the established streetscape in terms of scale, design and architectural character are inappropriate.

14 The frontages to O'Connell Street at ground floor level should be composed of display

windows, doors and openings and should avoid blank surfaces and solid infills. A variety of


11 February 2016

14

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

building materials and colour should be allowed but the use of black or very bright colours should be minimised.

Setback

16 Buildings (excluding verandahs, porticos and the like) on O’Connell Street should be built to the primary road frontage.

Council Wide

Height, Bulk and Scale

167 Development should be of a high standard of design and should reinforce the grid layout and distinctive urban character of the City by maintaining a clear distinction between the

following:

(a) the intense urban development and built-form of the town acres in the Capital City, Main Street, City Frame and Residential Zones; (c) The historic character of the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone; and

Corner Sites 190 New development on major corner sites should define and reinforce the townscape

importance of these sites with appropriately scaled buildings that: (a) establish an architectural form on the corner; (b) abut the street frontage; and (c) address all street frontages.

The proposal aims to provide a group of contemporary buildings, featuring predominantly

curtain-glass facades to the retirement living buildings and masonry facades and glass to

the western serviced apartment building.

The statement by the applicant’s architect indicates with respect to the built form: “The forms, detailing and materials of the buildings have a cohesion across all four buildings so that they read as a family of buildings – all related but with individual character. The three retirement buildings have a closer link in terms of site arrangement and architectural language to express their common function. The serviced apartment

building now has a solidified expression with small openings to convey the function within.”

The podium level facing O’Connell Street is 2 storeys in height and will be constructed of

stone with glazed openings that are restricted in width intentionally to continue the

narrow rhythm of the O’Connell Street shopfronts. The Ward Street and Brougham Place

podiums will also be finished with a combination of stone and glazing to relate to the

northern face of the listed ‘stables’ and the Local Heritage Place.

The statement by the applicant’s architect indicates with respect to the podium and

external finishes: “The strong, two storey podium forms of stone, coloured concrete and glass weave around the site and link together the new and heritage buildings whilst also providing a visual

connection with adjacent Lincoln College. Recesses and cantilevers have been deployed above the two storey podiums to provide separation from the lower built forms and to allow the heritage places to influence the form of the tower above.”

With respect to the design and appearance of the proposal, the Associate Government

Architect indicates:

“I support the massing distribution on the site that references both the existing streetscape pattern along Brougham Place and the scale and proportion of the existing apartment complex opposite on O’Connell Street. I also support the central location of the 16 storey building to optimise views and balance the distribution of mass.”


11 February 2016

15

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

With regards to the architectural expression, the Associate Government Architect

indicates: “I support the intent for the articulation and modelling established by the expression of simple tower forms above a podium, and the architectural expression of alternating

masonry and glass that strengthen the identity of the various buildings in the scheme.”

Further refinement of the architectural expression is recommended by the Associate

Government Architect; this has been included as a condition should the Commission

support the proposal.

Overall, the grain and rhythm of the proposed development along O’Connell Street is

reflective of the typical North Adelaide streetscape of narrow shop fronts. The proposed

development also reinforces the corners and the listed places through land use,

materiality and built form.

8.4 Height

The Main Street (O’Connell) Zone contains a suite of provisions that relate to ‘catalyst

sites’ which are defined as sites greater than 1,500 square metres. The subject site has

an area of 5,400 square metres and is therefore a catalyst site. The subject site is

located adjacent to the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone to the east.

The Desired Character statement for the Zone indicates with regards to height:

‘whilst medium scale development is desirable throughout the Zone, higher built form is envisaged on integrated development sites, including the North Adelaide Village and in the area south of Tynte Street’.

In particular, Principle of Development Control 18 provides guidelines around building

height for the zone, but specifically excludes catalyst sites from these requirements: 18 Except on sites greater than 1500 square metres in area (which may include one or

more allotment), development may be built to the following maximum building height: (a) 14 metres – north of Tynte Street; or

(b) 22 metres – south of Tynte Street.

The Main Street O’Connell Zone provisions for catalyst sites envisage medium to high

scale residential development that is carefully integrated with non-residential

development that contributes to the vibrancy of the main street through building designs,

(refer to Zone PDCs 20 to 24). The scale of development on catalyst sites should also

respond to its context.

The height and design of new development with an interface to the North Adelaide

Historic (Conservation) Zone should be designed to carefully manage the interface; in

particular, the Desired Character Statement for the zone states that:

Developments on catalyst sites will exemplify quality and contemporary design that is generally greater in intensity than their surroundings. However, development will be designed to carefully manage the interface with sensitive uses in the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone, particularly with regard to massing, proportions,

overshadowing, and traffic and noise related impacts.

The proposed development will see a lower tower adjacent to the Historic (Conservation)

Zone (11 storeys); then a rise in height to the tower facing Brougham Place located

within the centre of the site (16 storeys); a smaller tower facing Ward Street given that it

is constructed to the front property boundary (ie 9 storeys); the development then

consists of a tower of 12 storeys facing O’Connell Street.


11 February 2016

16

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The applicant’s architect has provided a number of study diagrams which seek to

demonstrate that while the overall height of the proposed building is substantially greater

than that on adjoining land, a suitable transition is achieved to the adjoining

development through the use of ‘suitable setbacks and modulating the form of the

proposed building together with the use of podiums’, (Planning Report by PBA, dated

October 2015)

Generally development along O’Connell Street and Ward Street is of low scale with

buildings of 2 levels; Lincoln College on the abutting site to the east consists of buildings

of 2 to 4 levels. An approval over the former Le Cornu site (some 7,500 square metres)

exists for a development of some 58.2 metres which will transform the appearance of

this section of O’Connell Street.

It is acknowledged that development would be limited to 22 metres (approximately 6

levels) if not a catalyst site. However, the catalyst site provisions seek to allow proposals

to benefit from exceeding the height limits given that a larger site area creates

opportunities for an appropriate design response that manages the interface.

Given that the policies do not expressly state a maximum building height, and the overall

height is considered to be achieving a quality development from a design perspective,

the height must be considered in the context of Principles of Development Control (Zone)

21 and 21 which refer to the management of interface impacts: 21 Catalyst sites should be developed to manage the interface with the North Adelaide

Historic (Conservation) Zone with regard to intensity of use, overshadowing, massing, building proportions and traffic to minimise impacts on residential

amenity. 23 The scale of development on catalyst sites should respond to its context,

particularly the nature of adjacent land uses and the interface treatments required to address impacts on sensitive uses.

It is evident that the design philosophy has been to have the most intense form of

development to the centre of the site to provide a greater transition in scale between the

development and the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone to the east.

The Associate Government Architect indicates: “I also support the central location of the 16 storey building to optimise views and balance the distribution of mass. The podium treatment is extended within the site to manage the change of scale between the buildings and ground plane. The significant transition in height at the boundary between the eastern apartment building and Lincoln College (which is

located within the Historic Conservation Zone) is managed through the 4.6 metre high wall along the service ramp boundary, and narrow footprint of the stage one building.”

In summary, while it is acknowledged that the taller elements of the proposal will be

significant in the North Adelaide context, the buildings have been designed to be viewed

in the round and it is considered that the overall height has been well managed through

the distribution of mass and other design features, with particular consideration given to

how the development reads at ground level.

As indicated in the catalyst site policy framework above, interface management will be

discussed below.

8.5 Interface Management

The proposal interfaces with the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone. In addition

to the catalyst site policies described above, Principle of Development Control 8 of the


11 February 2016

17

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Main Street (O’Connell) Zone also places an emphasis on ensuring development does not

compromise the adjacent zone.

8 Development should ensure a high quality living environment is achieved for residential development within the Zone and the adjacent North Adelaide Historic (Conservation)

Zone.

Given the site abuts a residential zone, development should provide for a transition and

reasonable gradation from the character desired. Council Wide Principle of Development

Control 270 envisages that development should not unreasonably restrict the

development potential of adjacent sites, and should have regard to possible future

impacts such as loss of daylight/sunlight access, privacy and outlook.

Massing

The design approach for the development has been to locate the taller building elements

towards the centre of the site to reduce the overall mass to the adjacent residential areas

along Ward Street and Brougham Place.

There were concerns raised during the public notification process with regards to the

height and massing of the structures; in particular, that the heights should be closer to

the height limit of 22 metres.

Although there will be significant difference in height from the lower storey form to the

proposed tower heights, the proposed towers have been either setback from Ward Street

or lowered in height to create an appropriate transition to the lower storey form. As

indicated by the Associate Government Architect, the massing at the interface is

considered to be treated by setbacks from the zone boundary as well as in the expression

of designing ‘simple tower forms above a podium’.

The massing is therefore considered acceptable, albeit a contrast to the predominant low

rise character.

Visual privacy

Council Wide Principle of Development Control 67 and 68 seek that medium to high scale

development to minimise overlooking into habitable rooms. These Principles do not

regulate overlooking into private open space, but instead are measures to attain

“reasonable” development and privacy outcomes.

67 Medium to high scale residential or serviced apartment development should be designed

and sited to minimise the potential overlooking of habitable rooms such as bedrooms and living areas of adjacent development.

68 A habitable room window, balcony, roof garden, terrace or deck should be set-back from boundaries with adjacent sites at least three metres to provide an adequate level of amenity and privacy and to not restrict the reasonable development of adjacent sites.

The proposed tower to the east of the site has been setback more than 3 metres to

balconies, and upper level windows to protect the future privacy of potential development

on the Lincoln College site.

Solar Access

The Development Plan contains a range of objectives and principles within the Council

Wide section under the heading Micro-climate and Sunlight. Most relevant to this

assessment, is PDC 173:


11 February 2016

18

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

173 Development in a non-residential Zone that is adjacent to land in a City Living Zone or the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone should minimise overshadowing on sensitive uses by ensuring: (a) north-facing windows to habitable rooms of existing dwellings in a Residential Zone or the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone receive at least 3 hours of direct sunlight over a portion of their surface between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21

June;

(b) ground level open space of existing residential buildings in a Residential Zone or the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone receive direct sunlight for a minimum of 2 hours between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June to at least the smaller of the following:

(i) half of the existing ground level open space; (ii) 35 square metres of the existing ground level open space (with at least one of the area’s dimensions measuring 2.5 metres).

Shadow diagrams have been prepared by Pruszinski Architects and illustrate the shadow

impact on June 22 (winter solstice) and for 22 December (summer solstice) for at 9 and,

12 pm and 3 pm. The diagrams are provided in the ATTACHMENTS and are shown

below for the Winter Solstice:

These diagrams demonstrate that overshadowing will occur predominantly over the

Parklands during winter. Although there will be overshadowing onto the Lincoln College

institution, there will still be access to sunlight during the winter mornings.

8.6 Street Activation/Pedestrian Amenity

The Main Street (O’Connell) Zone seeks active street frontages, promoted by a high

proportion of display windows and frequent pedestrian entrance.

The proposal is considered to satisfy the above requirements as it has been designed

with ground level active land uses along O’Connell Street and further around to Ward

Street with the Well Being Centre as well as the listed ‘stables’ building proposed for a

cafe with outdoor dining.


11 February 2016

19

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Clear sightlines into and out of the entrance foyer areas for each tower is available to

residents and visitors, with the serviced apartments, retirement living units and

commercial entrances separated and clearly identifiable within the overall design of the

building.

Canopies are proposed along both O’Connell Street and Ward Street to enhance

pedestrian amenity. Council administration support the encroachments.

8.7 Residential Amenity

Serviced Apartments

There are a number of specific relevant policies regarding serviced apartment amenity

within the Adelaide (City) Council Development Plan in the areas of:

Provisions for useable private open space

Minimum unit sizes

Sufficient level of outlook from living areas

Access to natural light and ventilation

Storage availability.

Useable Private Open Space

Council Wide Principle of Development Control 59 requires minimum private open space

requirements; namely: Studio: no minimum but some provision is desirable 1 Bedroom: 8 square metres

2 bedroom: 11 square metres 3+ bedroom: 15 square metres

This policy also allows for a shortfall providing a communal open space area is provided.

The serviced apartments will be serviced with an outdoor dining deck as well as indoor

dining area.

It is evident that the majority of the serviced apartments are not provided with a private

balcony space. However, although it is policy to provide balcony space for serviced

apartments, the nature of the serviced apartments are such that they are occupied

primarily on a short-term basis; occupants wishing to stay longer, may likely book those

apartments that offer a balcony space.

Accordingly, given the short term nature of the occupancy and its accessibility to the

Parklands, the private open space shortfall in this instance, is considered acceptable.

Apartment Sizes

Council Wide Principle of Development Control 70 states:

70 Medium to high scale residential or serviced apartment development should provide a high quality living environment by ensuring the following minimum internal floor areas: (a) studio (where there is no separate bedroom): 35 square metres. (b) 1 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 50 square metres

(c) 2 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 65 square metres (d) 3+ bedroom dwelling/apartment: 80 square metres plus an additional 15 square metres for every additional bedroom over 3 bedrooms.


11 February 2016

20

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Note: Dwelling/apartment “unit size” includes internal storage areas but does not include balconies or car parking as part of the calculation.

All 1, 2 and 3 bedroom serviced apartments satisfy the minimum apartment sizes; in

most circumstances, the apartment sizes are much larger the minimum requirement.

There are 7 studio apartments which do not satisfy the minimum apartment size; that is,

they are each 30 square metres instead of 35 square metres. However, given that a total

of 7 out of 120 apartments (6% approximately) are short, and the serviced apartments

are aimed at providing short term accommodation, the departure is not considered fatal

to the proposal.

In addition, those studio serviced apartments are provided with an outlook to the

common open space area at the centre of the site and some studio apartments offered

with an oblique view to the Parklands.

Outlook, Light and Ventilation

Each apartment enjoys an outlook. Each apartment has access to natural light and

ventilation with no bedrooms relying on borrowed light.

In addition, the proposal has been setback sufficiently to satisfy the Development Plan

policy of 3 metres from a side boundary to balconies and windows, (Council Wide

Principle of Development Control 67).

Storage

Council Wide Principle of Development Control 81 indicates that serviced apartment

development should provide the following minimum storage facility sizes: (a) studio: 6 cubic metres (b) 1 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 8 cubic metres (c) 2 bedroom dwelling/apartment: 10 cubic metres

(d) 3+ bedroom dwelling/apartment: 12 cubic metres 50 percent of the storage space should be provided within the dwelling/apartment with the remainder provided in the basement or other communal areas.

Although there are no separate storage facilities in the basements, each serviced

apartment (apart from the 7 studio apartments which are undersized by 5 square

metres) measure greater than the minimum apartment size requirement. Accordingly,

each apartment will have sufficient space for storage should there be a need.

Serviced Apartment Entry

The entrance to the serviced apartment will be off O’Connell Street; visitors enter a

spacious reception and lobby which also has direct views through window to the

retirement village.

Apartment entries have been off set slightly from one another in that the doors are not

positioned directly opposite one another. There are instances where the entries are

located opposite a lift entrance which is not ideal; bedrooms are however not positioned

in the direct line of sight.

Retirement Living Units

The Development Plan is silent with regards to requirements for useable private open

space, minimum unit sizes and storage for retirement living.


11 February 2016

21

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Notwithstanding, each unit exceeds the minimum unit size, and provides sufficient

storage facilities within the unit; communal storage facilities are also available for most

apartments.

In terms of private open space, the majority of the apartments will be provided with a

conservatory of at least 8 to 12 square metres; these conservatories offer operable

windows, allowing the space to be closed.

In addition to the private open space, the development also proposes both active and

passive ‘outdoor’ and ‘indoor’ spaces to cater for the recreational needs of the occupants.

For example, a private courtyard is located at the centre of the site, between the towers;

a gymnasium overlooks the courtyard. The roof top in Stage 1 comprises of a multi

purpose room and lounge for an alternative space to congregate.

In conclusion, with respect to both the serviced and retirement living units, the

Government Architect indicates: “The apartment layouts are broadly supported, including the floor layouts, orientation of living spaces and access to natural light. The current distance between towers is appropriate to enable apartment amenity to be maintained. The winter gardens are

supported, demonstrating site-specific learning from the existing building has been incorporated into the proposal.”

8.8 Heritage

The applicant is seeking the following as part of the development of the site:

- Partial demolition of the State Heritage Place (dwelling and stables) with an

extension to the rear for adaptive reuse as a dwelling and the stables as a cafe

- Continued use of the Local Heritage Place as an office

- Removal of components of the fencing associated and listed as part of the Local

Heritage Place to allow for visual connection through the ground floor land uses

The diagram below illustrates the extent of demolition:


11 February 2016

22

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The diagram below illustrates the location of listed places within the locality on adjacent

sites:

There are three aspects to consider with respect to demolition:

- Demolition of heritage fabric

- Compatibility of alterations and additions to the listed places

- The adequacy of the transition to the adjacent Heritage Place (Lincoln College

Institution site which contains a number of listed items (State Heritage Places) as

indicated in the Figure above.

With regards to demolition, Council Wide Principle of Development Control 156 and 157

indicate: “A State heritage place should not be demolished or removed, in whole or in part, unless: (a) That portion of the place to be demolished or removed does not diminish the heritage

value of the place; and (b) A heritage impact assessment has been prepared that reviews the heritage values of

the place and includes an assessment of the impacts on those values by the proposed

development.”

“A local heritage place should not be demolished or removed, in whole or in part, unless: (a) the portion of the place to be demolished or removed does not diminish the heritage value of the local heritage place; or (b) the structural condition of the place is seriously unsound and cannot be rehabilitated.

With respect to the policies that speak to the design response to listed places.”

Although there was no referral response received from the State Heritage Unit (DEWNR),

there were concerns raised throughout the Pre Lodgement Service process in relation to

the partial demolition of the State Heritage fabric of the building. In addition, it was

indicated that the stables are historically linked to the main dwelling, and therefore, any

severance of this link, (such as the proposed stage 1 tower) will significantly impact on

the heritage value of the place and its setting.

Council, as a representor, has also raised a concern with respect to the partial demolition

of the listed fence, (Local Heritage Place).

Mr Ron Danvers, on behalf of the applicant, has prepared a Heritage Significance and

Conservation Report. Mr Danvers concludes:


11 February 2016

23

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

49 Brougham Place North Adelaide

- the heritage value of the dwelling at 49 Brougham Place is primarily one of

environmental significance as an item of character, not architectural merit, in the

streetscape

- the residence including its front fence is not of sufficient heritage value to support

its current listing as a State Heritage Place. Its environmental significance

(streetscape) is almost entirely associated with the front section facing Brougham

Place

- therefore, the rear section of the dwelling does not make any significant

contribution to its environmental value and could therefore be demolished.

- the stables is also not of sufficient heritage value to support listing as a State

Heritage Place because its heritage value has been assessed from 1982 as an

isolated streetscape item in an overwhelmingly hostile environmental context

- the dwelling and stables need not be considered as tied to one another in heritage

terms, because there appears to be no evidence that they were constructed

together for the same owner.

56 Brougham Place North Adelaide

- The remainder of the fence/wall on the western side of 58 Brougham Place

continuing around the corner into O’Connell Street is no longer of any significant

value as part of the Local Heritage Place because it has become visually isolated

from the Residence as a streetscape component

Mr Danvers also supports the design of the proposed development and its response to

the heritage value of the listed places.

It is considered that there is significant tension between the aspirations of the Mainstreet

(O’Connell) Zone as they relate to catalyst sites and those provisions regarding

preservation of heritage items and fabric. Noting that the proposed demolition does not

eliminate the dwelling and the stables nor, therefore, the contribution these make to the

Brougham and Ward Street streetscapes respectively, it is considered that the proposal

overall acceptably navigates this tension.

Based on the above conclusion, the next issue to consider is whether the proposed

development is carefully designed to manage the interface with the abutting Lincoln

College Institution site and the listed items on the subject site.

In this respect, the Associate Government Architect indicates: “The significant transition in height at the boundary between the eastern apartment building and Lincoln College is managed through the 4.6 metre high wall along the service ramp boundary, and narrow footprint of the stage one building. I support the setback and

consequent visual connection through the site adjacent the eastern boundary.” “In relation to the heritage items on site, I consider the development successfully integrates the existing heritage items into the overall scheme. While the proposed buildings present relatively abrupt transitions in scale, overall I support the relationship between the heritage items and the new buildings. The impact on the Heritage items is mitigated by

providing significant setbacks and the neutral backdrop of green podium wall at the

interface. I encourage the continued involvement of a heritage architect to refine this integration.”

Based on the above, and on the catalyst site provisions which seek a more intense

development on an integrated site, the proposed development is considered to manage

the interface with the listed items successfully.


11 February 2016

24

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

In addition, the applicant will be using materials removed from the listed places within

the development itself to provide some reference to the past.

8.9 Technical Matters

Pedestrian and Cyclist Access

The proposal incorporates numerous access points for pedestrians and cyclists. Across

the site it is considered that there is a high degree of permeability and legibility. There

are no concerns with the proposal in this context.

Vehicle Access

The proposal incorporates:

a two-way vehicle crossover on Ward Street

a one-way porte cochere on Brougham Place (with entry and exit crossovers)

a one-way vehicle thoroughfare between Brougham Place and Ward Street

an existing crossover to Brougham Place at the eastern side of the site.

No vehicle crossovers are proposed along the O’Connell Street frontage of the site.

The Ward Street crossover will provide vehicle access to the proposed basement car park

and service vehicle access to a loading bay to the rear of the heritage listed stable

building (which loading bay also is dedicated to stages 1, 2A and 2B).

The porte cochere will be used for drop-off and pick up movements connected with

stages 1, 2A and 2B (the residential components of the proposal).

The thoroughfare between Brougham Place and Ward Street will be available to vehicles

servicing the building proposed against the O’Connell Street frontage of the site proposed

serviced apartment building only (stage 3).

The existing crossover to Brougham Place will be used by residents of the State heritage

listed dwelling.

No concern has been raised by Adelaide City Council in respect of the location or

configuration of the vehicle access points nor the service vehicle movements and

arrangements. It is therefore considered that these are acceptable.

Bicycle Parking

Within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone, bicycle parking should be provided in

accordance with rates set out in Table Adel/6. These are set out below:

Land Use Bicycle parking space standard for employees

and/or residents

Bicycle parking space standard for customers, visitors and/or shoppers

Bicycle Parking Space Provision

Sought

Aged care facility (low care, high care, nursing home or retirement home)

1 per 7 people the facility is capable of accommodating

1 per 60 people the facility is capable of accommodating

27 for residents and 3 for visitors(based on apartment occupancy of 2 persons and total capacity of 186


11 February 2016

25

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

persons)

Café / Restaurant 1 per 20 employees 1 per 50 seats 1 for employees and 4 for visitors (up to 200 seats anticipated)

Indoor Recreational Facility

1 per 4 employees 1 per 200 square metres of gross leasable floor area

1 for employees (up to 4 employees anticipated) and 1 for visitors (approximate GLA of 200 square metres)

Serviced Apartment 1 per 20 employees 2 for the first 40 rooms, plus 1 for every additional 40 rooms

2 for employees (up to 40 employees) and 4 for rooms (100 rooms)

Total provision 43 spaces

A total of 168 bicycle parking spaces are to be provided across the site. Of these spaces,

13 will be in the form of racks at ground level (available to employees and patrons of the

various non-residential uses forming part of the proposal), 56 will be spread across the

two basement levels and the remaining 99 in storage compartments.

In addition to the above bicycle parking spaces, it is proposed that a total of 18 gopher

parks are to be provided. This is in recognition of the expected occupant mix.

It is considered that the proposed rate of bicycle parking provision is appropriate.

Car Parking

Within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone, car parking should be provided in accordance

with rates set out in Table Adel/7. These are set out below:

Land Use Minimum Provision Car Parking Spaces Sought

Medium to High Scale

Residential or

Serviced Apartment

1 space per dwelling up to 200 square metres building floor area (including serviced apartment)

191 (191 apartments / serviced under

200 square metres in area)

At least 2 spaces per dwelling greater than 200 square metres building floor area

6 (3 apartments greater than 200

square metres in area)

Non-residential

Development

(Excluding Tourist

Accommodation)

3 spaces per 100 square metres

of gross leasable floor area

26 spaces (870 square metres non-

residential floor area)

Total provision sought 223 spaces

The proposal incorporates a total of 218 car parking spaces. All but two of these (those

adjacent the state heritage dwelling at ground level) are located within the proposed


11 February 2016

26

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

basement. The departure from the rate of provision sought by Table Adel/7 is considered

minor.

The proposed basement car park is to be secured. In other words, visitor access to it will

not be permitted. This is considered acceptable noting that Table Adel/7 does not

explicitly identify a desire for provision of visitor car parking spaces for the various land

uses forming part of the proposal.

The distribution of the proposed car parking spaces across the 3 stages of the

development is considered acceptable (this accords with the rate of provision sought by

Table Adel/7 for each of the stages).

Local Road Network Impacts

No concern is held with respect to the number of vehicle movements the proposal is

expected to generate on the local road network and the ability of the local road network

to accommodate these in a safe manner.

During the pre-lodgement process it was identified that the proposal is expected to

generate a significant increase in pedestrian movements in a southerly direction from the

site (towards the Adelaide Oval and the CBD). This, in turn, gave rise to some concern

that the absence of an east - west pedestrian activated crossing on the southern side of

the intersection of O’Connell Street and Brougham Place may lead to unsafe pedestrian

movements. Ultimately this is not considered a significant concern due to the availability

of a pedestrian activated crossing on the northern side of this intersection and the

provision of pedestrian infrastructure in Brougham Gardens to the south of the site

(which provides alternate opportunities for pedestrian access to the south).

Waste Management

A waste management statement prepared by Pruszinski Architects details the proposed

approach to waste management.

the waste path within stages 1, 2A and 2B (the residential buildings forming part

of the proposal) is as follows:

waste generated within apartments is transported by occupant to waste chutes on

each level of each building (one chute for general waste, a second for comingled

recyclables)

waste chutes transport waste to ground level waste rooms within each building

wherein bins for general waste and comingled recyclables (1,100 litre where

possible; 660 litre where not possible) are accompanied by a 240 litre bin for

green waste

bins within the waste rooms will be transported by the property cleaner to the

waste staging area adjacent the basement ramp for collection.

The bin rooms on the ground level of each of the residential buildings will also contain

space for hard electronic waste. Such waste will be transported manually to the waste

rooms by property cleaners on an as needs basis.

The waste path within stage 3 (between serviced apartment and the waste room on

ground floor) is similar to that for stages 1, 2A and 2b yet managed by cleaning staff by

virtue of the commercial nature of the accommodation therein.

Waste generated within the wellness centre will be manually transported on an as needs

basis to the ground floor waste room in the stage 2A building. The restaurant and café


11 February 2016

27

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

tenancies proposed each posses separate waste storage rooms that are conveniently

located relative to the service vehicle loading bay adjacent the thoroughfare between

Brougham Place and Ward Street.

The waste management approach proposed has been developed in accordance with the

guidance provided by the Design Guide for Residential Recycling Appendix 2: Waste

Resource Generation Rates produced by the Adelaide City Council. It is considered that

the waste storage capacity within the various waste rooms is sufficient.

It is proposed that waste collection occur every 2 days between 7.00am and 8.00am to

minimise disturbance to occupants and neighbours. This is considered acceptable.

Acoustics

Council-wide Principles of Development Control 89 to 99 provide guidance with respect to

acoustic amenity. Together these seek incorporation of noise attenuation measures

within development to protect the acoustic amenity enjoyed by both nearby and internal

noise sensitive uses.

Resonate Acoustics were engaged by the applicant to review the acoustic

performance of the proposal. With respect to potential noise impacts on

neighbouring and nearby land uses, Resonate Acoustics find that:

the components of the proposal having potential to generate noise are the car

park, mechanical plant and patrons of and music played within the wine bar

forming part of the proposal

noise associated with the car park will be within World Health Organisation

recommended external noise levels at adjacent noise sensitive receptors (these

being the boarding houses within the Lincoln College premises to the immediate

east and the site and the residential uses to the north of the site on the opposite

side of Ward Street)

it is not possible to determine whether noise generated by mechanical plant will

be at this as detailed information regarding the plant to be employed is not yet

available (on this basis it is recommended that future testing be undertaken

following selection and installation of plant)

patron and music noise emanating from the wine bar is not likely to be contrary to

the directions provided by Council-wide Principle of Development Control 92.

With respect to the acoustic amenity the proposal will offer occupants of the residential

and serviced apartments proposed, Resonate Acoustics have provided recommendations

regarding the glazing that should be used in all buildings forming part of the proposal to

provide an appropriate degree of attenuation of noise from O’Connell Street (this being

the main generator of noise within the locality).

It is considered that the proposal responds appropriately to Council-wide Principles of

Development Control 89 to 99. It is recommended that any consent granted the

proposal be subject to a condition requiring incorporation of the measures recommended

by Resonate Acoustics.

Wind

Council-wide Principle of Development Control 125 provides:

Development that is over 21 metres in building height and is to be built at or on the street frontage should minimise wind tunnel effect.


11 February 2016

28

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

The proposal includes buildings exceeding 21 metres in height. Therefore it is necessary

to consider potential wind impacts of the proposal on the surrounding public realm in

particular.

The proposal is informed by a desktop analysis of the likely impacts of the proposed

development on the local wind environment undertaken by Windtech. This finds that:

the Brougham Place public pedestrian area won’t be adversely affected by wind

conditions generated by the proposed development (due to substantial setbacks

and existing street trees)

the O’Connell and Ward Street public pedestrian areas are potentially exposed to

less than ideal wind conditions due partly to the proposed development (by virtue

of accelerated wind flows around the corner north-western and south-western

corners of the proposed serviced apartment building) but also to the alignment of

these streets (which permits easy entry of prevailing winds)

some parts of the private outdoor space within the interior of the site between the

buildings proposed (particularly the thoroughfares along the southern boundary of

the site) will be exposed to potentially adverse wind impacts

the ground level outdoor dining area adjacent the Ward Street frontage of the site

will potentially be exposed to adverse wind conditions

some parts of the various roof top decks and some balconies are potentially

exposed to adverse wind conditions due to the absence of adjacent and nearby

buildings capable of providing shielding against prevailing winds.

Windtech recommends inclusion of a number of features that would ameliorate the above

potentially adverse wind conditions. These include the planting of densely foliating trees

throughout the site, provision of a canopy along O’Connell Street and Ward Street,

provision of arbours within the interior of the site and installation of impermeable screens

and balustrades at the edges of specified decks and balconies. These features are, in the

main, incorporated within the proposal. It is therefore considered that the potential wind

impacts of the proposed development (particularly on the public realm surrounding the

site) are acceptable.

Ecologically Sustainable Development

A number of Council-wide policies of relevance to the proposal seek that development

embody measures aimed at maximising efficiency in energy and water consumption.

Lucid Engineering was engaged by the applicant to provide a statement of the

measures proposed to be implemented in response to these policies. This

identifies incorporation of the following measures within the proposal:

natural ventilation (all habitable rooms are to include an openable window)

external shading structures (most north facing windows are to be equipped with

sunshades to passively control solar gain)

high performance materials aimed at achieving an average 6 star rating and a

minimum 5 star rating under the Nationwide Energy Rating Scheme)

motion detection lighting activation systems coupled with low energy luminaires

demand management car park ventilation

high efficiency lifts.

The statement prepared by Lucid also identifies that post development connection of the

site to the Glenelg to Adelaide Pipeline (which transports treated wastewater from the


11 February 2016

29

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Glenelg waste water treatment plant to the Adelaide Parklands) will be considered in

order to source water for irrigation of landscaping.

These measures, together with satisfaction of the energy efficiency standards mandated

by the Building Code of Australia, lead to the conclusion that the proposal embodies an

acceptable response to relevant Development Plan policy regarding ecologically

sustainable development.

Infrastructure and Services

Lucid Engineering was engaged by the applicant to provide preliminary site services

infrastructure information to inform the proposal. This identifies that

the existing transformer on Ward Street currently servicing the site is not capable

of servicing any stage of the proposal and the resultant replacement transformer

will be located internally within the site adjacent the proposed basement ramp

multiple connections to the existing sewer mains within O’Connell Street and Ward

Street will be required and are acceptable to SA Water

multiple connections to the existing potable water mains within O’Connell Street,

Ward Street and Brougham Place will be required and are acceptable to SA Water

the existing low pressure gas mains along O’Connell Street, Ward Street and

Brougham Place are not capable of servicing the site and, therefore, connection of

the proposal to gas services will be dependent on an extension of the high

pressure gas mains from the intersection of O’Connell Street and Ward Street to a

new gas meter enclosure to adjacent the proposed basement ramp

a new booster system for fire fighting will be required and is to be installed

adjacent the proposed basement ramp.

No issue is held with the proposed means of servicing the site with utility and emergency

service infrastructure.

Site Contamination

A Preliminary Site Investigation was undertaken by LBW Environment Projects to inform

the proposal. This found that:

a range of potentially contaminating activities (including importation of

uncontrolled fill, application of termite treatment activities, a brewery and a

service station activity) have previously occupied the various parts of the site with

those of greatest potential severity having occupied that part of the site adjacent

O’Connell Street

a preliminary intrusive investigation should be undertaken to characterise the

contamination status of soils and groundwater and, potentially, soil vapour within

the site.

In light of these findings, it is recommended that any consent granted the proposal be

subject to a condition requiring submission of a remediation validation report.

9. CONCLUSION

The two primary issues associated with the proposal relate to heritage impact and height.

Design and appearance of the development is heavily influenced by the heritage context

and integral to the sought heights and success of the scheme, in order to achieve the

outcome expected of catalyst sites.

It was through the pre lodgement service that the design and appearance evolved

significantly, to carefully address and manage the interface, as well as respect the


11 February 2016

30

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

heritage value of the listed places. The height, design and appearance are supported by

the Associate Government Architect.

Overall, the retirement living units, supported by the serviced apartments land use, as

well as the activated ground floor land uses, will offer a valuable contribution to the

community. Although there are some areas (private open space, storage) that the

serviced apartments do not satisfy, the nature of the serviced apartments are such that

they are occupied predominantly for short term periods.

In conclusion, the proposal is considered to exhibit sufficient merit when assessed

against the policies of the Development Plan, and in particular the catalyst site

provisions, to warrant consent.

8 RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the Development Assessment Commission:

1) RESOLVE that the proposed development is NOT seriously at variance with the

policies in the Development Plan.

2) RESOLVE that the Development Assessment Commission is satisfied that the

proposal meets the key objectives of the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone.

3) RESOLVE to grant Development Plan Consent to the proposal by 52 Brougham

Place Pty Ltd for The demolition of existing buildings and the construction of a

mixed use development comprising the following: three towers for retirement

living with a ground level cafe and wellness centre; a tower for serviced

apartments with ground level retail, cafe and restaurant land uses; basement

carparking and site works; works affecting State and Local heritage places

including partial demolition, subject to the following conditions of consent.

PLANNING CONDITIONS

1. That except where minor amendments may be required by other relevant Acts, or by

conditions imposed by this application, the development shall be established in strict

accordance with the details and following plans submitted in Development

Application No 020/A080/15:

2. Drawings/Plans by Pruszinski Architects numbered DAC01 to DAC29 and dated 15

October 2015.

Reports/Correspondence:

Planning Report by PBA (Phil Brunning and Associates) dated October 2015

Heritage Significance and Conservation Report as well as Heritage Impact

Report by Ron Danvers and dated May 2015 and October 2015 respectively

Acoustic Report by Resonate Acoustics dated 19 May 2015

Traffic Impact Assessment Report by GTA Consultants dated 30 September

2015

Sustainability Report by Lucid Consulting Australia dated 22 September 2015

Infrastructure Statement by Lucid Consulting Australia dated 22 September

2015

Waste Management Statement by Pruszinski Architects dated 14 October

2015

Landscape and Public Realm Concept Design by Oxigen dated October 2015


11 February 2016

31

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

Pedestrian Wind Environment Statement by Windtech dated 23 September

2015

Structural Condition Report on 49 Brougham Place North Adelaide prepared

by Wallbridge and Gilbert and dated 17 August 2015

Preliminary Site Investigation Report prepared by LBW Environmental Projects

and dated 21 October 2015.

3. The applicant shall submit, for approval by the Development Assessment

Commission, further information as to the resolution of the detail facade and podium

design and final details of materials, finishes and colours, in consultation with the

Government Architect, prior to final Development Approval for substructure.

4. The on-site Bicycle Parking facilities shall be designed in accordance with Australian

Standard 2890.3-1993 and the AUSTROADS, Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice

Part 14 – Bicycles.

5. The proposed car parking layout and vehicular entry points shall be designed and

constructed to conform to the Australian Standard 2890.1:2004 (including clearance

to columns and space requirements at the end of blind aisles) for Off Street Parking

Facilities; Australian Standard 2890.6-2009 Parking facilities – Off street commercial

vehicle facilities and designed to conform with Australian Standard 2890.6:2009 for

Off Street Parking for people with disabilities.

6. That all external lighting of the site, including car parking areas and buildings, shall

be designed and constructed to conform with Australian Standards and must be

located, directed and shielded and of such limited intensity that no nuisance or loss

of amenity is caused to any person beyond the site.

7. Mechanical plant or equipment shall be designed, sited and screened to minimise

noise impact on adjacent premises or properties. The noise level associated with the

combined operation of plant and equipment such as air conditioning, ventilation and

refrigeration systems when assessed at the nearest existing or envisaged noise

sensitive location in or adjacent to the site shall not exceed 50 dB(A) during daytime

(7.00am to 10.00pm) and 40 dB(A) during night time (10.00pm to 7.00am) at the

most affected residence when measured and adjusted in accordance with the

relevant environmental noise legislation except where it can be demonstrated that a

high background noise exists.

8. A Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) shall be prepared and

implemented in accordance with current industry standards – including the EPA

publication “Environmental Management of On-site Remediation” - to minimise

environmental harm and disturbance during construction. The management plan

must incorporate, without being limited to, the following matters: a. air quality,

including odour and dust b. surface water including erosion and sediment control c.

soils, including fill importation, stockpile management and prevention of soil

contamination d. groundwater, including prevention of groundwater contamination e.

noise f. occupational health and safety.

For further information relating to what Site Contamination is, refer to the EPA

Guideline: 'Site Contamination – what is site contamination?':

www.epa.sa.gov.au/pdfs/guide_sc_what.pdf A copy of the CEMP shall be provided to

the Development Assessment Commission prior to the commencement of site works

for both the hospital and car park.

9. The applicant shall provide to the satisfaction of the Development Assessment

Commission a remediation management plan prior to Development Approval for any

substructure works upon the site.


11 February 2016

32

AGENDA ITEM 3.1

ADVISORY NOTES

a) The development must be substantially commenced within 3 years of the date of this

Notification, unless this period has been extended by the Development Assessment

Commission.

b) The authorisation will lapse if not commenced within 3 years of the date of this

Notification.

c) The applicant is also advised that any act or work authorised or required by this

Notification must be completed within 9 years of the date of the Notification unless

this period is extended by the Commission.

d) The applicant has a right of appeal against the conditions which have been imposed

on this Development Plan Consent or Development Approval.

e) Such an appeal must be lodged at the Environment, Resources and Development

Court within two months from the day of receiving this notice or such longer time as

the Court may allow.

f) The applicant is asked to contact the Court if wishing to appeal. The Court is located

in the Sir Samuel Way Building, Victoria Square, Adelaide, (telephone number 8204

0289).

Notes from Adelaide City Council

g) Any removal or pruning of Council’s street trees required to accommodate the

development will be subject to Council’s Amenity Tree Evaluation Formula Policy. The

developer will be required to liaise with Mr Kent Williams, Senior Consultant – Parks,

Water & Environment, on 8203 7814 to discuss this matter further if necessary

Concetta Parisi

SENIOR PLANNING OFFICER

DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE

This brochure provides summary information on clearances from powerlines and tips on when it’s OK to sign the declaration form.

To protect people and property, minimum safe clearances from powerlines have been established in the Regulations under the Electricity Act 1996. The declaration form requires applicants to confirm that their development will meet these safe clearances.

The vast majority of applications will not have any powerline issues as normal residential setbacks often cause the building to comply with the clearance distances prescribed by the Electricity Act.

Particular care needs, however, to be taken for developments on major roads, commercial/industrial developments and in other cases where higher voltage powerlines exist.

Even if the proposed location of your building is closer than the clearances outlined in this brochure, it may still be compliant with the Regulations under the Electricity Act 1996. Please see our brochure ‘Building Safely Near Powerlines’ for more details or contact the Office of the Technical Regulator. You may be required to obtain additional information from the Electricity Supplier for a nominal fee, including the maximum worst case swing and sag of the powerline.

Swimming pools are considered to be structures and are not permitted within the clearance zone. It is unsafe to locate a swimming pool under any powerline.

These legislated clearance distances are not the same as electricity distribution or transmission company easements for access to the powerlines.

If there is an easement for electricity supply purposes registered on your Certificate of Title you must ensure that the proposed location of your building does not encroach on the easement area. If your proposal will encroach on the

easement area you will also need to approach ETSA Utilities or ElectraNet to seek approval for your proposal.

Overhead Powerlines

The minimum safe clearance between powerlines and buildings depends on the voltage of the powerline and the type of conductor. The different types of powerlines can usually be recognised from their construction, however, check with ETSA Utilities if you are not sure what the powerline voltage is. The Technical Regulator website contains a list of personnel at ETSA Utilities who can be contacted for voltage identification.

Most metropolitan streets contain only low voltage, or low voltage and 11 000 volt powerlines. In these cases, if your development will be more than 3.1 metres horizontally away it is OK to sign the declaration form.

POWERLINE CLEARANCE DECLARATION GUIDE

Issue 20070112

OK TO SIGN

Low Voltage and 11 000 volts

Greater than 3.1 metres from closest conductor

In rural areas, a SWER (single wire earth return) powerline is commonly used, and this has a voltage of 19 000 volts. Due to the long span lengths (distance between poles) of SWER lines, it is necessary to include additional clearance distances. If there is a SWER line near your proposed development and your building will be more than 15 metres away from the powerline, then it is OK to sign the declaration form.

Some higher voltage (e.g. 66 000 volts and 132 000 volts) powerlines are on very tall stobie poles—around 15 metres or higher. If you are near one of these powerlines and your building will be more than 15 metres away from the centreline of the poles, then it is OK to sign the declaration form.

Transmission lines are very high voltage powerlines that carry electricity from power stations to major substations, or between major substations. These are normally seen in country areas or on the outskirts of towns.

If there are transmission towers near your proposed development and your building will be more than 25 metres away from the centreline of the powerline, then it is OK to sign the declaration form.

Underground Powerlines

If you are planning to build in an area where there are underground powerlines, you should contact Dial Before You Dig on telephone 1100 before starting any excavation.

It is a requirement that underground powerlines are more than 3 metres away from buildings. This does not include underground powerline lines directly supplying power to the building. Unless your building is right on the front boundary of your property or there is an electricity easement on your property, it is probably OK to sign the declaration form.

For further information refer to the brochure Building Safely Near Powerlines, available from:

www.technicalregulator.sa.gov.au

Or call the Office of the Technical Regulator on (08) 8226 5500

Greater than 3.1 metres from conductor

OK TO SIGN

OK TO SIGN

Greater than 15 metres from the centreline of the powerline

Greater than 25 metres from the centreline of the powerline

19 000, 33 000, 66 000 or 132 000 volts on a stobie pole

132 000 or 275 000 volts on a tower

DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS 1993 Form of Declaration

(Schedule 5 clause 2A) To: From: Date of Application: / / Location of Proposed Development: …………………………………………… House No: …… Lot No: …. Street: …………………Town/Suburb…………. …. Section No (full/part): ………Hundred: …….. Volume: ………… Folio: ……………. Nature of Proposed Development: I …………………………………………………………………..being the applicant/ a person acting on behalf of the applicant (delete the inapplicable statement) for the development described above declare that the proposed development will involve the construction of a building which would, if constructed in accordance with the plans submitted, not be contrary to the regulations prescribed for the purposes of section 86 of the Electricity Act 1996. I make this declaration under clause 2A(1) of Schedule 5 of the Development Regulations 1993. Date: / / Signed: …………………………………….. Note 1 This declaration is only relevant to those development applications seeking authorisation for a form of development that involves the construction of a building (there is a definition of ‘building’ contained in section 4(1) of the Development Act 1993), other than where the development is limited to –

a) an internal alteration of a building; or b) an alteration to the walls of a building but not so as to alter the shape of the

building.

49 - 58 Brougham Place, North Adelaide

Mixed Use Development

Martin Stone

27 10 2015

Lucid Consulting Engineers - Martin Stone

Adelaide City Council

28 10 2015

Note 2 The requirements of section 86 of the Electricity Act 1996 do not apply in relation to:

a) a fence that is less than 2.0 m in height; or b) a service line installed specifically to supply electricity to the building or

structure by the operator of the transmission or distribution network from which the electricity is being supplied.

Note 3 Section 86 of the Electricity Act 1996 refers to the erection of buildings in proximity to powerlines. The regulations under this Act prescribe minimum safe clearance distances that must be complied with. Note 4 The majority of applications will not have any powerline issues, as normal residential setbacks often cause the building to comply with the prescribed powerline clearance distances. Buildings/renovations located far away from powerlines, for example towards the back of properties, will usually also comply. Particular care needs to be taken where high voltage powerlines exist; where the development:

• is on a major road; • commercial/industrial in nature; or • built to the property boundary.

Note 5 Information brochures ‘Powerline Clearance Declaration Guide’ and ‘Building Safely Near Powerlines’ have been prepared by the Technical Regulator to assist applicants and other interested persons. Copies of these brochures are available from council and the Office of the Technical Regulator. The brochures and other relevant information can also be found at www.technicalregulator.sa.gov.au Note 6 In cases where applicants have obtained a written approval from the Technical Regulator to build the development specified above in its current form within the prescribed clearance distances, the applicant is able to sign the form. PLN/06/0024

INTEGRATED MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING THREE RESIDENTIAL TOWERS FOR

RETIREMENT LIVING, A SERVICED APARTMENT BUILDING, WITH ASSOCIATED GROUND LEVEL RETAIL,CAFE &

RESTAURANT USES, BASEMENT CAR PARKING, TOGETHER WITH THE ADAPTIVE REUSE

OF TWO HERITAGE PLACES

49-58 BROUGHAM PLACE, NORTH ADELAIDE

DEVELOPMENT REPORT

PREPARED FOR 52 BROUGHAM PLACE PTY LTD

OCTOBER 2015

CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. BACKGROUND 2

3. PROPOSAL 3

4. LAND & LOCALITY 14

5. DEVELOPMENT PLAN 18

6. ASSESSMENT 22

7. CONCLUSION 48 APPENDIX 1 Architects Statement APPENDIX 2 Heritage Significance & Conservation Report APPENDIX 3 Design Assessment – Heritage Impact Report APPENDIX 4 Acoustic Report APPENDIX 5 Traffic Impact Assessment APPENDIX 6 ESD Statement APPENDIX 7 Building Services Statement APPENDIX 8 Waste Management Statement APPENDIX 9 Landscape & Public Realm Concept Design APPENDIX 10 Pedestrian Wind Environment Statement APPENDIX 11 Opinion of Probable Costs APPENDIX 12 Apartment Data Analysis APPENDIX 13 Apartment Storage Analysis APPENDIX 14 Structural Condition APPENDIX 15 Preliminary Site Investigation

1

1. INTRODUCTION

This report has been prepared as an assessment of the proposed development having regard to the relevant provisions of the Adelaide (City) Development Plan, the existing condition of the subject land and its environs, together with the pattern and form of development within the surrounding locality. In broad terms, the proposal is for the comprehensive redevelopment of a large consolidated site with a mixed use scheme comprising three residential towers for retirement living, a serviced apartment building with associated ground level retail, café and restaurant uses, basement car parking and adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. It is first appropriate to note that due to the proposed works exceeding $10 M, the Development Assessment Commission (the DAC) is the relevant authority for the purpose of making a decision on this development application, as identified more particularly within Schedule 10 of the Development Regulations, 2008. In the period leading up to formal submission of this development application, the Applicant availed itself of the ‘pre-lodgement’ case management process conducted by officers from the Department of Planning Transport & Infrastructure. This process included consideration of the proposal by the Capital City Design Review Panel. Arising from this intensive design review process, the Office for Design and Architecture SA (ODASA) has provided advice by letter dated 16 October 2015 in support of the proposal in terms of the fundamental elements relating to siting and arrangement of buildings, form and scale, and their relationship with the urban context. The pre-lodgement process also provided for valuable input and feedback from representatives from the Adelaide City Council and the State Heritage Branch of the Department of Environment, Water & Natural Resources in respect to various matters including heritage, waste management, traffic, stormwater and the like. This development is somewhat unique in the Adelaide context in so far as it seeks to provide high quality accommodation for retirees in a desirable and much sought after location, in a manner that provides residents with high levels of amenity and function including efficient access to a range of complementary activities and facilities. The adjacent serviced apartments will provide accommodation for visiting family members and friends, together with the public more generally in close proximity to a wide range of entertainment facilities including Adelaide Oval and restaurants along O’Connell Street, which strengthens this locality as a focus for economic activity. In addition to a high quality architectural response for this landmark corner site, a range of active ground level uses that activate public space and the adaptive reuse of heritage buildings, the proposal will result in considerable capital and recurrent expenditure that would have a range of positive multiplier effects within the economy. For the reasons that will be discussed below, the proposal warrants consent.

2

2. BACKGROUND

The Brown family has consolidated property in this location over the past 45 years with the ultimate vision being to pursue a comprehensive redevelopment comprising high quality buildings that fully realise the many attributes displayed by this land as a legacy to future generations within the family and the community more generally. This is a high profile and prominent site that demands a bold and considered design response. It commands majestic views towards the Adelaide CBD and Adelaide Hills beyond, together with the St Peters Cathedral and the iconic Adelaide Oval in the foreground. It is a highly desirable location for living and visiting. The size of the land, some 5400 m2 (a ‘catalyst site’) provides a capacity for a robust form of development of a scale and intensity that is greater than which may otherwise occur within low scale/low density residential historic conservation areas within the balance of North Adelaide, which will remain unaffected by the proposed development. This proposal should be considered in the context of the emerging form of development along O’Connell Street including ‘Place on Brougham’ and the recently approved development for 88 O’Connell Street. In combination, these developments will elevate the economic function and performance of this strategic location. Development Plan policy clearly anticipates and provides for change in this location, such that existing buildings on the land ought not to be viewed as an insurmountable constraint to a new form and scale of development occurring, mindful of the need to retain and conserve the values of listed heritage buildings. The proposed development does however need to be sensitive to and respectful of the various heritage buildings on the subject land, that adjoining and within the surrounding locality more generally. The Applicant has taken expert advice in this regard, with a considered and balanced approach taken in terms of the design response. The townscape setting of Brougham Place must be considered and responded to in terms of the manner in which larger mansion style buildings are sited within open spacious gardens with an aspect towards Brougham Gardens. The pattern and rhythm of space between buildings needs to be acknowledged and reflected in the scheme. The Applicant seeks active ground level uses including shops, cafes and restaurants to both O’Connell Street and Ward Street that enhance the public realm, integrated with an internal arrangement of private and public spaces for the enjoyment of residents and visitors alike, acknowledging the need for a degree of security and privacy. The grid pattern of North Adelaide in terms of the alignment of streets and buildings should be reflected and reinforced by new development, with new buildings addressing the street they front both architecturally and functionally. The interface between private and public realm is to be configured and managed in a considered manner. Other design considerations will include reference to the ‘fine grained’ manner in which shop fronts are presented to O’Connell Street, materials and finishes sympathetic to the broader heritage context, the use of podiums and other techniques to moderate apparent scale and bulk, together with landscape setting and public realm improvements.

3

3. PROPOSAL

3.1 Overview The proposal is for an integrated mixed use development of a large consolidated ‘catalyst site’ comprising three residential towers for retirement living, a serviced apartment building fronting O’Connell Street with ground level uses including shops, cafes and restaurants, together with basement car parking and the adaptive reuse of two heritage places.

FIGURE 1 – VIEWS FROM PUBLIC REALM

FIGURE 2 – SITE LAYOUT

4

3.2 Proposal Plans The proposal is represented on the drawing sheets prepared by Pruszinski Architects DAC01 EXPLORATION OF CONTEXT TO INFORM ALIGNMENT AND SET BACKS DAC02 DEMOLITION PLAN DAC03 VIEWS AROUND NORTH ADELAIDE DAC04 BUILDING HEIGHTS DAC05 BASEMENT PLAN DAC06 GROUND FLOOR PLAN DAC07 GROUND FLOOR DIAGRAM – CIRCULATION PLAN DAC08 LEVEL 1 PLAN DAC09 LEVEL 2 PLAN DAC10 LEVEL 3-8 PLAN DAC11 LEVEL 9 PLAN DAC12 LEVEL 10 PLAN DAC13 LEVEL 11 PLAN DAC14 LEVEL 12-13 PLAN DAC15 LEVEL 14-15 PLAN DAC16 LEVEL ROOF PLAN DAC17 ELEVATIONS DAC18 ELEVATIONS DAC19 SECTIONS DAC20 ANALYSIS OF STAGING AND CONSIDERATION OF SITE ORGANISATION DAC21 PERSPECTIVES DAC22 PERSPECTIVES DAC23 RESOLUTION OF TRANSITION IN SCALE DAC24 HERITAGE ANALYSIS DAC25 RESOLUTION OF BUILDINGS AND OPEN SPACES DAC26 MATERIALS DAC27 EARLY DESIGN EXPLORATION DAC28 SHADOW DIAGRAM 3.3 Technical Reports The proposal plans should be considered along with the following technical reports. Architects Statement, Pruszinski Architects, 14 October 2015 Heritage Significance & Conservation report – Mr Ron Danvers May 2015 Design Assessment – Heritage Impact Report, Mr Ron Danvers, October 2015 Acoustic Report, Resonate Acoustics, 19 May 2015 Traffic Impact Assessment, GTA Consultants, 30 September 2015 ESD Statement, Lucid Engineering, 22 September 2015 Building Services Statement, Lucid Engineering, 22 September 2015 Waste Management Statement, Pruszinski Architects, 14 October 2015 Landscape & Public Realm Concept Design October 2015 Pedestrian Wind Environment Statement, Windtech, 23 September 2015 Opinion of Probable Costs, Pruszinski Architects, 15 September 2015 Apartment Data Analysis, Pruszinski Architects, October 2015 Apartment Storage Analysis, Pruszinski Architects, October 2015 Structural Condition, Walbridge & Gilbert Consulting Engineers, 17 August 2015 Preliminary Site Investigation, LBW Environment Projects, 21 October 2015

5

3.4 Basement Parking Garage

A total of 218 parking spaces are to be provided as part of this development. 216 parking spaces (including 8 disabled spaces) are to be provided within two levels of basement car parking. Access to this basement parking garage is to be from Ward Street, which will provide two-way vehicle access for passenger vehicles. 18 ‘gopher’ parks will also be provided within these basement levels. This driveway will also be used by waste management contractors so as to gain access to storage area at ground level. A waste collection vehicle may enter and leave the site in a forward direction utilising this driveway. The ramp down to the basement commences at a point beyond that which is used by collection vehicles. As can be seen on the proposal plans, storage units will be provided for use by residents within the retirement village above. These storage units will have an average volume of some 10 m3 and would be individually accessible by residents. Additional storage units will be made available within the buildings above as space permits.

FIGURE 3 – BASEMENT PLAN

The two parking spaces to the front of 49 Brougham Place are to be retained. 3.5 Stage 1 – Retirement Living & Stables Conversion

Stage 1 is comprised of an 11 storey building (38 metres) to be constructed adjacent the eastern boundary of the land which adjoins Lincoln College. This building is to be used as retirement living for retired persons (34 units) with tenure to be in form of a license to occupy granted under the South Australian Retirement Villages Act, 1987. Portion of the State Heritage Place is to be demolished as part of this proposal in order to provide for the siting of this new building. The substantive portion of this heritage building will be retained and extended for use as a dwelling. The manner in which the new building adjoins this heritage building will be discussed further below.

6

FIGURE 4 – STAGE 1 BUILDING ELEVATION TO BROUGHAM PLACE

A reception lobby will be provided at the base of this building which will be used by residents and visitors. This lobby will provide secure access to the lifts and also a small administration area used in the management of the facility. Access to the lobby and levels above and parking basement below will be electronically secured. The site plan shows the manner in which pedestrian may access the building from Brougham Place along a landscaped walkway with an associated arbor. This walkway will form the primary address for the building until such time as Stage 2B is completed which will provide the main entry with a porte cochere for the complex.

FIGURE 5 – PEDESTRIAN ENTRY TO STAGE 1 BUILDING

Dwelling units within this and the other buildings proposed are typically arranged as two and three bedrooms with an open plan living area that relates to a partially enclosed balcony area. Partially enclosed in so far as the external glazing system will be operable such that may be opened and closed according to weather conditions.

7

This building is configured as ground floor providing an entry lobby with 9 levels of units above together with the top floor club lounge. A portion wall having a height of 4.6 metres for a length of 24.6 metres is proposed on the common property boundary with Lincoln College to the east. From level 1 and above the building is to be set back by between 3.8 and 4.4 metres from the eastern boundary. Levels 2 to 8 will be provide four units per level, with Level 9 arranged as three ‘penthouse’ suites providing more generous accommodation and balconies. Level 10 is to be used as a club lounge and private dining area with associated facilities for use by residents and guests, including a terrace on the north side and balconies to the south.

FIGURE 6 – RESIDENTS CLUB LOUNGE AND DINING ROOM Adjoining Ward Street, the former stables building is to be converted and extended so as to provide for a licensed cafe for the enjoyment of residents and the public more generally. An outdoor dining area will be provided adjacent this building accessible from Ward street.

FIGURE 7 – CONVERSION OF HERITAGE STABLES TO LICENSED CAFE

8

3.6 Stage 2A – Retirement Living & Wellness Centre

The next stage of this development will be the 9 storey building (29 metres) which fronts Ward Street, is likewise to be used for residential retirement living, albeit that on the ground floor it is proposed to provide a ‘wellness centre’ comprising a gymnasium, consulting, indoor swimming pool and a specialists centre.

A total of 24, two bedrooms units are to be provided over 8 floors (3 units per floor).

FIGURE 8 – STAGE 2A BUILDING ELEVATION TO WARD STREET

FIGURE 9 – STAGE 2A BUILDING 3 D IMAGE TO WARD STREET

This building will enjoy an entrance and address to Ward Street, but will remain interconnected and accessible from the balance of the complex via a networks of walkways though the central plaza area which has been the subject of a comprehensive landscape proposal as will be discussed further below. Direct access will be provided to and from the basement car parking garage via two lifts. Residents will be assigned car parking on an as needs basis by management and no doubt, subject to an appropriate charge. On average, the development provides at least one parking space per dwelling unit.

9

Waste chutes will be provided within each of the residential buildings that allow for the delivery of waste and recyclables down to a collection point which in turn is placed within a central storage and collection area adjacent the driveway to the basement parking garage off Ward Street. 3.7 Stage 2B – Retirement Living & Common Facilities

Stage 2B will be the tallest of the four buildings proposed at 16 storeys (53.7 metres) and will provide for 36 retirement living units, the main entrance and a porte cochere from Brougham Place, together with a range of shared facilities at ground level for use by residents and their guests. Once again, this building is composed with a strong masonry podium element, with levels 1 to 8 arranged as 3 dwelling units per floor, where after levels 9 to 13 are set in from the lower levels and provide 2 units per floor. The upper two levels (Level 14 and 15) will be configured as more generous penthouse units, one per floor.

FIGURE 10 – STAGE 2B BUILDING ELEVATION TO BROUGHAM PLACE This building is clearly of a residential appearance with expressed building levels and individual balconies. A palette of high quality materials and finishes is proposed, including the use of stone to the podium as an appropriate reference to the adjacent heritage buildings on Brougham Place. The philosophy that has influenced the siting and design of this building is articulated within the statement provided by the Architect. This is unashamedly a building in a modernist style reflective of its time, but with appropriate references and consideration in respect to the relationship with lower scale heritage buildings on the land. As will be discussed further below, while these buildings are somewhat atypical of the building typology that characterises North Adelaide more generally, their siting position and relationship to other large scale structures is such that provides a capacity for a more robust form of development as a contrast to this otherwise low scale development.

10

FIGURE 11 – STAGE 2A BUILDING 3 D IMAGE TO BROUGHAM PLACE

3.8 Stage 3 – Serviced Apartments, Café & Retail

A total of 100 serviced apartments are proposed within this 12 storey (41.20 metres) building. This building will enjoy pedestrian access from O’Connell Street and from the shared use space internal to the development which provided for vehicle access through the site for the purpose of ‘set down’ and ‘pick up’.

In addition to the reception lobby associated with the serviced apartments, the ground floor is to be arranged with a variety of ‘public’ uses in the form of restaurants, cafes and shops in a manner that reflects the current pattern of development along O’Connell Street further to the north.

These active ground level uses will return along both Ward Street and Brougham Place, with the corner to Brougham Place to be ‘opened up’ by removing the raised outdoor dining area and setting this function down at street level.

FIGURE 12 – STAGE 3 BUILDING ELEVATION TO O’CONNEL STREET

11

FIGURE 13 – STAGE 3 BUILDING 3D IMAGE TO O’CONNEL STREET In contrast to the three residential buildings on the balance of the land, the serviced apartments are to be presented with a more ‘solid’ form in terms of the ratio of glazing to masonry, particularly on the elevation to O’Connell Street. The building will enjoy a strong podium element to the public realm with a cantilevered verandah over the footpath. This more solid approach to the composition of the building form to the western facade will offer better thermal performance and is reflective of the building typology that characterises this locality. The verandah to O’Connell Street will have an under side clearance of 3.6 metres. The Local Heritage Place at 58 Brougham Place is to be retained and used as office and consulting rooms and will continue to enjoy an address to Brougham Place. This building will become more prominent within the streetscape as a result of the modifications proposed to the boundary fence adjacent the corner with O’Connell Street. 3.9 Landscaping, Courtyards & Driveways

The proposal includes a comprehensive landscaping scheme to be implemented in stages so as to integrate and provide linkages between the various built form elements of this development. Landscaping (both soft and hard) is an important element in providing for a pleasant and enjoyable space at ground level. The central courtyard area will be landscaped in a manner that combines more formal structural plantings with smaller intimate areas for enjoyment by residents. Access to this central courtyard area will be for residents and their guests and not the public more generally. Where necessary, fences and gates will be provided for this purpose. The area adjacent the proposed licensed cafe (the converted heritage stables on Ward Street) will be arranged so as to provide for outdoor dining and enjoyment by the public more generally. A simple arbor structure will be provided to filter sunlight during Summer months, with good northern sunlight to be had during Winter.

12

FIGURE 14 – LANSCAPE CONCEPT FOR CENTRAL COURTYARD

A key feature of the proposal is a shared space that is aligned between Ward Street and Brougham Place which provides for the movement of vehicles at low speed, together with pedestrians and cyclists. This is not a public street and vehicle speed will be limited to walking pace, with appropriate refuge available for pedestrians as required. To Brougham Place, the landscaping scheme will provide for generous planting beds that not only soften the paved areas associated with the porte cochere and the shared use driveway, but allows for more formal garden presentation in a manner compatible with and reflective of the mansion houses to the east.

FIGURE 15 – SHARED USE AREA BETWEEN STAGE 2A AND STAGE 3 BUILDING

13

3.10 Staged Construction - Extended Consent

It is proposed to implement this development in three sequential, but integrated stages.

A staged approach is necessary in order to relocate those existing residents of 52 Brougham Place who choose to take up an opportunity within Stage 1 of the proposed development. This existing 10 level apartment building will be demolished as part of Stage 2 which will commence according to market demand.

In order to implement the development in this manner it will be necessary to secure a consent which extends beyond the default statutory period of three years. As provided for by Regulation 48(2)(a) of the Development Regulations 2008, the Applicant requests that the life of this consent be extended to a total of 9 years beyond the operative date, i.e. Stage 1 3 years Stage 2A & 2B 3 years Stage 3 3 years

FIGURE 16 – STAGED IMPLEMENTATION

14

4. LAND & LOCALITY

The land on which this development is proposed has a combined area of some 5400 m2 and is currently developed with a range of buildings of varied scale and quality, including two heritage places. Portion of the heritage place at 49 Brougham Place together with all remaining non-heritage listed buildings are proposed to be removed. The land has frontage to Ward Street to the north, O’Connell Street to the west, Brougham Place to the south, and adjoins Lincoln College to the east. The land has a combined street frontage of some 239 metres, of which 67 metres to O’Connell Street is designated as arterial road frontage. The land is held in fee simple, and is comprised of seven (7) allotments: Allotment 1 in Filed Plan 16990 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded in

Certificate of Title Volume 6153 Folio 94;

Allotment 3 in Filed Plan 16990 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded in Certificate of Title Volume 6153 Folio 93;

Allotment 2 in Filed Plan 16990 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded in

Certificate of Title Volume 5093 Folio 268;

Allotment 13 in Deposited Plan 21353 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded in Certificate of Title Volume 5444 Folio 250;

Allotment 10 in Deposited Plan 21353 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded

in Certificate of Title Volume 5444 Folio 306;

Allotment 11 in Deposited Plan 21353 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded in Certificate of Title Volume 5444 Folio 305; and

Allotment 12 in Deposited Plan 21353 within the Hundred of Adelaide, as recorded

in Certificate of Title Volume 5444 Folio 304.

The following aerial and streetscape photographs assist in understanding the existing condition of the land together with the nature of existing improvements. The most notable structure on the land is the 10 storey apartment building that was built approximately 40 years ago together with the two level commercial building to O’Connell Street. The land also accommodates two heritage places: State Heritage Place - 49 Brougham Place – Single Storey Dwelling (Brougham

House) and former stables; and

Local Heritage Place - 58 Brougham Place – Two Storey Dwelling and masonry wall to Brougham Place and O’Connell Street.

15

FIGURE 17 – LOCALITY PLAN

16

FIGURE 18 – THE LAND FROM VARIOUS VIEW POINTS

17

FIGURE 19 – THE LAND FROM VARIOUS VIEW POINTS

18

5. DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The land is located within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone of the Adelaide (City) Development Plan, the relevant version for the purpose of assessing this development application is that consolidated on 24 September 2015.

FIGURE 20 – ZONE MAP FROM DEVELOPMENT PLAN

19

The following provisions of the Development Plan are relevant in this regard. COUNCIL WIDE Living Culture Objectives: 3 Principles of Development Control: 1 City Living Objectives: 6, 7 Principles of Development Control: 5, 7, 8, Medium to High Scale Residential/Serviced Apartment Objectives: 22, Principles of Development Control: 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 59,

60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81

Environmental Crime Prevention Objectives: 24 Principles of Development Control: 82, 83, 84, 85, Operating Hours and Associated Activities of Licensed Premises Objectives: 25 Principles of Development Control: 87, 88, Noise Emissions Objectives: 26. 27 Principles of Development Control: 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, Waste Management Objectives: 28 Principles of Development Control: 101, 102, 103, 104 Energy Efficiency Objectives: 30 Principles of Development Control: 106, 107, 108, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113,

114,

20

Micro-climate and Sunlight Objectives: 33, 34, Principles of Development Control: 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125 Stomwater Management Objectives: 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 Principles of Development Control: 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, Heritage and Conservation Objectives: 42, 43, 44, Principles of Development Control: 136, 137, 138, 140, 142, 145, 146, 149, 150,

151, 152, 153, 154, 156, 157, 158, 162, 163, 165,

Built Form and Townscape Objectives: 46, 47, 48 Principles of Development Control: 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 177, 179,

181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190,

Sky and Roof Lines Objectives: 49 Principles of Development Control: 191, 192, 193, 194 Active Street Fronts Objectives: 50, 51 Principles of Development Control: 195, 196, 197, 198 Outdoor Dining Objectives: 52 Principles of Development Control: 199, Demolition Objectives: 53 Principles of Development Control: 202, Landscaping Objectives: 55 Principles of Development Control: 206, 207, 208, 209,

21

Transport and Access

Access & Movement Objectives: 60 Principles of Development Control: 223, 224 Pedestrian Access Objectives: 61, 62, 63 Principles of Development Control: 225, 226, 227, 229,230, 231 Bicycle Access Objectives: 64, 65 Principles of Development Control: 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237 Public Transport Objectives: 66, 67 Principles of Development Control: 238, 239, Traffic and Vehicle Access Objectives: 68, 69, 70 Principles of Development Control: 240, 241, 242, 244, 246, 247, 248, 249, Car Parking Objectives: 71 Principles of Development Control: 250, 251, 252, 253, 254, 262, 264, Economic Growth and Land Use Objectives: 73, 74, 75, 76 Principles of Development Control: 265, 267, 269, 270 Centres and Main Streets Objectives: 77, 78, Principles of Development Control: 271, 272, MAIN STREET (O’CONNELL) ZONE Objectives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Principles of Development Control: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16,

18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 35

22

6. ASSESSMENT

The following matters are most relevant in the assessment of this proposal.

6.1 Procedural Matters

The proposed development is comprised of a number of components, none of which are identified as being non-complying forms of development as listed in Principle of Development Control 34 such that this application is to be assessed for consent on merit having regard to the relevant provisions of the Development Plan.

As this development is proposed on a ‘catalyst site’ and is to have a building height greater than 22 metres, Principle of Development Control 35 for the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone identifies that this matter should be assigned Category 2 in respect to public notification procedures required by Section 38 of the Development Act, 1993. Public Notification

35 For the purposes of public notification in accordance with the procedures and rights established by the Development Act 1993, development is assigned to the specified categories as follows: (b) Category 2, public notification required. Third parties may, at the discretion of the relevant planning authority, appear before the relevant planning authority on the matter. Third parties do not have appeal rights: (i) all development, other than where development is assigned Category 1. (ii) any development assigned as Category 1 where the site of the development is adjacent land

to land in the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone and it exceeds 22 metres in building height south of Tynte Street or 12 metres in building height north of Tynte Street.

(iii) any development on a catalyst site (a site greater than 1500 square metres, which may include one or more allotment) that exceeds 22 metres in building height south of Tynte Street or 12 metres in building height north of Tynte Street.

Category 2 public notification procedures provide for the owners and occupiers of adjacent land to make both written and verbal representation to the planning authority in respect to the proposed development. The Act does not anticipate appeal rights to representors in respect to Category 2 development against a decision to grant consent.

As the total amount of this development exceeds $10 M, Schedule 10 of the Development Regulations, 2008 identifies that the Development Assessment Commission is the relevant planning authority for the purpose of assessing and determining this development application.

Notwithstanding the fundamental support for the proposal expressed by ODASA to date by letter dated 16 October 2015, Regulation 24 of the Development Regulations, 2008 requires that the development application be referred to the Government Architect. Advice provided by the Government Architect is for regard.

It will be also necessary for this proposal to be referred to the Minster for Heritage in so far as the proposal involves works that will directly affect a State Heritage Place. Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations identifies that 8 weeks are provided for this referral, with the response being for regard.

While not a statutory referral body, the Adelaide City Council has provided preliminary advice in relation to matters including waste management, traffic and parking, stormwater management and other public realm issues including encroachments and kerb side cafes permits and the like.

23

6.2 Catalyst Site This is a ‘catalyst site’ by virtue of the land area exceeding 1500 m2. The desired character statement for the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone provides some narrative in respect to the manner in which catalyst sites may be developed. Key concepts to note include use of the term integrated developments that assist in the transformation of a locality, and at a greater intensity than their surroundings. Catalyst sites provide opportunities for integrated developments on large sites to assist in the transformation of a locality. Such developments will facilitate an increase in the residential population of the City, while also activating the public realm and creating a vibrant main street feel. A range of land uses will be provided that add to the range of local employment opportunities and the availability of service and shopping facilities within the main street. Developments on catalyst sites will exemplify quality and contemporary design that is generally greater in intensity than their surroundings. However, development will be designed to carefully manage the interface with sensitive uses in the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone, particularly with regard to massing, proportions, overshadowing, and traffic and noise related impacts.

While a more intensive form of development is provided for, the Development Plan acknowledges the need to manage the interface with ‘sensitive uses’ in the adjoining North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone in respect to a wide range of considerations which will be addressed further below. The following Principles of Development Control provide further guidance in this respect. Catalyst Sites

20 Development on catalyst sites (sites greater than 1500 square metres, which may include one or more

allotment) should be comprised of medium to high scale residential development that is carefully integrated with non-residential development.

21 Catalyst sites should be developed to manage the interface with the North Adelaide Historic

(Conservation) Zone with regard to intensity of use, overshadowing, massing, building proportions and traffic to minimise impacts on residential amenity.

22 Catalyst sites should contribute to the vibrancy of the main street through building designs that:

(a) include a mix of land uses that create activity and overlooking of the street, particularly at the ground level and the first floor;

(b) create the appearance of narrow frontages and enhance visual interest; (c) are vertically massed; and (d) include above street level fenestration, balconies, parapets, architectural detailing and

ornamentation which contribute to the rich visual texture.

23 The scale of development on catalyst sites should respond to its context, particularly the nature of adjacent land uses and the interface treatments required to address impacts on sensitive uses.

24 Where there is an apparent conflict between the catalyst site principles and Zone or Council Wide

objectives and principles (including the quantitative provisions) the catalyst site principles will take precedence.

It is informative to note the specific use of language in Principle of Development Control 20 where it provides that catalyst sites will accommodate ‘medium to high scale residential development’, albeit with a range of caveats in respect to managing the interface with the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone.

24

The land on which this development is proposed has a limited interface to land within the with the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone (to the east) which is developed with a residential college comprising grander heritage buildings to Brougham Place and more utilitarian residential buildings of greater scale to Ward Street. It is respectfully suggested that those provisions in respect to interface as outlined above, may have greater work to do where development on a catalyst site is proposed adjacent to low scale residential development. This locality is not characterised by a predominance of low scale residential development. In this regard, I am aware that the Adelaide City Council is pursuing an amendment to the Development Plan (North Adelaide Large Institutions and Colleges DPA) which would provide for a more robust form of development on the rear portion of the adjacent Lincoln College site to the east, up to 6 building levels.

FIGURE 21 – CONCEPT PLAN FROM LARGE INSTITUTIONS AND COLLEGES DPA

Regard has been given to this proposed policy amendment when assessing the context in which the proposed development will be experienced, noting that the assessment in respect to interface should be on the basis of this theoretical building volume or mass (at least to the rear portion of the land).

25

6.3 Desired Character The Development Plan expresses the following in respect to desired character for this Zone. Desired Character The Zone will be enhanced as the main focus for retailing, commercial, entertainment, and community activities, restaurants, cafés and tourist accommodation in North Adelaide and the surrounding suburbs. Development will reinforce the Zone’s role providing services to the local community and with a distinctive traditional main street character and amenity. Whilst medium scale development is desirable throughout the Zone, higher built form is envisaged on integrated development sites, including the North Adelaide Village and in the area south of Tynte Street. Uses that generate a high frequency of pedestrian activity and activate the street such as shops, restaurants and cafés will be located on the ground floor. Active street frontages will be promoted through a high proportion of display windows and frequent pedestrian entrances. The mix of complementary land uses will extend activity into the evening to enhance the vibrancy and safety of the area and provide visual interest after hours, including by having no external shutters. Residential development above ground level is envisaged. Development will complement the closely developed historic commercial built form and its visual character by including a strong built form edge to O'Connell Street. Development will acknowledge the low-rise horizontal massing of built form which is established by the continuity of parapets, verandahs and balconies with podium elements on the street frontage and setbacks at higher levels. Streetscape character is associated with the prominent and richly detailed heritage places such as those on the north-western corner of O'Connell and Tynte streets, and with related groups of late nineteenth and early twentieth century residential and commercial buildings. The podium elements will incorporate vertical proportions and high solid to void ratios in the composition of façades. The ground floors of buildings will abut the footpath and continue the established width, rhythm and pattern of façades to support a variety of tenancies with narrow frontages. Development on corner sites should include buildings that present a strong built form edge to the secondary street boundary. The Zone will retain a high degree of vehicle accessibility, with O'Connell Street continuing as a major traffic and public transport route, with priority given to public transport. Safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle movement to and through the Zone will be provided. Formal avenue plantings of street trees and attractive paving and street furniture will continue to enhance the sense of place and amenity. The impacts of development will be carefully managed to ensure the enhancement of amenity for residential development within the Zone and in adjacent Zones to ensure the achievement of a high-quality residential living environment. Catalyst sites provide opportunities for integrated developments on large sites to assist in the transformation of a locality. Such developments will facilitate an increase in the residential population of the City, while also activating the public realm and creating a vibrant main street feel. A range of land uses will be provided that add to the range of local employment opportunities and the availability of service and shopping facilities within the main street. Developments on catalyst sites will exemplify quality and contemporary design that is generally greater in intensity than their surroundings. However, development will be designed to carefully manage the interface with sensitive uses in the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone, particularly with regard to massing, proportions, overshadowing, and traffic and noise related impacts.

This statement of desired character clarifies the role and function of this zone for a range of activities that serve both the local residential population, but the wider community more generally in terms of the various entertainment, restaurant and café uses that O’Connell Street is famous for. Activation at street level is a key contributor to desired character as is the manner in which shop fronts are arranged and presented to O’Connell Street. While the scale of development proposed may be greater than which has historically occurred, compatibility may be achieved via the use of podiums and verandah proportions.

26

FIGURE 22 – USE OF PODIUMS & VERANDAH ELEMENTS The proposal in my opinion performs suitably in this regard, acknowledging that the proportion of the podium to O’Connell Street is somewhat taller than the lower scale development to the north. That said, suitable separation is afforded by the width of Ward Street itself such that moderates the apparent scale at street level.

It is also reasonable to anticipate that over time these properties further north along O’Connell Street may be the subject of redevelopment with a taller form of development. As will be discussed further below, the Development Plan allows for up to 6 levels in this location, notwithstanding the presence of several local heritage places. Other attributes of the proposed development in respect to desired character include: a continuous built form edge to O’Connell Street that provides for an active return

along Ward Street and to a lesser extent Brougham Place;

an active street frontage with a range of ‘public’ uses including cafes, restaurants and shops that add vitality and visual interest;

the cantilevered verandah which extends along the O’Connell Street frontage and

returns along Ward Street such that enhances pedestrian amenity;

27

high solid to void ratio in the podium presented to O’Connell Street reflective of the more traditional forms of architecture that exist; and

a rhythm and pattern of shop fronts reflective of that which occurs further along O’Connell Street to the north.

While this is clearly a new form of development of a greater scale than that which typifies O’Connell Street, it displays essential design elements that reinforces the concept of the ‘high street’ which affords a pedestrian scale and function at street level, notwithstanding that development beyond the podium may be of a substantively greater scale.

FIGURE 23 – PODIUM TO O’CONNELL STREET AND WARD STREET

6.4 Land Use & Management The Development Plan envisages the following land uses for the Zone.

Land Use

1 The following types of development, or combinations thereof, are envisaged in the Zone:

Affordable housing Aged persons accommodation Community centre Consulting room Dwelling Educational establishment Licensed premises Office

Pre-school Residential flat building Restaurant Retirement village Shop or group of shops Supported accommodation Tourist accommodation.

As discussed above, the proposal is to accommodate a range of complementary and mutually reinforcing land uses. The proposed retirement living seeks to respond to an identified segment within the market that is currently under provided for, with a high quality and secure living environment, in a highly desirable location. As discussed above, the independent retirement living use will be managed in a coordinated and integrated manner under the South Australian Retirement Villages Act, 1987. Residents would enjoy secure tenure according to a residence contract and will be afforded a range of services and access to shared facilities for their enjoyment. The serviced apartment building may provide for tourists or visitors to the area, including members of family visiting their loved ones within the retirement living. These apartments will be let by a management group that would also be responsible for servicing and maintenance of this facility.

28

While land division is not proposed at this time, it is envisaged that a land tenure scheme be prepared such as a plan of community division that would provide a spatial framework within which the various uses may be held and managed over time in an efficient and effective manner.

The various shops, offices, consulting rooms, restaurants and cafés will be operated and managed by separate entities according to a leasing and property maintenance framework to be developed by the Proponent. It is expected that individual tenants would be responsible for the fit out of their respective premises. 6.5 Building Height Principles of Development Control 18 and 19 identify both maximum and minimum heights for development within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone. Principle of Development Control 18 more specifically makes reference to maximum height but does make an exception in respect to ‘catalyst sites’ such as this. Building Height

18 Except on sites greater than 1500 square metres in area (which may include one or more allotment),

development may be built to the following maximum building height: (a) 14 metres – north of Tynte Street; or (b) 22 metres – south of Tynte Street.

19 Buildings should have a minimum building height in accordance with the following:

(a) 2 storeys – north of Tynte Street; or (b) 3 storeys – south of Tynte Street.

Concept Plan Fig MS(0)/1 provided below shows this land as being within allocation appropriate for up to 6 building levels. This concept plan also identifies the locations at which the interface with the adjacent North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone is most critical. I note that the eastern boundary of this land is not one such location.

As discussed above, the Development Plan acknowledges and provides for development of a greater scale and intensity on larger catalyst sites such as this. Indeed it is appropriate to acknowledge that existing development on the land which is 10 storeys in height together with the adjacent Place of Brougham building at 11 levels.

I also note the specific use of language within the Desired Character statement where it makes it abundantly clear that ‘whilst medium scale development is desirable throughout the Zone, higher built form is envisaged on integrated development sites, including the North Adelaide Village and in the area south of Tynte Street’.

The proposed development (Stage 2B) to the roof structure will be 53.7 metres above ground level (16 storeys). This building is located more centrally within the site and away from the interface with the adjacent North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone and roughly in the same position as the existing 10 level building on the land.

The balance of the proposed buildings range in height from 29 to 41 metres.

This height while greater than the 22 metres or 6 building levels anticipated for land south of Tyne Street is less than the maximum building height identified on Map Adel (Overlay 5) Airport Building Heights which indicates that in respect to aircraft safety, this site may be developed with a structure up to 73 metres (120 metres AHD).

29

FIGURE 24 – CONCEPT PLAN FOR DEVELOPMENT ALONG O’CONNELL STREET

30

FIGURE 25 – AIRPORT BUILDING HEIGHTS

31

As with Development Plan policy more generally, Principles of Development control are expressed in an advisory, not mandatory sense, such that the planning authority may reasonably exercise discretion in respect to certain quantitative measures in appropriate circumstance subject to the effects or impact of such being fully considered. Height, Bulk and Scale PRINCIPLES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

167 Development should be of a high standard of design and should reinforce the grid layout and distinctive

urban character of the City by maintaining a clear distinction between the following: (a) the intense urban development and built-form of the town acres in the Capital City, Main Street,

Mixed Use, City Frame and City Living Zones; (b) the less intense and more informal groupings of buildings set within the landscaped environment of

the Institutional Zones; (c) the historic character of the Adelaide and North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zones and groups

of historic housing within the City Living Zone; and (d) the open landscape of the Park Lands Zone.

168 The height and scale of development and the type of land use should reflect and respond to the role of

the street it fronts as illustrated on Map Adel/1 (Overlay 1). 169 The height, scale and massing of buildings should reinforce:

(a) the desired character, built form, public environment and scale of the streetscape as contemplated within the Zone and Policy Area, and have regard to: (i) maintaining consistent parapet lines, floor levels, height and massing with existing buildings

consistent with the areas desired character; (ii) reflecting the prevailing pattern of visual sub-division of neighbouring building frontages

where frontages display a character pattern of vertical and horizontal sub-divisions; and (iii) avoiding massive unbroken facades.

(b) a comfortable proportion of human scale at street level by: (i) building ground level to the street frontage where zero set-backs prevail; (ii) breaking up the building facade into distinct elements; (iii) incorporating art work and wall and window detailing; and (iv) including attractive planting, seating and pedestrian shelter.

Having regard to these provisions and the manner in which the development relates to adjoining land, I am of the view that this land has capacity for a greater scale of development than might other sites within the balance of the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone for reasons including the following: the size of this ‘catalyst site’;

the limited interface with the adjoining North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone

and the minimal extent to which this height may impact adjoining land;

the capacity of the adjoining land to the east (Lincoln College) for development of a greater scale than that which presently exists;

the relationship of this land to the adjacent corner ‘gateway’ site developed with

Place on Brougham, an 11 level building;

the manner in which the vertical scale of the buildings is moderated via use of a strong podium element to Brougham, Ward and O’Connell Streets;

32

the extent to which the proposed building will be visible from the near and wider locality having regard to existing development and landscape;

the vertical proportions and design quality of these buildings which presents four

slender and elegant towers;

the space provided between buildings and the opportunity for views between them through to the City skyline and the Adelaide Hills beyond; and

this locality is not characterised by low scale historic residential development as occurs

further afield within the heart of the North Adelaide Historic (Conservation) Zone. The following diagram demonstrate the theoretical height and form of buildings provided for by the Development Plan along both Brougham Place and O’Connell Street having regard to Airport Height Limits, Zone and Catalysts Site provisions, including the height of buildings recently approved for 88 O’Connell Street.

FIGURE 26 – BUILDING HEIGHT ANALYSIS

It is apparent from this analysis that the height of the buildings sought by this proposal is somewhat less than that approved in relation to 88 O’Connell Street and within the broader envelope provided by the Development Plan. Attention is also drawn to the 6 level height provisions proposed for adjacent land to the east. The following images also assist in understanding the context and relationship of the proposed buildings to that on adjoining land (including that provided for by the North Adelaide Large Institutions and Colleges DPA). A 36 degree plane has been extended into the subject land to demonstrate the transition in scale.

33

FIGURE 27 – INTERFACE TRANSITION STUDY

This measure of approximately 36 degrees at the transition between zones providing for differing scale of development is somewhat conservative in the broader policy context set out within the BDP Planning Policy Library. I note that a measure of 45 degrees is proposed in the case of the North Adelaide Large Institutions and Colleges DPA. This study demonstrates that while the overall height of the proposed buildings is substantively greater than that on adjoining land, a suitable transition may be achieved to adjoining development by providing suitable set backs and modulating the form of the proposed building together with the use of podiums. In terms of the broader context within North Adelaide and beyond, the following images assist in understanding the context in which the proposed buildings will be observed and their relative prominence, acknowledging that presence of various buildings of equal or greater scale and/or bulk.

34

FIGURE 28 – DISTANT VIEWS TOWARDS THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS

6.6 Heritage Conservation As acknowledged above, the land on which this development is to occur is occupied by a State Heritage Place, Brougham House and stables fronting Ward Street. The heritage significance of this place is explored within the assessment prepared by Associate Professor, Mr Ron Danvers Heritage Architect in his report dated May 2015.

FIGURE 29 – BROUGHAM HOUSE (49 BROUGHAM PLACE) – STATE HERITAGE PLACE

As I understand it, the expert advice provided by Mr Danvers suggests that the listing of Brougham house as a State Heritage Place was undertaken at the time in order to afford a level of protection for this building and in the absence of the ability to list as a Local Heritage Place in so far as this statutory mechanism did not exist at that point.

35

Further, it is suggested that the stables which abut Ward Street may not have been originally associated with this dwelling and that the link between the two is somewhat tenuous which supports the view that they need not be interconnected or linked in any practical manner such that the space between the two may not be developed. It would seem contrary to the fundamental concept underpinning the policy for this zone that the space between the two buildings be retained. The Development Plan on my reading clearly anticipates and provides for a more intensive form of development and that the space between the two should not be viewed as a constraint.

FIGURE 30 – STABLES TO REAR OF BROUGHAM HOUSE – STATE HERITAGE PLACE

36

Notwithstanding the basis for the listing and the ability to develop the space between the two, the fact is that these buildings are identified as a State Heritage Place and that they ought to be conserved, with any demolition limited to the circumstances discussed in Council wide Principles of Development Control 165.

156 A State heritage place should not be demolished or removed, in whole or in part, unless:

(a) that portion of the place to be demolished or removed does not diminish the heritage value of the place; and

(b) a heritage impact statement has been prepared that reviews the heritage values of the place and includes an assessment of the impacts on those values by the proposed development.

The proposal does necessitate the removal of rooms to the rear of 49 Brougham House, but does retain the substantive portion to the front which is to be restored and used as a private residence, consistent with its original purpose and function. On the advice provided, the portion to be removed would not diminish the heritage value of the place.

FIGURE 31 – PORTION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS TO BE DEMOLISHED

The proposal would only be non-complying if the total building were to be demolished.

Non-complying Development

34 The following kinds of development are non-complying:

(c) Total demolition of a State Heritage Place (as identified in Table Adel/1)

37

The following provisions speak more particularly to the manner in which development should occur in relation and/or adjacent to a heritage place (whether it is of State or Local heritage significance) with the emphasis on retaining and conserving those elements that contribute to heritage value.

137 Development affecting a State heritage place (Table Adel/1), Local heritage place (Table Adel/2), Local

heritage place (Townscape) (Table Adel/3) or Local heritage place (City Significance) (Table Adel/4), including: (a) adaptation to a new use; (b) additional construction; (c) part demolition; (d) alterations; or (e) conservation works; should facilitate its continued or adaptive use, and utilise materials, finishes, setbacks, scale and other built form qualities that are complementary to the heritage place.

140 Development on land adjacent to a heritage place in non-residential Zones or Policy Areas should incorporate design elements, including where it comprises an innovative contemporary design, that: (a) utilise materials, finishes, and other built form qualities that complement the adjacent heritage

place; and (b) is located no closer to the primary street frontage than the adjacent heritage place.

142 Development that abuts the built form/fabric of a heritage place should be carefully integrated, generally being located behind or at the side of the heritage place and without necessarily replicating historic detailing, so as to retain the heritage value of the heritage place.

149 Development of a Heritage Place, identified in the relevant Zone or Policy Area, should:

(a) retain and conserve those elements contributing to its heritage value; (b) have regard to the heritage value, physical material and setting of the Heritage Place; (c) provide for the retention of views and vistas to the Heritage Place from public roads as well as

between any elements of identified heritage value; (d) where possible, provide for the reinstatement of views and vistas to the Heritage Place from public

roads by removing unsympathetic fencing, building additions or alterations; and (e) integrate improvements and additions at the rear or side of the Heritage Place and not in front of

elements of identified heritage value, and may be of contemporary design provided it is of compatible: (i) scale, bulk and setbacks; (ii) proportion and composition of design elements; (iii) form and visual interest (as determined by play of light and shade, treatments of openings and

depths of reveals, roofline and silhouette, colour and texture of materials, details, landscaping and fencing); and

(iv) materials such as stone, brick, render, galvanised steel, slate, terracotta and the like which are characteristic of North Adelaide.

Consistent with the view expressed by Mr Danvers that the heritage value of these buildings is as much the contribution they make to streetscape in terms of the manner in which they maybe enjoyed by the public more generally, the proposal would not seriously offend the above provisions. Care and attention has been given to the manner in which new building work relates to these buildings, in particular Brougham House, with the design solution arrived at balancing the constrains posed by this State Heritage Place and the opportunity to achieve meaningful development consistent with policy intent. The adaptive reuse of the stables to Ward Street is considered to be desirable outcome in terms of providing an economic use or purpose for this structure which in turn assist in its long term maintenance and retention. I note that Brougham House and the stables have been vacant for many years.

38

FIGURE 32 – RELATIONSHIP OF BROUGHAM HOUSE TO NEW BUILDING

FIGURE 33 – STABLES TO WARD STREET

The Local Heritage Place at 58 Brougham Place is to be retained and used as an office.

FIGURE 34 – 58 BROUGHAM PLACE RETAINED AS OFFICE

39

6.7 Design & Appearance

The following policies are expressed more particularly to the design and appearance of buildings and spaces within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone, acknowledging the extensive provisions set out within the Council wide section of the Development Plan that are more specifically identified in Section 5 of this report.

Design and Appearance 9 Development should enhance the cohesive streetscapes along O'Connell, Ward and Archer streets

through built form massing and frontage proportions consistent with the Zone's traditional commercial architecture.

10 Buildings should:

(a) complement the streetscape character with regard to scale, massing, siting, composition, architectural detailing, materials and colour.

(b) be modelled and incorporate design elements such as verandahs and balconies, decoration and ornamentation.

(c) exhibit a high proportion of solid to void in the composition of façades above verandah or awning level of the podium element.

(d) incorporate pedestrian shelters along O'Connell Street and other major street frontages. (e) maintain or re-establish the continuity of low-scale buildings situated close to or abutting the major streets. (f) on corner sites of the major streets reinforce the townscape importance of these sites with

appropriately scaled buildings abutting the street frontages. 11 The street wall height of buildings fronting O’Connell Street should be designed to reinforce the prevailing

datum heights and parapet levels of the street through design elements that reflect the street wall heights of adjacent buildings and provide a clear distinction between the levels below and above the prevailing datum line.

12 The continuity of parapets, verandahs and balconies should emphasise the horizontality of the

townscape. Podium elements should maintain the horizontal massing of built form while incorporating vertical proportions in the composition of façades.

13 Long, blank façades which are unsympathetic to the established streetscape in terms of scale, design

and architectural character are inappropriate. 14 The frontages to O'Connell Street at ground floor level should be composed of display windows, doors

and openings and should avoid blank surfaces and solid infills. A variety of building materials and colour should be allowed but the use of black or very bright colours should be minimised.

Having regard to these policies, I am of the view that the proposal is in substantive compliance in so far as the proposed buildings: will result in a cohesive streetscape along O’Connell Street and Ward Street, with

appropriate regard given to the prevailing scale and arrangement of shop fronts; the use of a podium form to O’Connell Street together with a cantilevered verandah

element not only enhances pedestrian amenity but streetscape character; facades are highly modeled and in the case of the building to O’Connell Street

more particularly exhibit a high solid to void ratio reflective of the use within; the proposed buildings respond to the corners with Ward Street and Brougham

Place in a desirable manner providing a robust built form that reinforce the grid;

40

the proposal avoids long blank facades, with active frontages and land use activities to all three public streets;

the design of the proposed buildings display suitable visual interest and detailing

while preserving an elegant contemporary form at upper levels; and

a high quality palette of material and finishes is proposed which would complement the character of this locality and the architectural form of the proposed buildings.

In respect to judgements of design quality and style, I note that ODASA is fundamentally supportive of this development subject to continued refinement through design development and documentation. I suggest that this objective and expert opinion should prevail in the assessment and determination of this proposal.

FIGURE 35 – VIEW FROM BROUGHAM GARDENS

6.8 Residential Amenity The Development Plan sets out a plethora of policies that speak to amenity and function of residential buildings, with specific guidance given in relation to medium and high scale residential and serviced apartment development. The following overarching Objective is most relevant in this regard. Medium to High Scale Residential/Serviced Apartment OBJECTIVE Objective 22: Medium to high scale residential (including student accommodation) or serviced apartment

development that: (a) has a high standard of amenity and environmental performance; (b) comprises functional internal layouts; (c) is adaptable to meet a variety of accommodation and living needs; and (d) includes well-designed and functional recreation and storage areas.

41

As can be seen from the typical floor layout plan below, all habitable rooms enjoy light and ventilation from an external window. Dwellings will be provided with a high level of amenity in terms of the aspect from these windows, with sufficient distance between buildings so as to minimise the potential for loss of privacy. Floor to ceiling heights for both the retirement living units and the serviced apartments satisfy Development Plan minimums with at least 2700mm provided between floor level and the underside of the ceiling immediately above. A more generous proportion is to be provided for the ‘penthouse’ units at the upper floors.

FIGURE 36 – TYPICAL FLOOR LAYOUT

In addition to the enjoyment of ground level open space within the central courtyard area, the majority of units will be provided with a conservatory of at least 8 to 12 m2. These conservatories offer operable windows allowing the space to be used as an open deck in good weather and as an enclosed space during inclement weather. This arrangement would afford a high level of amenity to residents in terms of responding to prevailing weather conditions as has been the experience in the existing apartment building on the land, as acknowledged by the Government Architect. Objective 27: Noise sensitive development designed to protect its occupants from existing noise sources

and from noise sources contemplated within the relevant Zone or Policy Area and that does not unreasonably interfere with the operation of non-residential uses contemplated within the relevant Zone or Policy Area.

An acoustic assessment has been undertaken by Resonate Acoustic in respect to the potential for various noise sources to compromise the amenity that may otherwise be enjoyed by residents within these buildings and also guests within the serviced apartments to O’Connell Street.

42

The predicted noise emissions from site have been assessed in accordance with the Development Plan and Environment Protection (Noise) Policy 2007. The assessment has shown that the likely noise emissions will be complaint with these requirements thereby providing a suitable amenity for residents. Micro-climate and Sunlight

OBJECTIVES Objective 33: Buildings which are designed and sited to be energy efficient and to minimise micro-climatic

and solar access impacts on land or other buildings.

57 Medium to high scale residential or serviced apartment development should locate living areas, private open space and communal open space, where such communal open space provides the primary area of private open space, where they will receive sunlight and, where possible, should maintain at least two hours of direct sunlight solar time on 22 June to: (a) at least one habitable room window (excluding bathroom, toilet, laundry or storage room windows); (b) to at least 20 percent of the private open space; and (c) communal open space, where such communal open space provides the primary private open

space for any adjacent residential development.

As can be seen from the shadow diagrams provided below, while the proposed development will cast a shadow into its own site, such will not unreasonably prejudice future residents (within adjoining buildings) from enjoying suitable solar access for the requisite portion of the day, i.e. 2 hours during Winter.

FIGURE 37 – SUN SHADING STUDY 125 Development that is over 21 metres in building height and is to be built at or on the street frontage should

minimise wind tunnel effect.

Design Techniques (these are ONE WAY of meeting the above Principle)

125.1 Methods to reduce the potential for a wind tunnel effect may include: (a) a podium built at the base of a tall tower and aligned with the street to deflect wind away from the

street; (b) substantial verandahs around a building to deflect downward travelling wind flows; and/or (c) placing one building windward of another building.

43

Where development exceeds 21 metres in height adjacent to public spaces, the Development Plan seeks to ensure that suitable measures are employed to reduce the negative micro climatic effects of wind tunnelling. Windtech in their report at Appendix 11 make certain recommendations in this regard. In the main, the recommendations provided by Windtech have been adopted other than in relation to the species of trees used in the driveway and central plaza area. Whereas evergreen trees have been recommended, a decision has been taken to utilise deciduous species given solar access benefits arising, as recommended by Oxigen Landscape Architects. The Development Plan sets out a comprehensive set of design guidelines and best practice approaches expressed as principles of development control that speak to Crime Prevention Through Urban Design (CPTUD). The following Objective provides overarching guidance in this respect.

Crime Prevention Through Urban Design

OBJECTIVES

Objective 24: A safe and secure, crime resistant environment that:

(a) ensures that land uses are integrated and designed to facilitate natural surveillance; (b) promotes building and site security; and (c) promotes visibility through the incorporation of clear lines of sight and appropriate lighting.

In this regard, the proposal displays the following attributes:

upper level windows that provide for casual or passive surveillance of publically

accessible spaces including walkways and shared spaces within the development;

land uses at ground level which activate public street frontages including shops, cafes, restaurants that extend into the evening period;

on site management personnel to ensure physical safety of residents

supplemented as required by electronic means such as CCTV;

electronically controlled access to entry lobbies and lifts for the safety and security of residents and guests;

clear line of sight maintained in landscaped areas via the use of clear trunk trees

and low hedging and ground covers;

appropriate levels of lighting during hours of darkness to ground level spaces;

surfaces at ground level specified and or treated post construction to minimise the potential for damage caused by graffiti; and

entrapment points minimised with clear line of sight provided for pedestrians at

ground level.

44

6.9 Access & Parking

Vehicle access to the proposed basement parking garage is to be from Ward Street via a ramp that grades down from a point just past the waste management room. A total of 216 car parking spaces are to be provided within this garage, a number of which are arranged in ‘tandem’, i.e. one behind the other. As discussed above, the basement garage is to be constructed in stages according to the demand generated by the buildings above. Notwithstanding this staged construction, the car parking garage will remain operational for the duration so as to service the needs of residents and visitors. In addition to the basement parking garage, the development includes a private driveway configured as a ‘shared space’ (motor vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists) which is aligned in a north south manner providing one-way vehicle movement from Brougham Place to Ward Street at low speed. Further, there is to be a porte cochere accessed from Brougham Place which will provide undercover access for persons alighting from vehicles into the main lobby area associated with Building 2B. I expect that a concierge or similar will be available to assist in this task. Car Parking

25 Access should be provided at the rear of properties and from lanes or streets other than O'Connell

Street. New vehicle access across the O'Connell Street frontage should be avoided.

26 Parking should be provided away from the primary frontages and be designed to minimise its impacts on residential amenity.

27 Any multi-level car park should be designed and/or screened to respect the amenity of adjacent

residential properties and minimise any overlooking into adjoining residential properties.

28 Car parking should be provided in accordance with Table Adel/7 and be ancillary to an approved or existing use.

45

The above policies in respect to the provision and arrangement of car parking within the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone are expressed by the Development Plan, which are more specific to the ‘general’ provisions found within the Council wide section, other than in respect to parking rates for selected uses.

While I defer in the first instance to the expert advice provided by GTA Consultants, I am of the view that the proposal (in its various stages) would provide adequate car parking to meet the needs arising from the land uses to be conducted on site, inclusive of the limited café, restaurant and retail uses proposed at ground level.

For the reasons discussed more particularly by GTA Consultants, that while the proposal may generate a theoretical demand for some 223 car parking spaces, a provision of 218 spaces would, in the circumstance, be sufficient to serve the proposed development both in its entirety and for each stage. GTA Consultants have also provided an in depth analysis of traffic movements to and from the subject land as a result of the proposed development including the likely effect on the function of adjacent intersections. They conclude that the increase in traffic arising from the proposed use is within the capacity of the existing road system.

An assessment of on site loading and unloading facilities including that for waste management has been undertaken by GTA Consultants, together with the provision of bike parking and end of trip facilities, pedestrian safety, provision for disabled persons, concluding that in each respect the proposal meets recognised standards. The following summary provided as a conclusion by GTA Consultants in their report: The Development Plan indicates a minimum of 223 spaces is required for the proposed development.

The proposed supply of 218 car parking spaces (216 spaces, including 8 disabled spaces, in a basement car park and 2 at grade spaces accessible off Brougham Place) is considered appropriate for the proposed development given the availability of on-street parking which is used by the present site and North Adelaide uses generally.

The existing heritage residence will be maintained as part of the proposed development, with its own driveway access to Brougham Place incorporating space for 2 parked vehicles maintained as per the existing arrangement.

The proposed parking layout is consistent with the dimensional requirements as set out in the Australian/New Zealand Standards for Off Street Car Parking (AS/NZS2890.1:2004 and AS/NZS2890.6:2009).

The provision of 163 bicycle parking spaces (including 94 in resident storage units) is considered appropriate for the proposed development, and exceeds the minimum requirements for resident, employee, customer and visitor bicycle parking based on the Development Plan rates.

Loading, unloading and refuse collection will take place in a loading area off of the Ward Street basement carpark access driveway for Stage 1 and 2 of the development. Loading, unloading and refuse collection for Stage 3 of the development will take place on the internal service road connecting Brougham Place to Ward Street.

The site is expected to generate approximately 81 and 525 vehicle movements in any peak hour and daily respectively associated with the Ward Street basement carpark access.

The site is expected to generate up to 10 and 56 vehicle movements in any peak hour and daily period respectively associated with loading/unloading, refuse collection and pickup/drop off on the internal service road and porte-cochere on Brougham Place.

The traffic assessment has found there is adequate capacity in the surrounding road network to cater for the traffic generated by the proposed development, with minimal impact expected on the operation of adjacent roads and intersections.

46

6.10 Environmentally Sustainable Design

The Development Plan expresses the following policies more particularly in respect to energy efficiency which has as an objective long term sustainability on the environment achieved through minimising the consumption of non-renewable resources and where possible though the adaption of alterative energy systems.

Energy Efficiency OBJECTIVE Objective 30: Development which is compatible with the long term sustainability of the environment,

minimises consumption of non-renewable resources and utilises alternative energy generation systems.

PRINCIPLES OF DEVELOPMENT CONTROL All Development 106 Buildings should provide adequate thermal comfort for occupants and minimise the need for energy use

for heating, cooling and lighting by: (a) providing an internal day living area with a north-facing window, other than for minor additions*, by:

(i) arranging and concentrating main activity areas of a building to the north for solar penetration; and (ii) placing buildings on east-west allotments against or close to the southern boundary to maximise northern solar access and separation to other buildings to the north.

(b) efficient layout, such as zoning house layout to enable main living areas to be separately heated and cooled, other than for minor additions;

(c) locating, sizing and shading windows to reduce summer heat loads and permit entry of winter sun; (d) allowing for natural cross ventilation to enable cooling breezes to reduce internal temperatures in summer; (e) including thermal insulation of roof, walls, floors and ceilings and by draught proofing doors,

windows and openings; (f) ensuring light colours are applied to external surfaces that receive a high degree of sun exposure,

but not to an extent that will cause glare which produces discomfort or danger to pedestrians, occupants of adjacent buildings and users of vehicles;

(g) providing an external clothes line for residential development; and (h) use of landscaping.

107 All development should be designed to promote naturally ventilated and day lit buildings to minimise the

need for mechanical ventilation and lighting systems. 108 Energy reductions should, where possible, be achieved by the following:

(a) appropriate orientation of the building by: (i) maximising north/south facing facades; (ii) designing and locating the building so the north facade receives good direct solar radiation; (iii) minimising east/west facades to protect the building from summer sun and winter winds; (iv) narrow floor plates to maximise the amount of floor area receiving good daylight; and/or (v) minimising the ratio of wall surface to floor area.

(b) window orientation and shading; (c) adequate thermal mass including night time purging to cool thermal mass; (d) appropriate insulation by:

(i) insulating windows, walls, floors and roofs; and (ii) sealing of external openings to minimise infiltration.

(e) maximising natural ventilation including the provision of openable windows; (f) appropriate selection of materials, colours and finishes; and (g) introduction of efficient energy use technologies such as geo-exchange and embedded, distributed

energy generation systems such as cogeneration*, wind power, fuel cells and solar photovoltaic panels that supplement the energy needs of the building and in some cases, export surplus energy to the electricity grid.

47

Lucid Consulting Engineers in their report of 17 August 2015 summarise the initiatives for consideration in this development which promote passive design features to reduce building energy consumption beyond the Building Code of Australia ‘Deemed to Satisfy” approach to energy efficiencies leading to further reductions in CO2 emissions. natural ventilation natural daylight external shading structures high performance materials air tightness

In addition to these passive design techniques, the following initiatives are proposed: Optimise the building facade, building fabric performance and passive design of apartments to achieve a

NatHERS FirstRate Energy Rating of at least 5 Stars for each individual apartment and targeting a development average of 6 Stars.

Passive infrared (PIR) motion detection system to activate lighting with manual overrides where appropriate

(i.e. car park level, apartment lobbies, etc).

Low energy luminaires such as fluorescent and LED fittings with energy efficient controls in public and common areas comprising motion sensors, timeclocks and photocells in outdoor applications.

Demand management control of car park ventilation, with fans served by variable speed drives (VSD) and

activated by carbon monoxide (CO) sensor control.

Variable speed drives to reduce energy consumption and peak power associated with mechanical plant such as pumps and fans.

High efficiency lifts with regenerative breaking systems and LED lighting.

In a broader sense, developments of this scale and density assist in the efficient use of land in locations that are well served by existing infrastructure and social services including public transport which assists in reducing reliance on passenger vehicles to the extent that may otherwise be expected in locations further afield. The scale and nature of the proposed use also provides for certain economies of scale in the provision of services to residents. These services may be limited in the first instance to assistance with house keeping through to in home medical care. This latter option becomes increasingly viable given proximity to a range of hospitals.

48

7. CONCLUSION In conclusion, I consider it informative to summarise the key aspects of this proposal and the planning policy framework within which it is to be determined, acknowledging that the assessment is to be undertaken in balanced and objective manner assisted by expert technical advice and objective professional judgment.

this is a large aggregated site of some 5400 m2 which, as a ‘catalyst site’, has a capacity for a robust form of development at a greater scale and intensity than is currently evident on this land and that surrounding;

the strategic intent of the Development Plan clearly anticipates and provides for change in this location with the policy setting not focused on preserving the status quo but rather the ‘transformation’ of the locality;

the achievement of such a development outcome should not in my view be unreasonably constrained by the form and scale of existing buildings (including heritage places) on the land and that adjoining;

it is acknowledged nonetheless, that the scale and form of new development should be respectful and compatible with the heritage character and values of such buildings and that of North Adelaide more generally;

while an important consideration, heritage adjacency is but one element in the assessment of this proposal which must be reconciled with the overarching strategic intent of the Main Street (O’Connell) Zone;

appropriate weight should be given to matters including:

- design quality; - responsive spaces through good urban design; - streetscape character compatibility; - satisfying an identified market need and preference in housing type; - land use compatibility and efficient function; - avoiding, managing and/or mitigating potential off site impacts; and - investment attraction (if not retention) and economic activity;

this is a unique and important landmark site in the boarder Adelaide context that demands a robust and well considered response, reflective of contemporary values and need.

With these considerations in mind, I am of the view that the proposal is an appropriate form of development that generally accords with the relevant provisions of the Development Plan such that warrants Development Plan Consent. To the extent that the proposal departs from certain provisions, no serious planning impacts would arise.

PHILLIP BRUNNING & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD

PHILLIP BRUNNING MPIA Certified Practising Planner

52 brougham place pty ltd 020/a080/15 - dac.sa.gov.au€¦ · description of levels ground floor...

Documents