name of applicant addressdevelopment assessment commission 6 july 2017 3 agenda item 3.2.1 overview...

Development Assessment Commission

6 July 2017

1

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

Name of Applicant

Palumbo Pty Ltd

Address

104-108 Currie Street, Adelaide

Proposal Variation to Development Authorisation 020/0043/13A for deletion of

double skin façade system, other miscellaneous amendments, resolution of reserved matter 1.2 and conditions 4, 6 and 12

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO

AGENDA REPORT 2 - 22

ATTACHMENTS

1: PLANS 23 - 70

2: APPLICATION DOCUMENTS

a. Written summary of submitted documentation

b. Summary of submitted versions of plans

c. Wind Impact Assessment by Vipac Engineers

d. Clarification on Wind Impact Assessment

e. Thermal Assessment of Facades Report by Inhabit

Living Engineering

f. Clarification on Thermal Assessment

g. Waste Management Report

h. Response to Council comments

i. Aeronautical Assessment by Rehbein Airport

Consulting

71 – 75

76 separate attachment

77 – 81

82 – 86

87 – 89

90 – 95

96 – 100

101 - 122

3: PHOTOS OF SITE AND LOCALITY 123 - 125

4: AGENCY COMMENTS

a. Associate Government Architect

b. DIRD Airspace Approval

126 – 128

129 – 131

5: COUNCIL TECHNICAL ADVICE 132 – 134

6: ORIGINAL AUTHORISATION DOCUMENTATION

a. Original DAC Report

b. Original DAC Report- Deferred Item

c. Original DNF

d. Original Authorised Plans

135 – 383

384 – 390

391 – 396

397 – 424

7: DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROVISIONS (Consolidated 24 Sep

2015- former Development Plan)

425 - 453


6 July 2017

2

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1


6 July 2017

3

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

OVERVIEW

Application No 020/0043/13A V1

Unique ID/KNET ID Appian 960 / Knet ID 2016/04190/01

Applicant Palumbo Pty Ltd

Proposal Variation to Development Authorisation 020/0043/13A for

deletion of double skin façade system, other miscellaneous

amendments, resolution of reserved matter 1.2 and conditions

4, 6 and 12

Subject Land 104 - 108 Currie Street, Adelaide

Zone/Policy Area Capital City Zone – Central Business Policy Area 13

Relevant Authority DAC

Lodgement Date 19 February 2016

Council City of Adelaide

Development Plan Adelaide (City) Consolidated 24 Sep 2015

Type of Development Merit

Public Notification Category 1

Representations N/A

Referral Agencies Government Architect, Adelaide Airports Limited

Report Author Tom Victory

RECOMMENDATION Development Plan Consent subject to conditions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The applicant seeks to vary a previously authorised 32 level hotel/residential apartment

building by undertaking a range of internal and external amendments.

The original application was a consent on merit, Category 1 form of development, and so

is this proposed variation.

The amendments proposed have arisen as a result of detailed design, engineering,

security matters, technical requirements of service providers, accommodating apartment

purchaser requirements and facilitating the operating requirements of a potential hotel

operator.

A key assessment matter in the variation proposal relates to the revised architectural

expression and internal occupant amenity resulting from the removal of a previously

proposed ‘double-skin’ on upper portions of the east and west facades.

On balance the proposal is considered to display sufficient merit to warrant Development

Plan Consent subject to conditions. It is further considered that a reserved matter on the

original consent is no longer applicable due to the varied design and can be deleted. In

addition, three outstanding conditions are now considered to be adequately resolved.

ASSESSMENT REPORT

1. BACKGROUND

On 13 February 2014 the Capital City Development Assessment Committee of the

Development Assessment Commission granted Development Plan Consent to

development application 020/0043/13A for the demolition of existing buildings and

construction of a 32 level building with basement and rooftop plant levels for a hotel,

retail and residential use and associated car parking in four stages.


6 July 2017

4

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

That consent has subsequently been granted numerous extensions of time and as such

remains operative. Copies of the original DAC reports, operative Development Plan

Consent and authorised plans are provided in the ATTACHMENTS.

The lodgement date of this variation was well prior to the recent gazettal of the

Ministerial Development Plan Amendment on 30 May 2017. As such the former

consolidation of the Development Plan (24 Sep 2015) is applicable to the assessment of

this variation application as this consolidation was in force at the time of lodgement.

The variation proposal did not go through the DPTI pre-lodgement service, however the

original proposal was subject to an extensive pre-lodgement process culminating in a

Pre-lodgement Agreement with the Government Architect.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The following summarises the key amendments proposed within the variation application:

1. The deletion of a previously proposed ‘double skin’ glazed façade system to

approximately half of the western and eastern facades above level 9 (which

applied to hotel and apartment levels only). To accompany this amendment, the

application includes an amended detailed wind impact assessment report and

thermal assessment report, so as to demonstrate the performance of the revised

building façade in relation to energy efficiency and occupant amenity in the

absence of the originally proposed façade system.

2. Transformer relocated from basement to ground level at the corner of Burnett St

and Solomon St (as agreed with SA Power Networks).

3. Fire booster & tank suction outlets relocated to corner of Currie/Rosina Streets (as

required by SA Metropolitan Fire Service - SAMFS).

4. Amendment to the internal floor layout to ground level entry lobby & porte

cochère.

5. Building height increased due to the addition of a new ballroom level (level 10) &

required shielding of roof services/lift overrun. As a result an amended approval

was sought and received from the relevant Federal Department governing building

heights for airspace safety.

6. Amended layout of central core (re-positioning of residential & hotel lifts, hotel

goods lift, services lift & fire stairwells 1 and 2).

7. Pool & gym facilities relocated to levels 3 & 4……

8. Original transfer & services floor (level 9) replaced by new Level 10 ballroom &

conference level. Services have been relocated to new level 7.5, roof & basement.

9. Residential storage cages relocated throughout carpark & Level 2.

10. A reduction in apartment numbers from 80 to 70 via reconfigurations and

amalgamations of various apartments to suit market preferences.

11. Reduction of car parking.

12. Hotel guest rooms reconfigured as per preferences/requirements of the proposed

hotel operator.

13. Loading dock reconfigured.

14. Hotel bike racks originally located in the porte cochère relocated to an enclosure

off Burnett Street (adjacent to new transformer location).

15. Additional detailed external lighting information, waste management report and

updated recommended wind impact measures being incorporated into the design.

The plans and supporting reports are contained in the ATTACHMENTS.

3. SITE AND LOCALITY


6 July 2017

5

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

3.1 Site Description

The subject land comprises three allotments and is known as 104-108 Currie Street,

Adelaide. The legal descriptors the subject allotments are as follows:

Lot No Section Street Suburb Hundred Title

Reference A557 FP 181399 Currie Adelaide Adelaide 5673/263

A587 FP 181429 Currie Adelaide Adelaide 5353/480

A558 FP 181400 Currie Adelaide Adelaide 5353/439

The subject land is rectangular in shape and is an ‘island site’ with street frontages to all

sides. It has frontages to Currie Street (21.41m), Rosina Street (48.79m), Solomon

Street (21.41m) and Burnett Street (48.83m). The primary frontage for this site is Currie

Street. The site has a total area of 1045m2.

There are two existing commercial buildings on the site. Neither of the buildings are

heritage listed.

The subject land falls approximately 1.8 metres from the south down to the north (to

Solomon Street at the rear).

3.2 Locality

The locality is characterised by mixed uses comprising office, retail, educational (TAFE SA

Adelaide City Campus), car parks, the Nexus Arts Centre and some residential uses.

Currie Street is identified as a secondary City access, with existing pedestrian linkages

through Rosina Street to Hindley Street and is a major public transport route being

defined as an east west boulevard and provides an important entry point into the city.

Building canopies are of varying types that extend beyond the building line and to the

street boundary. There are two local heritage buildings in the broader locality and one

State Heritage building, (the Old Queens Theatre). These buildings are however well

separated from the site.

Directly west is the TAFE SA Adelaide City Campus, a red brick, four storey building. To

the north is an open air car park.

Photographs of the site and locality are contained in the ATTACHMENTS.

4. COUNCIL TECHNICAL ADVICE

The proposal was informally referred to the City of Adelaide for advice on technical

matters such as vehicular access, parking, encroachments, stormwater management and

public realm infrastructure. The advice received outlined:

The pedestrian shelter in the form of a lower level canopy should be retained. If

no canopy is proposed an appropriate wind assessment should be undertaken

(note- the canopy in question has been retained in the final variation plans).

The proposal to locate services (fire booster etc.) at the corner of Currie St

ground floor façade compromises the approved active frontage to the corners of

the primary frontage and will reduce incidental pedestrian sight lines approaching

this footpath corner.


6 July 2017

6

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

The bicycle parking areas in the car park are still inaccessible when vehicles are

parked. Additionally, bicycles parked here would be at risk of damage from motor

vehicles and the car parking spaces would also be compromised by the position of

the bicycles.

The grades in the porte cochere are excessive and are expected to create safety

issues for pedestrians, queuing vehicles and vehicles exiting to Rosina Street.

It is unclear whether the canopies meet the requirements of the encroachment

policy, in particular, where they interact with the roadway. Height clearances

below 5 metres are at risk of being damaged by trucks.

Comments regarding waste arrangements remain as previously outlined.

If temporary hoarding or site works require modification of existing Council and/or

SA Power Network’s public lighting (including associated infrastructure such as

cabling etc) shall meet Councils’ requirements. The works shall be carried out to

meet Councils’ requirements and all costs borne directly by the developer.

All damage to ACC’s infrastructure, including damage to public lighting and u/g

ducting etc caused by projects works or loading of site crane onto pathways will

be repaired to meet Councils requirements and the cost of the developer.

If new canopies are to be constructed as part of these works, then lighting to

meet ACC’s under veranda requirements shall be installed.

Lighting design and installation for obtrusive lighting is to be fully compliant with

Australian Standard - AS 4282 – 1997- Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor

lighting.

There are no lighting related objections to this development, subject to a range of

technical matters being addressed.

There are no storm water related objections to this development, subject to a

number of technical matters being addressed in detailed design.

Applicant’s response to Council comments

The applicant subsequently noted a range of the technical matters outlined for inclusion

in the application and accordingly incorporated these into the final variation plans. Other

matters were considered to relate to external processes to the planning application

process and/or during detailed design following any consent issued. In addition, the

following responses were outlined:

The canopy over Currie Street footpath is being retained and has been reinstated

in the plans.

The location of the fire booster & suction outlets is as per SAMFS requirements.

The bicycle parks have already been approved on the previous submission.

Porte Cochere ramp grades have been amended to comply with AS2890.1. Section

3.3 Gradients of Access Driveways. The drop off area in the middle of the Porte

Cochere has been provided with a slight grade (1:47). This area is specifically for

hotel arrival and departure zone and not a thoroughfare for pedestrian use.

In relation to amended canopy plan A1000, the canopy to the front of the building

over Currie Street footpath has been raised 500mm to be above the required

5.0m clearance.

An appropriate waste management report has been included in the

documentation.

Where appropriate Council’s above technical comments have been included as conditions

of consent or advisory notes.

5. STATUTORY REFERRAL BODY COMMENTS

Referral responses are contained in the ATTACHMENTS.

5.1 Government Architect


6 July 2017

7

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

The Government Architect/Associate Government Architect is a mandatory referral in

accordance with Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations 2008. The Commission

must have regard to this advice. The AGA provided a referral response stating a

range of points that the Commission may like to consider for

clarification/amendment. Of particular note, was the following commentary in the

letter:

Other matters raised in summary related to:

A review of the width of hotel corridors and access to natural light and

ventilation.

Details and material selection to the car park screen and façade treatment to

the lower section of the building from ground floor to level seven.

A high quality of external materials supported by the provision of a materials

samples board.

5.2 Adelaide Airport

Through the Adelaide Airport, the Commonwealth Secretary for the Department of

Transport and Regional Services (now known as the Department for Infrastructure and

Regional Development or DIRD) is also a mandatory referral in accordance with Schedule

8 of the Development Regulations 2008 with power of direction to the Commission.

The applicant has sought and obtained the necessary revised approval for the proposed

varied building height from the DIRD. The variation development application plans match

the height at which Federal approval has been granted. Accordingly Adelaide Airport had

no comment to make on the variation. The revised directed conditions are reflected in

the recommended conditions of consent.

6. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION


6 July 2017

8

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

Both the original application and the variation application are Category 1 applications

pursuant to PDC 36 of the Capital City Zone. Accordingly, no public notification was

required for this variation.

7. POLICY OVERVIEW

The subject site is within the Capital City Zone and the Central Business Policy Area 13 as

described within the City of Adelaide Development Plan Consolidated 24 Sep 2015. The

proposal is neither complying nor non-complying within the Capital City Zone and is

assessed on its merits against the relevant provisions of the Development Plan. Relevant

planning policies are contained in the ATTACHMENTS and summarised below.

7.1 Central Business Policy Area 13

The Central Business Policy Area is the pre-eminent economic, governance and cultural

hub for the State. This role will be supported by educational, hospitality and

entertainment activities and increased opportunities for residential, student and tourist

accommodation.

Buildings will exhibit innovative design approaches and produce stylish and evocative

architecture, including tall and imposing buildings that provide a hard edge to the street

and are of the highest design quality. A wide variety of design outcomes of enduring

appeal are expected. Complementary and harmonious buildings in individual streets will

create localised character and legible differences between streets, founded on the

existing activity focus, building and settlement patterns, and street widths.

It is sought that development be of a high standard of design and external appearance

that integrates with the public realm and that buildings should be of a height that

ensures airport operational safety is not adversely affected.

7.2 Capital City Zone

The Capital City Zone is the economic and cultural focus of the State and includes a

range of employment, community, educational, tourism and entertainment facilities. The

zone encourages a diverse range of land uses with non-residential uses at the ground

floor which encourage a high level of pedestrian activity at the street level, together with

a variety of medium to high scale residential development above.

In summary the desired character and policies for the Capital City Zone seek the

following key outcomes:

High scale development with high street walls that frame the streets

No prescribed height limit (except for Airport height limits) in the locality of the

subject land

Increase in residential densities, ground level activity, employment opportunities

Enhanced pedestrian movement

Active non-residential land uses at ground floor including retail, restaurants, cafés

and licensed premises

Medium to high density residential development at upper levels

A high level of pedestrian amenity and interest, together with activation and

passive surveillance of the public realm

A high standard of architectural design and detailing with quality materials and

finishes to reflect the importance of the zone.


6 July 2017

9

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

7.3 Council Wide

Council Wide provisions provide guidance in relation to achieving high quality

architectural and urban design outcomes, appropriate bulk and scale of buildings, safe

and convenient vehicle movements, appropriate infrastructure provision, appropriate

apartment amenity with regard to private open space, minimum dwelling unit sizes,

access to natural light and ventilation and functional apartment layouts.

Relevant planning policies are included in the ATTACHMENTS.

8. PLANNING ASSESSMENT

The original authorisation was subject to a full detailed assessment against the City of

Adelaide Development Plan. The following assessment will focus only on the variations to

the proposal compared with that previously authorised, against the relevant provisions of

the Development Plan.

8.1 Assessment of Individual Amendments

8.1.1 The deletion of a previously proposed ‘double skin’ glazed façade system

This is considered the most significant change to the proposal in this

variation application.

The original proposal incorporated a glazed second skin which was to

commence above level 9 and run centrally up the facades on the

eastern and western sides of the building. The skin was intended to

minimise solar and wind impacts only to levels containing hotel rooms

and residential apartments. As such the skin was not required to levels

9 and below (which consisted of service, resort, car parking and lobby

areas etc. It featured arrayed glazed elements set off the curtain wall façade with maintenance walkways between the curtain wall and the offset facades.

The skin was deemed to form part of the overall expression of the

building at the time as concluded via Design Review processes and

ultimately the assessment by the Commission. Overall the second skin

was viewed as a positive features by the relevant assessment bodies

and sufficient comfort was felt in issuing a planning consent to the

building with the concept being included. In doing so it was however

considered that more detailed clarification was sought as to the specifics

of how the skin would function and its ultimate appearance once

detailed design had progressed to finalise these matters. This

culminated in the following reserved matter 1.2 being included on the

planning consent issued by the Commission:

1. Pursuant to Section 33 (3) of the Development Act 1993, the

following matters shall be reserved for further assessment, to the

satisfaction of the Development Assessment Commission, prior to

the granting of Development Approval for Stage 2 (Substructure)

of the development:

1.2 Detailed design development and material selection to the

higher level east and west facade double skin system.


6 July 2017

10

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

Following the planning consent being issued, the applicant then

progressed to the detailed design phase as well as more advanced

discussions with the likely hotel operator of the hotel component of the

building. Due to security concerns of occupants scaling the maintenance walkways and gaining access to adjacent balconies, it was ascertained

that the double skin may result in significant security as well as other

maintenance issues. It was subsequently concluded that the façade

system would therefore not be a viable or appropriate feature if the

building were to succeed for its ultimate use and function.

Accordingly the applicant resolved to delete it and revise the design

accordingly. As a result, following extensive discussions with staff of

ODASA and DPTI it was acknowledged that the proposed thermal and

amenity performance of the habitable levels of the building needed to be

re-assessed. It was requested to demonstrate the revised levels of wind

impact to apartments and in particular balconies, as well as how solar

loads are to be appropriately managed, given the extensive glazing of

the facades.

Therefore, to accompany this amendment, the application includes an

amended detailed wind impact assessment report (Vipac Engineers) and

a thermal assessment report (by Inhabit).

The following captures the key findings of the Wind Impact Assessment

report:

The Wind Impact report ultimately concluded that appropriate standards

can be met for residential comfort/safety and for persons on the terrace

area on level 8, subject to the recommendation of 1.8m high

balustrading on level 8. This feature is incorporated in the final plans in

the variation application.

It is noted that the recommendation about educating residents about

controlling loose items on balconies during high wind events cannot

effectively be controlled via the planning system, however an advisory

note is recommended in this regard.


6 July 2017

11

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

The thermal report undertook an assessment against relevant technical standards to review all residential apartments on each floor and ensure each apartment exceeded the minimum 5 stars requirement under the relevant standards. The assessment of the apartments achieved a range in performance between 5.2-7.3 stars. With the exception of the 2 worst case apartments, which are in the south-west stack, all other apartments on each floor are greater than 6 stars, achieving an average of 6 stars. In summary the report concluded:

The solar loads to apartments based on the deletion of the double skin will still be within acceptable limits with typically procurable facades systems to achieve compliance. It is noted that similar performance targets for similar developments have been adhered to without the additional double skin feature. Based on the outcomes of the assessment and experience in delivering façade design with similar performance targets it is confirmed that the façade systems will achieve compliance with the removal of the double skin system.

In relation to all of the above, whilst it is unfortunate that the double

skin facade concept outlined in the original authorisation has been

deleted, it is considered that the applicant has provided acceptable

justification as to its removal and that the building will nonetheless

demonstrate appropriate performance in relation to amenity and safety.

Whilst it is also noted that the architectural expression has also

changed, on balance, the amendment would not be considered to be of

a magnitude that would be fatal to the merit of the proposal as a whole.

The varied building design is considered to acceptably address the

following relevant provisions:

Central Business Policy Area 13 - Objective 2

Capital City Zone - Objectives 4, 5 and 7 and PDCs 6, 7, 13 and 14

Council Wide – Objectives 22, 30, 33, 34, 46, 47 and 48 and PDCs 50,

53, 56, 62, 73, 106, 107, 108, 113, 114, 119, 120, 122, 125, 167, 168,

169, 179, 180, 181, 186, 187, 188 and 189

8.1.2 Transformer relocated from basement to ground level at the corner of

Burnett St and Solomon St

Detailed design discussions with SA Power Networks has resulted in the

need for this amendment for various technical requirements. The

following comments from the AGA are noted in relation to this

amendment:


6 July 2017

12

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

The above comments are generally concurred with and as such no

concern is raised regarding this proposed amendment.

8.1.3 Fire booster & tank suction outlets relocated to corner of Currie/Rosina

Streets.

The applicant has stated that this amendment has resulted from detailed

discussions with the SAMFS to accommodate emergency fire

infrastructure in an appropriate location to suit their requirements.

Whilst this does result in a slight impact of the appearance of this corner

of the building when viewed from the public realm, it is considered

minor and the applicant has sought to minimise this impact where

possible. The matter is difficult to avoid due to the importance of

locating the infrastructure in an accessible location to ensure fire safety

of the building.

The application is still considered to appropriately address relevant

provisions in relation to public realm activation and streetscape

appearance.

8.1.4 Amendment to the internal floor layout to ground level entry lobby &

porte cochère

The applicant has provided detailed internal drawings and indicative

imagery of the design intent for the revised layout of the ground floor to

demonstrate a high quality and functional layout for this space. The AGA

did however suggest that the entrance space from Currie Street could

be more generous in size so as not to compromise the sense of arrival

for guests to the bar, restaurant and conference facilities entering from

Currie Street (as opposed to when entering from the main hotel

entrance through the Porte Cochere).

As noted by the AGA the amendments do not affect the building form or

the architectural expression and therefore do not raise any significant

concern. This point of view is generally concurred with and relevant

provisions are generally considered to be met.

8.1.5 Building height increase

The overall height of the building is proposed to increase from the

originally authorised height of 110.25m to 117m. This is due to an

additional ballroom level (with 5.5m floor to floor height) being added

and also additional shielding of roof services/lift overrun which has

arisen through detailed design.


6 July 2017

13

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

No concern is held in relation to this amendment noting that, the

screening of roof plant is considered an improvement, the site is within

an unlimited height area within the Capital City Zone and that the

proponent has obtained the necessary approval from the Federal

Department in relation to air navigational safety and airport building

heights. It is noted that the AGA supports the increased height as it

does not affect the overall architectural expression.

The proposal accords with Capital City Zone PDC 19 and Council Wide

PDCs 168 to 171.

8.1.6 Amended layout of central core (re-positioning of residential & hotel

lifts, hotel goods lift, services lift & fire stairwells 1 and 2)

It is noted that engineering requirements and detailed design has

necessitated a revision of the internal lift layout and central core

generally. It is considered that no planning issues of significance has

arisen from these amendments.

It is however noted that, in relation to the hotel levels, the AGA has

raised concern with a lack of natural light and ventilation and general

lack of width for the public corridors which lead from the lifts to the

hotel rooms on these levels. Whilst this is generally concurred with in

principle, it is however also noted that these corridors are only within

the hotel component of the building which will only accommodate short

term guests. This balanced, with the significant indoor and outdoor

entertaining and communal areas available to hotel guests, it is

considered on balance that it should not result in an overall detrimental

experience for hotel guests.

It is noted that the Development Plan does not contain the same

detailed policies for amenity for hotel uses as it does for residential

apartments. General provisions about appropriate light and ventilation

are still considered to be met when viewing the building as a whole.

8.1.7 Pool & gym facilities relocated to levels 3 & 4

No planning concerns of significance are identified with this amendment.

8.1.8 Original transfer & services floor (level 9) replaced by new Level 10

Ballroom & Conference level. Services have been relocated to new level

7.5, roof & basement. Residential storage cages relocated throughout

carpark & Level 2

No planning concerns of significance are identified with this amendment.

8.1.9 A reduction in apartment numbers from 80 to 70 via reconfigurations

and amalgamations of various apartments

No concern is held with this amendment noting that the overall intensity

of the development should be decreased and accordingly car parking

and vehicle movement numbers also should decrease. The amendments

are internal in nature and should not affect the overall expression of the

building.

8.1.10 Reduction of car parking


6 July 2017

14

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

This amendment is generally supported given that the Capital City Zone

does not specify a minimum parking ratio and in fact generally promotes

use of alternative modes of transport than private vehicles.

8.1.11 Hotel guest rooms reconfigured as per preferences/requirements of the

proposed hotel operator

No concern is held with this amendment given the Development Plan

does not stipulate detailed assessment guidelines in relation to hotel

rooms. The rooms are all considered to be of an appropriate size and of

a functional arrangement with natural light opportunities throughout. A

greater diversity in sizes and options are now proposed compared to the

previously authorised layouts. Relevant provisions are considered to be

met. Comments regarding the internal corridors on hotel levels are

discussed earlier.

8.1.12 Loading dock reconfigured

Minor amendments only. No planning issues identified.

8.1.13 Hotel bike racks originally located in the porte cochère relocated to an

enclosure off Burnet Street (adjacent to new transformer location).

This amendment relates only to hotel guest bicycle parking which

operates via a concierge service. Accordingly no concern is raised as the

hotel staff are responsible for transferring bicycles to and from the

storage area and bicycle usage for hotel guests is also expected to be

relatively low.

Remaining Reserved Matter

The following reserved matter is still considered to be outstanding, noting that the

AGA response letter stated that additional information in this respect is still sought:

Pursuant to Section 33 (3) of the Development Act 1993, the following matters shall

be reserved for further assessment, to the satisfaction of the Development

Assessment Commission, prior to the granting of Development Approval for Stage 2

(Substructure) of the development:

1.1 Detailed design development and material selection to the car park

screening and facade treatment to the lower section of the building.

It is however considered appropriate that this reserved matter can suitably be

converted to a condition to be consistent with other consents recently issued by the

Commission where similar matters have arisen. The recommended wording of this

condition is to be as follows:

Prior to commencement of superstructure works, the applicant shall submit a

final detailed schedule and samples of external materials and finishes for the

screening of the carparking levels for review in consultation with the Associate

Government Architect to the reasonable satisfaction of the Development

Assessment Commission.

Other Outstanding Conditions


6 July 2017

15

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

The following conditions of consent on the original authorisation required further

actions to be undertaken by the applicant:

4. The recommendations of the wind assessment contained in the report by TMK

Consulting Engineers shall be adopted in the final design of the Level 7

terrace.

6. A lighting plan for all external lighting of the building and the areas around the

building (if any) be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development

Assessment Commission prior to granting Development Approval for Stage 2

(substructure) of the development.

12. Final details of waste management practices shall be prepared in consultation

with the Adelaide City Council. These details shall include a Waste

Management Plan which covers the two phases of the development.

Waste minimisation and resource recovery during construction; and

Resource recovery during use (office paper and staff kitchen recycling

facilities).

A subsequent Waste Management Plan shall be undertaken in accordance

with the approved plan.

In relation to Condition 4, the recommendations in the original wind report have

already been incorporated into the variation proposal (along with new

recommendations outlined in the Vipac Report commissioned for the variation).

Accordingly, the condition is therefore accordingly addressed.

In relation to Condition 6, lighting plans have been submitted in the variation

application which demonstrate an appropriate design intent and outcome.

Accordingly, the condition is therefore accordingly addressed. Other conditions are

still to be attached to ensure such lighting accords with relevant technical thresholds

as advised by Council.

An appropriate waste management Plan has been submitted based upon Council

standard guidelines which is considered to suitably address Condition 12.

It is considered that these have all now adequately been addressed by the amended

proposal, updated plans and additional documentation provided in the variation

application. Accordingly, it is proposed that these conditions are now resolved and do

not need to be repeated in the list of conditions for the variation decision. In addition

to this a number of other conditions have been updated to reflect more recent

wording in DAC’s standard conditions which has arisen since the original authorisation

was granted, to ensure consistency. Also, many of Council’s technical comments have

been attached as additional conditions and/or advisory notes where appropriate.

9. CONCLUSION

It is generally considered commonplace for a development of this scale and complexity to

experience a progression of minor amendments as detailed design progresses in relation

to matters such as adhering to service authority requirements and incorporating more

detailed engineering requirements as they become known.


6 July 2017

16

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

Whilst the most significant amendment proposed in the variation involving the deletion of

a double skin glazed façade system is unfortunate, it is however considered that the

applicant has provided detailed justification as to why this concept from the original

design is not reasonable practical/viable. In relation to this amendment, the applicant

has provided additional detailed justification as to the overall performance of the building

and its revised architectural expression to demonstrate that the proposal will still result

in a high level of amenity and overall architectural merit when viewed as a whole.

Given the façade system is no longer proposed, previous reserved matter 1.2 would no

longer be applicable (in the event the Commission authorises this variation).

A range of other miscellaneous amendments are proposed, which are of a nature which

are not considered to raise any planning issues of significance and should be of little

consequence to the overall building and merits of the development as a whole. In some

instances these amendments bring the design into closer conformity with Development

Plan provisions than that previously authorised.

On balance, the proposed variation is considered to sufficiently accord with the relevant

Development Plan provisions and warrants consent.

10. 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 generally accords with the relevant Objectives and Principles of

Development Control of the City of Adelaide Development Plan.

3) RESOLVE to grant Development Plan Consent to the proposal by Palumbo Pty Ltd

for a variation to Development Authorisation 020/0043/13A for the deletion of a

double skin façade system, other miscellaneous amendments, resolution of

reserved matter 1.2 and conditions 4, 6 and 12 at 104-108 Currie Street, Adelaide

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 020/0043/13A V1:

Plans by Palumbo Pty Ltd - Job No. 12PR14-N

Drawing Number Drawing Title Revision

Sheet A00 Title Page D

Sheet A0300 Basement Level Plan C

Sheet A0301 Ground Floor Plan C

Sheet A0302 Mezzanine Level Plan C

Sheet A0303 Level 0.5 Floor Plan C

Sheet A0304 Level 1 Carpark/Hotel Office Plan C

Sheet A0305 Level 2 Carpark/BOH C

Sheet A0306 Level 3 Carpark/Pool C


6 July 2017

17

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

Sheet A0307 Level 4 Carpark/Gym C

Sheet A0308 Level 5 Carpark/Hotel C



Sheet A0311 Level 7.5 Plant Room/Storage C

Sheet A0312 Level 8 Restaurant C

Sheet A0313 Level 9 Club Lounge C

Sheet A0314 Level 10 Ballroom/Conference C

Sheet A0315 Levels 11-22 Typical Hotel Floor Plan C

Sheet A0319 Level 23 Hotel guestroom floor plan C

Sheet A0320 Level 24 Hotel guestroom floor plan C

Sheet A0321 Level 25 Residential apartment level

floor plan E


floor plan A


floor plan A


floor plan A


floor plan C


floor plan A


floor plan A


floor plan A

Sheet A0329 Level 33 Roof Plant level floor plan C

Sheet A0330 Level 33 Roof Plan A

Sheet A0500 East Elevation C

Sheet A0501 West Elevation D

Sheet A0502 North & South Elevation. Rev C – No

change C

Sheet A0503 Burnett & Solomon Street Elevations &

Perspectives C

Sheets A0600 to A0607 (8

x sheets)

Building Sections A to K A

Sheet A1000 Canopy Plan A

Sheet C0002 Porte Cochere Concept Plan A

Sheet C0005 External Façade Lighting Concept Perspectives

B

Sheet C0006 External Façade Lighting Concept

Elevations B

Reports and Correspondence

- Vipac Report dated 6/4/17 – Wind Impact Assessment - Façade effects & pedestrian comfort.

- Inhabit Report dated 07/05/17 - Thermal Assessment of Facades – 4536-CAN-

FC0002 [01]


6 July 2017

18

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

2. Prior to commencement of superstructure works, the applicant shall submit a final

detailed schedule and samples of external materials and finishes for the screening of

the carparking levels for review in consultation with the Associate Government

Architect to the reasonable satisfaction of the Development Assessment Commission.

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

implemented in accordance with current industry standards – including the EPA

publications “Handbook for Pollution Avoidance on Commercial and Residential

Building Sites – Second Edition” and, where applicable, “Environmental Management

of On-site Remediation” – to minimise environmental harm and disturbance during

construction.

4. All stormwater design and construction shall be in accordance with Australian

Standard AS/NZS 3500.3:2015 (Part 3) to ensure that stormwater does not

adversely affect any adjoining property or public road.

5. Stormwater runoff from the proposed commercial development must be retained

within the property boundaries, collected and discharged to the Currie Street road

reserve.

6. Collected ground seepage water in the basement must not be discharged to the

building stormwater disposal system. Ground seepage water should be discharged to

either sewer or a water reuse system.

7. Lighting shall be installed in accordance with Council’s guideline entitled “Under

Verandah/Awning Lighting Guidelines” at all times to the reasonable satisfaction of

the Adelaide City Council and prior to the occupation or use of the Development.

Such lighting shall be operational during the hours of darkness at all times to the

reasonable satisfaction of the Development Assessment Commission. All

modifications required to Adelaide City Council’s public lighting and associated

infrastructure shall meet Councils’ requirements and all costs associated with these

works will be borne directly by the developer.

8. All vehicle car parks, driveways and vehicle entry and manoeuvring areas shall be

designed and constructed in accordance with Australian Standards (AS/NZS

2890.1:2004 and AS/NZS 2890.6.2009) and be constructed, drained and paved with

bitumen, concrete or paving bricks in accordance with sound engineering practice

and appropriately line marked to the reasonable satisfaction of the Development

Assessment Commission prior to the occupation or use of the development.

9. Proposed boundary levels for the Porte Cochere entrances (Rosina Street and Burnett

Street) and carpark entrance (Burnett Street) must be designed to provide adequate

freeboard flood protection to the 100 year ARI rainfall event.

10. All bicycle parks shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Australian

Standard 2890.3-2015.

11. Council maintained infrastructure that is removed or damaged during construction

works shall be reinstated to Council specifications. All costs associated with these

works shall be met by the proponent.


6 July 2017

19

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

12. Prior to the commencement of construction a dilapidation report (i.e. condition

survey) shall be prepared by a qualified engineer to ensure the stability and

protection of adjoining buildings, structures and Council assets. A copy of this report

shall be provided to the Adelaide City Council.

13. The waste and general storage and service/operational areas shall be kept in a neat,

tidy, safe and healthy condition at all times.

14. All trade waste and other rubbish shall be stored in covered containers prior to

removal and shall be kept screened from public view.

15. The development and the site shall be maintained in a serviceable condition and

operated in an orderly and tidy manner at all times. 16. The building must not exceed a maximum height of 158.8 metres AHD, inclusive of

all lift over-runs, vents, chimneys, aerials, antennas, construction cranes, lightning

rods, any roof top gardens plantings, exhaust flues, etc.

17. The vertical exhaust plume to a velocity in excess of 4.3 m/s from the building must

not exceed a maximum height of 162.6 metres AHD.

18. The building must be obstacle lit by low intensity steady red lighting during the hours

of darkness at the highest point of the building. Obstacle lights are to be arranged to

ensure the building can be observed in a 360 degree radius as per subsection 9.4.3 of

the Manual of Standards Part 139 – Aerodromes (MOS Part 139). Characteristics for

low intensity lights are stated in subsection 9.4.6 of MOS Part 139.

19. The building must ensure obstacle lighting arrangements have a remote monitoring

capability, in lieu of observation every 24 hours, to alert AAL reporting staff of any

outage. For detailed requirements for obstacle monitoring within the OLS of an

aerodrome, refer to subsection 9.4.10 of the MOS Part 139.

20. The proponent must ensure obstacle lighting is maintained in serviceable condition and

any outage immediately reported to AAL.

21. Separate approval must be sought under the Regulations for any cranes required to

construct the building. Construction cranes may be required to operate at a height

significantly higher than that of the proposed controlled activity and consequently,

may not be approved under the Regulations.

Advisory Notes:

a) This approval does not include approval for the external signage shown

indicatively on the plans referred to in condition 1. All external signage will

require further approval under the Development Act 1993.

b) The applicant is reminded of its general environmental duty, as required by

Section 25 of the Environment Protection Act 1993, to take all reasonable and

practical measures to ensure that the activities on the whole site, including

during construction, do not pollute the environment in a way which causes or

may cause environmental harm.

c) Any information sheets, guidelines documents, codes of practice, technical

bulletins etc. that are referenced in this response can be accessed on the

following web site: http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/pub.html

http://www.epa.sa.gov.au/pub.html


6 July 2017

20

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

d) The applicant must ensure there is no objection from any of the public utilities in

respect of underground or overhead services and any alterations that may be

required are to be at the applicant’s expense.

e) The emission of noise from the premises is subject to control under the

Environment Protection Act and Regulations, 1993 and the applicant (or person

with the benefit of this consent) should comply with those requirements.

f) The development must be substantially commenced within two (2) years of the

date of the original Development Authorisation Notification, unless this period

has been extended by the Development Assessment Commission.

g) You are also advised that any act or work authorised or required by this

Notification must be completed within four (4) years of the date of the original

Authorisation Notification (plus any extension given by the Commission).

h) You will require a fresh consent before commencing or continuing the

development if you are unable to satisfy these requirements.

i) You have a right of appeal against the conditions which have been imposed on

this Development Plan Consent or Development Approval. Such an appeal must

be lodged at the Environment, Resources and Development Court within two

months of the day on which you receive this notice or such longer time as the

Court may allow. Please contact the Court if you wish to appeal. The Court is

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

number 8204 0289).

j) As outlined in the Vipac Report dated 6/4/17 – Wind Impact Assessment -

Façade effects & pedestrian comfort, it is recommended that a management plan

be adopted in the development in regards to ensuring occupants are informed

and adhere to methods of ensuring loose furniture or other items on balconies

are appropriately tied down, to minimise adverse safety concerns during high

wind events.

Council advisory notes

k) A Building Site Management Plan is required prior to construction work beginning

on site. The Building Site Management Plan should include details of such items

as:

Work in the Public Realm

Street Occupation

Hoarding

Site Amenities

Traffic Requirements

Servicing Site

Adjoining Buildings

Reinstatement of Infrastructure

l) Insecure building sites have been identified as a soft target for vandalism and

theft of general building materials. The Adelaide Local Service Area Police and

the Adelaide City Council are working together to help improve security at

building sites. Items most commonly stolen or damaged are tools, water

heaters and white goods. To minimise the risk of theft and damage, consider

co-ordinating the delivery and installation of the goods on the same day. Work


6 July 2017

21

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

with your builder to secure the site with a fence and lockable gate. Securing the

site is essential to prevent unauthorised vehicle access and establishes clear

ownership. If you have any further enquiries about ways to reduce building site

theft, please do not hesitate to contact the Adelaide Local Service Area

Community Programs Section on 8463 7024. Alternatively, you can contact

Adelaide City Council for further assistance and information by calling Nick Nash

on 8203 7562.

m) Pursuant to Regulation 74, the Council must be given one business day's notice

of the commencement and the completion of each stage of the building work on

the site. To notify Council, contact City Services on 8203 7332.

n) If temporary hoarding or site works require modification of existing Council

infrastructure, the works will be carried out to meet Councils requirements and

costs borne directly by the developer.

o) All damage to Adelaide City Council’s infrastructure, including damage to public

lighting and underground ducting caused by projects works or loading of site

crane onto pathways will be repaired to meet Councils requirements and the cost

of the developer.

p) The ‘No Standing Hotel Loading Only’ zone and ‘New Coach Bus Parking’ zone

shown on the Ground Floor Plan are subject to permission/consultation with

Adelaide City Council.

q) Approval will be required from the Adelaide City Council for any encroachment

over public space prior to the commencement of any construction of the

encroachment.

r) If temporary hoarding or site works require modification of existing Council

and/or SA Power Network’s public lighting (including associated infrastructure

such as cabling etc) shall meet Councils’ requirements. The works shall be

carried out to meet Councils’ requirements and all costs borne directly by the

developer.

s) All modifications requiring temporary removal/relocation/provision of temporary

lighting/reinstatement of existing Council and/or SA Power Network’s public

lighting (including associated infrastructure such as cabling etc) shall meet

Councils’ requirements. The works shall be carried out to meet Councils’

requirements and all costs borne directly by the developer.

t) All damage to ACC’s infrastructure, including damage to public lighting and u/g

ducting etc caused by projects works or loading of site crane onto pathways will

be repaired to meet Councils requirements and the cost of the developer.

u) Obtrusive Lighting – Lighting design and installation is to be fully compliant with

Australian Standard - AS 4282 – 1997 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor

lighting. Sign off by consultant is required to confirm compliance. The applicant

should provide relevant lighting calculation grid detailing property boundary lines

for Councils record. If concerns are raised by nearby residents or Council to the


6 July 2017

22

AGENDA ITEM 3.2.1

new lighting, the development shall address and resolve them to the satisfaction

of the relevant parties.

v) The proposed development works will impact on the public lighting within the

proximity of the development site.

o Currie Street – the existing street lighting is owned and maintained by

Council and consists of a lighting column with outreach and street light and

associated electrical u/g cabling/pits; a Wifi unit is also installed on the

lighting outreach that is owned and maintained by Internode. Internode

will need to be contacted to arrange relocation if required to meet their

requirements.

o Burnett Street - the existing street lighting consists of a Council wall

mounted light and associated electrical u/g cable and pit near the Currie

Street end of the street, and the remaining street lighting installed is

owned and maintained by SA Power Networks and consists of wall mounted

lighting and overhead catenary electrical cabling.

o Soloman Street – the existing street lighting is owned and maintained by

SA Power Networks and consists of a stobie column with light attached with

overhead catenary electrical cabling.

o Rosina Street – the existing street lighting is owned and maintained by SA

Power Networks and consists of lighting columns with street lights attached

and associated u/g electrical cabling/pits.

Tom Victory

Principal Planner, CBD and Inner Metro Team

DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, TRANSPORT and INFRASTRUCTURE

name of applicant addressdevelopment assessment commission 6 july 2017 3 agenda item 3.2.1 overview...

Documents