Hi Everyone,
Below is draft content for a submission to Hunters Hill Council. You might wish to copy some, all, or none of it – as you please. Please just make a submission to council@
**
I do not support the Planning Proposal including an ADDITIONAL increase in the number of flats to be built on the Gladesville Shopping ‘Village’ (key site), by increasing the applicable Floor Space Ratio, beyond the existing zoning.
I do not support an amendment to Hunters Hill Council’s Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to increase the Floor-space-ratio (FSR) applicable to the ‘key site’.
I do not support the proposed relocation of the heritage listed timber cottage at 10 Cowell Street to a remote location. I support retention of the heritage listed timber cottage in its present location as part of a redevelopment exhibiting architectural merit, or relocation to a site very near to its current location.
I do support Hunters Hill Council introducing a requirement for Design Excellence into the LEP, but this should NOT lead to additional FSR.
I do support Hunters Hill Council introducing requirements for open space for public benefit, but this should NOT lead to additional FSR.
Any bonus available in the LEP should be limited only to Height, with no concession on FSR and any bonus available in Height must be conditional upon delivering the proposed open space requirement is introduced into the LEP. Any bonus available in the LEP should be limited only to Height and not available to FSR, and only be available if Design Excellence is achieved – as determined under a robust assessment (criteria no lower than the threshhold set in the draft motion). Where required to deliver design excellence and a significant increase in open space available for public benefit, a higher Height control to facilitate optimal organisation of the site should be available.
The criteria for achieving Design Excellence should be extended to require the architectural integration of the heritage listed timber cottage at 10 Cowell Street into the design of the redevelopment, in its current location.
No increase in FSR should be permitted.
I do not believe that further increasing the number of flats to be built in this area of concentrated development is responsible. I do not believe that the proposed increase in open space or design excellence can mitigate the detrimental impact of the additional development that is proposed. I do not believe that the additional open space or design excellence within the ‘key site’ will mitigate the adverse impacts on parking, traffic flows, pedestrian safety, additional demand on local services and infrastructure, or the linkage between the Gladesville retail and commercial ‘high street’ on Victoria Road and that of the insular development on the ‘key site’ being Gladesville Shopping Village.
Victoria Road is the boundary by which Gladesville is divided between the Local Government Areas of Hunters Hill Council and Ryde Council, and has been an area of concentration of additional dwellings allowed under both Councils’ LEP’s. The Community has not seen a combined report on traffic management for the suburb that is informed by the increased population that inevitably will arise from the Height and FSR controls which now apply along Victoria Road and other sites in Gladesville. Other sites in Gladesville are already being developed, increasing the population and resultant demand on services and infrastructure, and I am concerned about the impact on traffic and parking – which is relevant to the residents and to the business community alike. Increasing the FSR and the number of flats on this site will exacerbate the problems which will arise from demand exceeding capacity.
The ‘key site’ already has generous Height and FSR controls that apply to it, by far the highest in the entire Hunters Hill Municipality. The existing controls will allow the construction of approximately 180 flats on this one site alone. There are other developments on Victoria Road which are creating 5-6 storey developments with shop-top housing, that use rear lane access adjacent to the ‘key site’.
The planning proposal would be estimated to permit up to 100 additional flats on this one site alone. Any amendment to the LEP must not permit an increase in flats by increasing the FSR. Any amendment to the LEP must introduce the proposed requirement for open space, must require design excellence, and should only permit a rearrangement of height on the site as required to deliver excellence in the design.
I do not support the relocation of the heritage listed timber cottage at 10 Cowell Street other than to a location in the immediate vicinity. The developer should be required to appropriately integrate it, at ground level, into the proposed development for the site for any proposed design to qualify as meeting Design Excellence.
If not integrated into the site, the heritage listed timber cottage should be required to be retained at ground level in a location not more than 100m from the current location, to respect heritage and the streetscape of the local precinct.