The HWCV made a submission on DA 12/2253 : 39-41 Hawke St, Huskisson - copy below - on 30 January 2013
Update on 15 July 2013 - after consideration, Council sent the DA back to the applicant, as various shortcomings needed to be addressed. Since then, properties 39 and 41 Hawke St have been placed on the market, For Sale - offers above $400,000. The properties have been sold. Update 4 December 2013 - Council has formally refused the DA, see their letter at right >> HWCV Submission: General Manager Shoalhaven City Council PO Box 42 NOWRA NSW 2541 Dear Sir, DA12/2253 : 39-41 Hawke St, Huskisson - medium density development the simple expedient of having an opinion on development applications in Huskisson seems to have spawned a vested interest lobby with an enduring enmity towards the HWCV, and none too squeamish on methods. DA12/2253 provides the latest opportunity for Huskisson residents to be characterized as ‘anti-development’ and ‘Greenies’. How fortunate for us, that behind the scenes, the Mayor and her team are such staunch defenders of the HWCV and all CCBs. The HWCV expects urban consolidation re-development in proximity to the village centre, and welcomes it. That doesn’t mean we should refrain from commenting on the planning merits of individual proposals. As residents, we have a pretty good handle on what visitors to Huskisson want. |
Timing of this application less than optimal
• exhibition of this DA is taking place during January school holidays, a hot summer, and severe bushfire season.
• a recent call to Council revealed the usual Senior Planner for Huskisson is on holidays
• the HWCV like most CCBs, doesn’t meet during January.
• DA exhibition should at minimum, be extended until the end of February to give neighbours and community a realistic opportunity to comment.
• Strictly speaking, Council should defer assessment of this DA until after SLEP2009 is re-exhibited.
DA12/2253 will result in a significant change in the character of Huskisson
With three storeys plus a rooftop entertainment deck, there are realistically four stories of amenity impacts, particularly at key times such as New Years Eve and Australia Day. It will be visually and acoustically prominent in the immediate neighbourhood and beyond.
Statement of Environmental Effects is misleading
• “Visually Prominent within the existing landscape - No” - this claim is false.
• Introduction: "The proposal is permissible under the planning provisions that apply to the land..” - this claim is false. The site is currently zoned for two storeys under the SLEP1985 and DCP71 Medium Density Housing applies here. More on this in section below.
• “Will proposal affect the amenity of surrounding residences by overshadowing, loss of privacy, increased noise and vibration? -Yes” - this admission by the applicant is at least correct
DA12/2253 doesn’t conform to current planning framework
• Draft Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan 2009 (SLEP2009) is not finalized, there will be a re-exhibition during autumn 2013. The local community has consistently stated that a like-for-like transfer of zones should see R3 Medium Density zones (existing 2(b)2) retained at two-storey unless with Council consent.
• The proponent admits overshadowing but attempts to justify this by speculating that neighbours will later on want to develop too – but what if they don’t?
• A general SLEP2009 issue is that draft 3-storeys (11.0m) within R3 draft Medium Density zone exceeds the controls within NSW Coastal Design Guidelines 2003 for a coastal village of less than 3,000 permanent residents (Huskisson has closer to 800 residents). Under the CDG, which inform SEPP71, two storeys is the appropriate maximum for residential areas surrounding the village centre. Even if Huskisson were a Town in size, the CDGs say '..generally heights of two storeys in suburban areas..'.
• Medium Density zones are conditioned by DCP71 Medium Density Housing, which specifies a building envelope of max height 8.5m. Shoalhaven City Council (1990) Policy to Control Building Height and Amenity in Residential Areas, further elaborates upon Siting/Overshadowing/Privacy/Overlooking. For solar access, this policy also specifies the period between 9:00am and 3:00pm as an accepted measure of reasonable solar access.
• DA12/2253 conflicts with the objectives of Zone R3 under draft SLEP2009, i.e. “To provide opportunities for the development of tourist and visitor accommodation, where this does not conflict with the residential environment”, and “To provide for dwelling houses that form an integral part of medium density development and maintain and enhance the residential amenity of the street”. DA12/2253 exceeds two-storeys in height, and would conflict with the existing residential environment, and also would not maintain or enhance the residential amenity of the street.
Unnamed laneway subject to intensification of useage
The ‘night cart’ lanes in Huskisson were intended for utility purposes, not as exploitable traffic thoroughfares of convenience. This is in itself a significant amenity impact of DA12/2253 upon the neighbours, given the proposed intensified use of the lane between Bowen & Nowra Streets.
Future management of the development - ‘Schoolies Mothership’ (sic)
With the mix of 2BR and 1BR apartments, and proximity to the delights of the village centre, the development has potential (in the wrong Landlords hands) to become a ‘Schoolies Mothership’ (sic). We ask both the proponent and Council, to closely to consider the future management of these apartments.
Huskisson R3 Medium Density zones – review needed
The HWCV strongly recommends an immediate review of Huskisson R3 Medium Density zones under draft SLEP2009. Three to four storey structures such as proposed by DA12/2253 should not be allowed to march throughout the centre of Huskisson, as this would be a significant impact on the residential amenity and character of the village. There is nothing new here, it has been the repeated entreaty (a minority of noisy, and mostly outside of Huskisson ,vested interests aside) by residents to Council.
Yours sincerely,
Garry Kelson
Chair
Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice Inc.
30 January 2013
• exhibition of this DA is taking place during January school holidays, a hot summer, and severe bushfire season.
• a recent call to Council revealed the usual Senior Planner for Huskisson is on holidays
• the HWCV like most CCBs, doesn’t meet during January.
• DA exhibition should at minimum, be extended until the end of February to give neighbours and community a realistic opportunity to comment.
• Strictly speaking, Council should defer assessment of this DA until after SLEP2009 is re-exhibited.
DA12/2253 will result in a significant change in the character of Huskisson
With three storeys plus a rooftop entertainment deck, there are realistically four stories of amenity impacts, particularly at key times such as New Years Eve and Australia Day. It will be visually and acoustically prominent in the immediate neighbourhood and beyond.
Statement of Environmental Effects is misleading
• “Visually Prominent within the existing landscape - No” - this claim is false.
• Introduction: "The proposal is permissible under the planning provisions that apply to the land..” - this claim is false. The site is currently zoned for two storeys under the SLEP1985 and DCP71 Medium Density Housing applies here. More on this in section below.
• “Will proposal affect the amenity of surrounding residences by overshadowing, loss of privacy, increased noise and vibration? -Yes” - this admission by the applicant is at least correct
DA12/2253 doesn’t conform to current planning framework
• Draft Shoalhaven Local Environment Plan 2009 (SLEP2009) is not finalized, there will be a re-exhibition during autumn 2013. The local community has consistently stated that a like-for-like transfer of zones should see R3 Medium Density zones (existing 2(b)2) retained at two-storey unless with Council consent.
• The proponent admits overshadowing but attempts to justify this by speculating that neighbours will later on want to develop too – but what if they don’t?
• A general SLEP2009 issue is that draft 3-storeys (11.0m) within R3 draft Medium Density zone exceeds the controls within NSW Coastal Design Guidelines 2003 for a coastal village of less than 3,000 permanent residents (Huskisson has closer to 800 residents). Under the CDG, which inform SEPP71, two storeys is the appropriate maximum for residential areas surrounding the village centre. Even if Huskisson were a Town in size, the CDGs say '..generally heights of two storeys in suburban areas..'.
• Medium Density zones are conditioned by DCP71 Medium Density Housing, which specifies a building envelope of max height 8.5m. Shoalhaven City Council (1990) Policy to Control Building Height and Amenity in Residential Areas, further elaborates upon Siting/Overshadowing/Privacy/Overlooking. For solar access, this policy also specifies the period between 9:00am and 3:00pm as an accepted measure of reasonable solar access.
• DA12/2253 conflicts with the objectives of Zone R3 under draft SLEP2009, i.e. “To provide opportunities for the development of tourist and visitor accommodation, where this does not conflict with the residential environment”, and “To provide for dwelling houses that form an integral part of medium density development and maintain and enhance the residential amenity of the street”. DA12/2253 exceeds two-storeys in height, and would conflict with the existing residential environment, and also would not maintain or enhance the residential amenity of the street.
Unnamed laneway subject to intensification of useage
The ‘night cart’ lanes in Huskisson were intended for utility purposes, not as exploitable traffic thoroughfares of convenience. This is in itself a significant amenity impact of DA12/2253 upon the neighbours, given the proposed intensified use of the lane between Bowen & Nowra Streets.
Future management of the development - ‘Schoolies Mothership’ (sic)
With the mix of 2BR and 1BR apartments, and proximity to the delights of the village centre, the development has potential (in the wrong Landlords hands) to become a ‘Schoolies Mothership’ (sic). We ask both the proponent and Council, to closely to consider the future management of these apartments.
Huskisson R3 Medium Density zones – review needed
The HWCV strongly recommends an immediate review of Huskisson R3 Medium Density zones under draft SLEP2009. Three to four storey structures such as proposed by DA12/2253 should not be allowed to march throughout the centre of Huskisson, as this would be a significant impact on the residential amenity and character of the village. There is nothing new here, it has been the repeated entreaty (a minority of noisy, and mostly outside of Huskisson ,vested interests aside) by residents to Council.
Yours sincerely,
Garry Kelson
Chair
Huskisson Woollamia Community Voice Inc.
30 January 2013