city of perth local development assessment panel agenda... · meeting venue: city of perth...
TRANSCRIPT
City of Perth Local Development Assessment Panel Agenda
Meeting Date and Time: 30 January 2018; 9am Meeting Number: PLDAP/86 Meeting Venue: City of Perth Committee Room 1, Council House 27 St Georges Terrace, Perth Attendance
DAP Members Mr Clayton Higham (Presiding Member) Mr Brian Curtis (Deputy Presiding Member) Mr Lou D’Alessandro (Alternate Specialist Member) Cr Jim Adamos (Local Government Member, City of Perth) Lord Mayor Lisa M Scaffidi (Local Government Member, City of Perth) – via teleconference Officers in attendance Mr Roberto Colallilo (City of Perth) Ms Margaret Smith (City of Perth) Mr Craig Smith (City of Perth) Mr Dimitri Fotev (City of Perth) Mr Shervin Family (City of Perth) Ms Catherine Ide (State Solicitor’s Office) Minute Secretary Ms Siobhan Rippington (City of Perth) Applicants and Submitters Mr Peter Simpson (PTS Town Planning) Mr Chee Wee Tan (Grand Hotel Management Pty Ltd) Mr Derek Toh (Grand Hotel Management Pty Ltd) Mr Paul McQueen (Lavan) Members of the Public / Media Nil 1. Declaration of Opening
The Presiding Member declares the meeting open and acknowledges the past and present traditional owners and custodians of the land on which the meeting is being held.
Version: 3 Page 1
2. Apologies
Mr Peter Lee (Specialist Member)
3. Members on Leave of Absence
Nil
4. Noting of Minutes
Note the Minutes of meeting no.85 held on 19 December 2017.
5. Declarations of Due Consideration
Any member who is not familiar with the substance of any report or other information provided for consideration at the DAP meeting must declare that fact before the meeting considers the matter.
6. Disclosure of Interests
Nil
7. Deputations and Presentations
7.1 Mr Paul McQueen (Lavan) presenting in support of the application at Item 9.1. The presentation will provide legal justification as to why the amendment should be approved.
8. Form 1 – Responsible Authority Reports – DAP Applications Nil
9. Form 2 – Responsible Authority Reports – Amending or cancelling DAP
development approval
9.1 Property Location: Lot 10 (99) Adelaide Terrace, Lot 11 (40) and Lot 12 (10) Terrace Road, East Perth
Application Details: Relocation of Approved Public Car Parking Bays Applicant: PTS Town Planning Owner: Grand Hotel Management Pty Ltd Responsible Authority: City of Perth DAP File No: DAP/17/01199
10. Appeals to the State Administrative Tribunal
Nil
11. General Business / Meeting Closure
In accordance with Section 7.3 of the DAP Standing Orders 2017 only the Presiding Member may publicly comment on the operations or determinations of a DAP and other DAP members should not be approached to make comment.
Version: 3 Page 2
Form 2 - Responsible Authority Report (Regulation 17)
Property Location: 99 (Lot 10) Adelaide Terrace, 10 (Lot 12) and 40 (Lot 11) Terrace Road, East Perth
Development Description: Alterations and additions to the Hyatt Centre Proposed Amendments: Relocation of approved car parking bays DAP Name: City of Perth LDAP Applicant: PTS Town Planning Owner: Grand Hotel Management Pty Ltd Value of Amendment: Nil LG Reference: 2017/5461 Responsible Authority: City of Perth Authorising Officer: Erica Barrenger, Director Planning and
Development DAP File No: DAP/17/01199 Report Date: 17 January 2018 Application Received Date: 14 December 2017 Application Process Days: 60 Attachment(s): 1: Form 1 Responsible Authority Report (15
August 2017) 2: Approval notice and approved plans
issued by City of Perth LDAP (21 August 2017)
3: Amended Development Plans (14 December 2017)
4: Confidential – Legal advice relating to bonus plot ratio (4 July 2017) – sent to panel members only
Officer Recommendation:
That the City of Perth Local Development Assessment Panel resolves to:
1. Accept that the DAP Application reference DAP/17/01199 as detailed on theDAP Form 2 dated 14 December 2017 is appropriate for consideration inaccordance with regulation 17 of the Planning and Development(Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011;
2. Refuse the DAP Application reference DAP/17/01199 as detailed on the DAPForm 2 dated 14 December 2017 and accompanying plans (Attachment 3) inaccordance with Clause 68 of the Planning and Development (Local PlanningSchemes) Regulations 2015 and the provisions of City Planning Scheme No.2, Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14 and the Metropolitan RegionScheme, for the proposed minor amendment to the approved alterations andadditions to the Hyatt Centre at 99 (Lot 10) Adelaide Terrace, 10 (Lot 12) and40 (Lot 11) Terrace Road, East Perth, for the following reason:
Reasons
1. The proposed amendments result in the development not complying with theprovisions of clause 28 of City Planning Scheme No. 2 given the relocation of
Page 1
public fee-paying car parking bays results in the plot ratio applicable to the approved development exceeding the maximum plot ratio (inclusive of bonuses) of 2.4:1 (29,489m2) for the southern portion of the site; and
2. Approval would be contrary to the orderly and proper planning of the locality noting City Planning Scheme No. 2 provides no discretion to approve developments which exceed the prescribed maximum plot ratio.
Details: Zoning MRS: Central City Area TPS: Office/Residential, Residential R-160 M/TPS: No.14 - Withernsea Use Class: ‘Special Residential’, ‘Dining’, ‘Office’, ‘Retail
(General)’, ‘Education 1’, ‘Healthcare 2’, ‘Recreation and Leisure’, ‘Entertainment’
Development Scheme: City Planning Scheme No.2 Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14
Lot Size: 25,826m2 Existing Land Use: Hyatt Centre – Hotel, Offices, Restaurants,
Shops The application proposes minor amendments to the previously approved development. Specifically the application seeks to relocate 16 tenant bays and 16 public car parking bays within the Level 1 car parking area. The relocation includes the movement of bays between the northern and southern portions of the site which are subject to different development controls, in part. No physical works or changes are proposed to the total number of either public or tenant car parking bays, with the proposal only relating to the relocation of the use of the existing bays approved for the site. Background: The subject site is comprised of three lots and has a total site area of 25,826m2 with street frontages to Adelaide Terrace, Plain Street and Terrace Road. The site is occupied by the Hyatt Centre which includes hotel, office, dining, retail and related land uses including public and tenant car parking. The existing development of the site is limited to Lot 10, with Lots 11 and 12 currently being vacant and landscaped. The northern portion of Lot 10 accommodates the Hyatt Hotel and includes associated functions rooms, amenities, restaurants and bars. Access to the tenant and public car parking areas located on Levels 1 to 3 is provided via a central crossover from Terrace Road along the southern boundary of the site. At its meeting held on 15 August 2017 the City of Perth Local Development Assessment Panel (LDAP) conditionally approved the redevelopment of and additions to the existing podium buildings at the subject site including the rationalisation of the car parking and vehicle access. The approval included the awarding of 20% bonus plot ratio for the provision of a public space (public plaza) and specific facilities on private land (child care centre, end of trip facilities and community theatres/performance spaces/art gallery).
Page 2
Following approval by the LDAP, the applicant lodged a review with the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) seeking a review of the decision. The review sought to modify the approval of the LDAP by deleting and/or modifying conditions relating to bonus plot ratio, management of the new function rooms and amalgamation of the sites. The review proceeded to the mediation stage however the application was later withdrawn. The purpose of the withdrawal was in order for this subject application to be lodged with a view to a determination being made by the LDAP relating specifically to the implications of plot ratio and bonus plot ratio. Legislation & policy: Legislation Planning and Development Act 2005 s.162 City Planning Scheme No. 2 (CPS2) Clauses 6, 8, 20, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34 and 36 and the Adelaide Precinct Plan (P13) requirements Minor Town Planning Scheme No.14 – Withernsea Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 – Deemed Provisions for Local Planning Schemes Clauses 60, 64, 66, 67 and 68 Metropolitan Region Scheme State Government Policies Perth Parking Policy 2014 (PPP) Local Policies Plot Ratio (4.5) Bonus Plot Ratio (4.5.1) Parking Policy (5.1) Consultation: Public Consultation The amended proposal was not referred to adjacent landowners on the basis that the provisions of CPS2 and MTPS14 provide no discretion to approve any development which exceeds the maximum plot ratio prescribed for the site(s). Therefore any comments received could not meaningfully be considered in the context of the proposal. Planning assessment: Local Planning Scheme Item Requirement Proposal Compliance Maximum Plot Ratio
Base Plot Ratio Northern portion 4:1 (54,156m²) Southern portion 2:1 (24,574m²)
Northern portion 3.17:1 (42,602m²) Southern portion 2.41:1 (29,656m2)
Variation sought
Page 3
Total – 78,730m2 Maximum Bonus Plot Ratio of 50% (northern portion – 81,234m2 inclusive) and 20% (southern portion – 29,488.8m2 inclusive) consisting of a combination of any of the below: Public Facility – total site (20% maximum) Special Residential Development – northern portion only (20% and 40% for high quality hotel maximum)
Total - 2.8:1 (72,258m2) across the site inclusive of a plot ratio bonus of 20% (15,746m²) on the basis of including public facilities
Officer Comments Plot Ratio Development within the site is subject to the provisions of CPS2 and Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14 - Withernsea (MTPS14). MTPS14 was established to facilitate the comprehensive redevelopment of land in the scheme area. With regards to plot ratio controls, the provisions of MTPS14 were initially established to provide for a ‘permissible plot ratio’ of 4.0:1 to be applied over the whole of the site. This is in contrast with CPS2 which provides for a maximum plot ratio of 4.0:1 for the northern portion of the site and 2.0:1 for the southern portion of the site. CPS2 also includes provisions for the awarding of bonus plot ratio up to maximums of 50% (northern portion) and 20% (southern portion). Clause 1.7 of MTPS14 states that “Where a conflict exists between the provision of the Scheme and the provisions of any other City of Perth Town Planning Scheme, the provisions of the Scheme shall prevail”. Noting the above, the City previously sought legal advice with regards to the application of plot ratio controls across the site. The legal advice confirmed that in this case a conflict does not exist between MTPS14 and CPS2 and, therefore, notwithstanding that MTPS14 refers to a ‘permissible plot ratio’ of 4.0:1 across the site, any development would need to be assessed and approved in accordance with the provisions of CPS2. This means a maximum plot ratio (inclusive of any bonuses or transfers) of 6.0:1 for the northern portion and 2.4:1 for the southern portion is applicable to any new developments. Public fee-paying car parking bays constitute plot ratio floor area and are not excluded from plot ratio calculations under the provisions of CPS2. Tenant car parking bays do not constitute plot ratio floor area and are excluded from plot ratio
Page 4
calculations. The proposed relocation of 16 public car parking bays to the southern portion of the site in place of tenant car bays results in the plot ratio of the southern portion of the site increasing to 2.41:1 (29,656m2) which exceeds the approved and prescribed maximum of 2.4:1 (29,488.8m2). Whilst the proposal does not result in any additional building bulk or impact on adjoining properties and only relates to the function or use of the approved car parking bays, the provisions of clauses 27, 28 and 36 of CPS2 state: “27 Plot Ratio (1) Unless otherwise provided in this Scheme, the plot ratio of development shall
not exceed the maximum plot ratios specified in the Plot Ratio Plan.” 28 Bonus Plot Ratio (1) Subject to this clause, the local government may permit, by way of the grant of
development approval, an increase in the maximum plot ratio for development (in this clause referred to as ‘bonus plot ratio’) up to the maximum specified by the Maximum Bonus Plot Ratio Plan. Bonus Plot ratio may be comprised of one or more of the individual bonus plot ratio categories listed in subclause (2).
(2) The local government may permit a bonus plot ratio of –
(a) up to a maximum of 20% per lot where in the opinion of the local government the development would –
(ii) include a public facility that would make a significant contribution to
the amenities of the locality and the development is located within the area shown on the Public Facilities Bonus Plot Ratio Plan as being eligible for public facilities bonus plot ratio;
36 Determination of Non-Complying Applications (1) In this clause -
(a) an application which does not comply with a standard or requirement of this Scheme (including a standard or requirement set out in a planning policy, the relevant precinct plan or minor town planning scheme), is called a ‘non-complying application’;
(b) a non-complying application does not include an application involving a prohibited use or an application to increase the maximum plot ratio which exceeds the limits set out in clause 28 and/or 30.”
Given the above, there is no discretion available under CPS2 for the approval of development which exceeds the maximum plot ratio as specified by the Maximum Bonus Plot Ratio Plan, which is specifically relevant to this amended proposal. Therefore, the amended proposal is unable to be approved. Conclusion: The amended proposal is limited to minor changes to the use and function of car parking bays within Level 1 of the development. Whilst the changes are considered to be minor and would ordinarily be capable of approval, clause 36(1) of CPS2 provides no discretion to approve developments which exceed the limits set out to bonus plot ratio for the site under clause 28. On this basis it is recommended that the modifications be refused.
Page 5
Form 1 - Responsible Authority Report (Regulation 12)
Property Location: 99 (Lot 10) Adelaide Terrace, 10 (Lot 12) and 40 (Lot 11) Terrace Road, East Perth
Development Description: Alterations and additions to the Hyatt Centre DAP Name: City of Perth LDAP Applicant: PTS Town Planning Owner: Grand Hotel Management Pty Ltd Value of Development: $50 million LG Reference: 2017/5111 Responsible Authority: City of Perth Authorising Officer: Erica Barrenger, Director Planning and
Development Department of Planning File No: DAP/17/01199 Report Due Date: 4 August 2017 Application Receipt Date: 24 March 2017 Application Process Days: N/A Attachment(s): 1: Location Plan
2: Perspectives (26 July 2017) 3: Development Plans (26 July 2017) 4: Summary Schedule of Submissions 5: Copies of Submissions 6: Overshadowing Plans (26 July 2017) 7: Applicant’s Revised Design Report (26 July 2017) 8: Panorama Council of Owners Updated Submission (2 August 2017)
Officer Recommendation:
That the City of Perth LDAP resolves to:
1. Approve by absolute majority DAP Application reference DAP/17/01199 andaccompanying perspectives (Attachment 2) and development plans(Attachment 3) in accordance with Clause 68 of the Planning and Development(Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and the provisions of CityPlanning Scheme No. 2, Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14 and theMetropolitan Region Scheme, subject to the following conditions as follows:
Conditions
1. the plot ratio for the development being restricted to a maximum of 4.8:1 (or64,987m² of plot ratio floor area) on the northern ‘office zoned’ portion of thesite and 2.4:1 (or 29,470m2 of plot ratio floor area) on the southern‘Residential R160 zoned’ portion of the site, inclusive of 20% bonus plot ratio(or 15,746m² of plot ratio floor area) across the site for the provision of a publicspace (public plaza) and specific facilities on private land (child care centre,end of trip facilities and community theatres/performance spaces/art gallery) inaccordance with Clause 28 of City Planning Scheme No. 2 and therequirements of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1);
Page 1
2. final details of the design, treatment of and access to the public plaza, including provision of universal access, landscaping, furniture, art, lighting, security, maintenance and litter control, together with the proposed management and maintenance of these areas being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
3. the public being granted permanent, unrestricted access to the public plaza for
364 days out of every year, with the written consent of the City being first obtained if it becomes necessary for public access to this area to be restricted for more than one day per year;
4. the child care centre, end of trip and community theatres/performance
spaces/art gallery facilities being available for use by the public to the City’s satisfaction and not being limited to the exclusive use by tenants or occupants of the buildings on the site, with these specific facilities on private land being operational within three months of the occupation of the approved development and thereafter maintained as public facilities to the satisfaction of the City;
5. leasing strategies and management plans for the tenanting and on-going
operation of the child care centre, end of trip and community theatres/performance spaces/art gallery facilities, demonstrating compliance with the above condition, being prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.4 ‘Provision of Specific Facilities on Private Land’ of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1) and being submitted for approval by the City prior to the occupation of the approved development;
6. in the event of the child care centre, end of trip facility and community
theatre/performance spaces/arty gallery facilities not continuing, any new use being proposed for approval being limited to a public facility complying with the objectives of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1) to the City’s satisfaction;
7. the function spaces and facilities located within Lot 11, as shown on the
approved plans, remaining an integral part of the hotel on the site and being managed and operated by the operators of the hotel at all times and not operating as standalone or independent function spaces to the satisfaction of the City;
8. the landscaped terraces and roof areas adjoining the function spaces and
facilities located within Lot 11 not being used for function or associated purposes or being accessed by patrons of the function facilities or by members of the public, with access only being provided to the landscaped areas for authorised maintenance purposes;
9. the development being constructed with high quality and durable materials
and finishes and to a level of detailing that is consistent with the elevations and perspectives received on 26 July 2017, with particular attention to the: a) treatment and integration of the loading dock area; and b) quality of materials and finishes to the western elevation of the new
function facilities on Lot 11;
Page 2
with the final details of the design and a sample board of the materials, colours and finishes being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
10. any proposed air-conditioning condensers, external building plant, lift overruns, piping, ducting, water tanks, transformers, fire booster cabinets and fire control rooms being located or screened so that they cannot be viewed from any location external to the site and to minimise any visual and noise impact on the adjacent developments, including any such plant or services located within the vehicle entrance of the development, with details of the location and screening of such plant and services being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
11. the recommendations contained in the preliminary Acoustic Report prepared by Wood & Grieve Engineering on 15 March 2017 regarding the noise amelioration construction specifications and other noise management measures being implemented in full to the satisfaction of the City, with a final Acoustic Report (refer to advice note) being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit and the relevant building permit plans being certified by a qualified acoustic consultant confirming the development can achieve compliance with the relevant noise legislation;
12. Noise Management Plans for the function and plaza spaces being submitted
for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit with all approved management measures being implemented by the operator/s thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
13. a final environmental wind assessment being undertaken to quantify and compare the wind conditions against the relevant pedestrian wind comfort criteria and, if necessary, including mitigation strategies to achieve compliance with the criteria, with details being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit, with any significant design changes in the opinion of the City resulting from the amended wind impact analysis being the subject of a separate application for approval;
14. the proposed floor levels of the ground floor pedestrian and vehicle entrances to the building being designed to match the current levels of the immediately adjacent footpaths, to the City’s satisfaction;
15. on-site stormwater disposal/management being to the City’s specifications with details being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
16. a maximum of 512 tenant car parking bays being provided on site, for the exclusive use of staff, guests and visitors of the development and not being leased or otherwise reserved for use of the tenants or occupants of other buildings or sites;
17. a maximum of 490 public long stay car parking bays being provided on site
and managed/operated in accordance with the provisions of the Perth Parking Policy;
18. a Parking Management Plan outlining the management and access
arrangements for tenant and public car parking bays, including drop off areas,
Page 3
being submitted for approval by the City, in consultation with the Department of Transport, prior to the occupation of the development with the plan being implemented by the operator/s thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
19. all vehicles (including service vehicles and the City’s waste vehicles) being
able to enter and exit the proposed development in a forward gear;
20. the proposed entry and exit point on Plain Street being restricted to left in and left out movement only with a suitable separation barrier being provided to the specification and satisfaction of the City;
21. the proposed vehicle access points on Terrace Road and Plain Street not
resulting in any removal of street trees and minimal net loss of on-street parking bays;
22. the central ‘port cochere/entry drop off’ area along Terrace Road being
deleted;
23. a Vehicular, Service and Delivery Access Plan, outlining the management and arrangements for on-site servicing of the building, being submitted for approval by the City prior to the occupation of the development with the plan being implemented by the proprietor/manager thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
24. the hours of operation of the loading dock facility being limited to between 7am
to 9pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 9pm Saturday and Sunday, with the facility being closed and aesthetically screened from view from the street when not in operation, to the satisfaction of the City;
25. the dimensions of all car parking bays, vehicle entrance, aisle widths and circulation areas complying with the Australian Standard AS2890.1, ensuring that vehicles can enter and exit the building in forward gear with a certificate of compliance by an architect or engineer being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
26. all redundant crossovers being removed and the verge and footpaths being
reinstated in accordance with the City’s specifications and satisfaction and at the expense of the developer/landowner and all new proposed crossovers being located and constructed to the City’s specification and satisfaction, with any additional works external to the property boundaries of the site not being approved as part of this development and being subject to a separate application for approval by the City;
27. a final Waste Management Plan satisfying the City’s waste collection
requirements being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit (refer to relevant advice note);
28. final details of all landscaped areas including soil depths, plant species,
irrigation, protection and retention of existing trees on site being prepared by a qualified landscape architect and being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
Page 4
29. the existing street trees located in the road verges on Terrace Road, Plain Street and Adelaide Terrace being retained and protected from damage throughout any demolition or development works;
30. Lots 10 and 11 being amalgamated into one lot on one Certificate of Title prior
to the occupation of any of the new buildings within the development;
31. any new signage for the development being integrated with the design of the buildings with details of any signage that is not exempt from approval under the City’s Signs Policy (4.6) being subject to a separate application(s) for approval; and
32. a construction management plan for the proposal being submitted prior to
applying for a building permit for the City’s approval, detailing how it is proposed to manage:
a) the delivery of materials and equipment to the site; b) the storage of materials and equipment on the site; c) the parking arrangements for the contractors and subcontractors; d) any dewatering of the site; e) the protection of street trees and any other City assets; and f) other matters likely to impact on the surrounding properties.
Advice Notes 1. This decision constitutes planning approval only and is valid for a period of two
years from the date of approval. If the subject development is not substantially commenced within the two year period, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect.
2. With regards to plot ratio, the northern and southern portions of the site referred to in condition 1 are in accordance with those areas as depicted on the Town Planning Scheme No. 14 Scheme Map 1.
3. The City advises that the final Waste Management Plan is required to address
the following additional matters:- a) bin quantities, waste stream and collection frequencies to be reviewed
and adequately addressed noting ‘PulpMaster’ is not currently available in Western Australia;
b) a contingency plan is required should the implementation of the above technology be delayed; and
c) updated swept path analysis required to demonstrate suitable manoeuvring for service vehicles.
4. With regards to the preliminary Acoustic Report, the City advises that the final
Acoustic Report is required to address the following additional matters:- a) assessment of all mechanical plant and equipment, including kitchen and
other exhausts, for the development demonstrating compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997; and
b) confirmation of mitigation measures to be implemented in relation to the loading dock area and various function spaces.
Details:
Page 5
Zoning MRS: Central City Area TPS: Office/Residential, Residential R-160 M/TPS: No.14 - Withernsea Use Class: ‘Special Residential’, ‘Dining’, ‘Office’, ‘Retail
(General)’, ‘Education 1’, ‘Healthcare 2’, ‘Recreation and Leisure’, ‘Entertainment’
Development Scheme: City Planning Scheme No.2 Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14
Lot Size: 25,826m2 Existing Land Use: Hyatt Centre – Hotel, Offices, Restaurants,
Shops Approval is sought for the redevelopment of and additions to the existing podium buildings at the subject site including the rationalisation of the car parking and vehicle access to the development as follows: • rationalise the basement parking and amend the current vehicle access
arrangements to remove the access located centrally along Terrace Road and locate access points on Lots 11 and 12 with access from Terrace Road and Plain Street and provide for a new loading dock accessed from Terrace Road;
• extend the existing lower levels of the Terrace Road buildings to Terrace Road; • provide tenancies at ground level along Plain Street to activate Plain Street,
which is currently a blank wall; • provide bicycle parking and end of trip facilities, including a public end of trip
facility accessed from Plain Street; • include a new supermarket on the podium level (level 3) where the current
Terrace Ballroom is located; • improve the existing pedestrian access and spaces; • improve the existing central plaza to accommodate a public plaza and event
space with high levels of landscape design and pedestrian comfort; • provide new and expanded function spaces and facilities on Lot 11 as a result
of the removal of the Terrace Ballroom; • provide a new corner statement to Adelaide Terrace and Plain Street and
upgrade the Plain Street facade; • provide additional podium building levels to accommodate retail, food and
beverage tenancies, community theatre/performance and art gallery spaces; and
• include new land uses such as a child care centre, health and wellness centre and medical centre.
On 26 July 2017, the applicant submitted revised plans to the City to address issues raised by the City of Perth LDAP at its meeting held on 6 July 2017. The amended plans altered the design and form of the proposed function facilities on Lot 11 to specifically address the western elevation, interface with the adjoining Panorama apartments and built form of the development as follows:- • removing the vehicle access directly adjacent to the western boundary and
consolidating an entry and exit to the east of the loading dock; • reducing the extent of the Level 5 service corridor with the setback area being
a landscape roof; • setting back the lower and upper function rooms from the western boundary;
Page 6
• setting back the upper level function room 10 metres in accordance with the Terrace Road Design Policy. The resulting terrace area will be landscaped and will not be accessible;
• providing additional landscaping to the Level 9 function room roof; and • landscaping the setback above the Terrace Road street front building (lower
function room) to provide an improved level of amenity to the property to the west’.
Specific details of the proposed development are as follows: Level Lot Proposed Development 1 10 • Removal of existing brick walls, diesel tanks and escalators
• Installation of new travelator, water pumps and tanks, service infrastructure and corridors
• Modification of car parking layout and installation of car stacking systems
11 • New basement floor for services, plant and storage 2 10 • The extension of the podium buildings to Terrace Road with new
tenancies providing dining and retail uses • Creation of a new central pedestrian entrance to the site • The activation of Plain Street through the creation of food and
beverage tenancies at ground level • The provision of tenant and public end of trip facilities accessed
from Plain Street • Modified car parking layout including new drop off area • Provision of a new car park exit
11 • Provision of a loading dock • Creation of a new tenancy (dining) • Provision of a new car park entry
12 • New two-way accesses via Plain Street and Terrace Roads 3 10 • The extension of the podium buildings to Terrace Road with new
tenancies providing dining uses • A new 1,649m2 supermarket on the western side of Lot 10
towards Terrace Road where the existing Terrace Ballroom and retail tenancies are currently located. The supermarket will be serviced via the loading dock on Terrace Road with a travelator providing shopper access to the car parking levels below
• Realignment of the existing tenancies to provide improved pedestrian access and active spaces. The tenancies will be food and beverage and retail uses
• The tenancies facing Plain Street will include outdoor seating facing Plain Street
• The creation of a covered central events plaza, which includes the removal of the existing centrally located escalators and the activation of the plaza
4 10 • The extension of the podium buildings to Terrace Road with the new tenancies providing dining uses
• Realignment of the existing tenancies to provide improved pedestrian access and active spaces. The tenancies will be food and beverage and retail uses
• New facilities to service the new function space and a pre-function area linking the new function space to the existing Hyatt function
Page 7
room level • Provision of a health centre, medical centre and child care centre
11 • Provision of a function space to replace the existing Terrace Ballroom, to be used in conjunction with the Hyatt Hotel
5 10 • Existing office floor with an extension of the office along the western boundary and to Terrace Road
• New glass canopy over the plaza and pedestrian access • New landscaped roof between the office and Hyatt Hotel
11 • Void to function space below • New landscaped roof along the western boundary between lower
levels of the function space and adjacent residential development 6 10 • Stair and circulation space related to function space
• Existing office floor with an extension to Terrace Road 11 • Void to function space below
7 10 • Function space and pre function space located between lots 10 and 11
• Landscaped central roof • Dining and retail tenancies along Plain Street
11 • Provision of a function space to replace the Terrace Ballroom, to be used in conjunction with the Hyatt Hotel
• Landscaped terrace fronting Terrace Road 8 10 • Dining tenancies, flexible performance space and flexible theatre
spaces along the Plain Street frontage 9 10 • Stair and circulation space related to function space
11 • Landscaped roof terraces 10 10
and 11
• Concrete and landscaped roofs and glass canopy over function space, tenancies and internal laneway
The applicant advises the overall design objectives of the proposed development are to: • ‘improve way finding within the site and create safe and attractive pedestrian
paths along all three frontages including creating civic gestures to welcome pedestrian’s access into the plaza and entertainment hub, proposed tenancy amendments along Plain Street, and Terrace Road, provision for outdoor food and beverage opportunities and integrated landscape and lighting design;
• maintain existing visual links to the foreshore and Langley Park and promote further visual amenity through proposed tenancy amendments and opportunities for improved public space designed for flexibility and occupant comfort;
• promote commercial and recreational activity to improve residential amenity and retail experience, create a vibrant and engaging streetscape, promote employment opportunities and establish the site as a destination within the Precinct;
• reinvigorate the urban edge along Plain Street, Terrace Road and Adelaide Terrace through improved streetscapes, tenancy opportunities, and pedestrian interactions;
• promote an interactive relationship within the development and the street by directing pedestrian flows and circulation patterns whilst respecting the existing geometries and relationships established by the original John Andrews design of the site;
Page 8
• break away from the horizontality of the existing building to provide an engaging and iconic building; and
• include materials which borrow from the Brutalist palette but re-define their use through sophisticated glazing systems, use of texture from stone and masonry, and the integration of landscape, art work and lighting.’
The applicant further advises that the current proposal represents stage one of a four stage redevelopment process as follows (as detailed within Attachment 7): • DA1 - Rationalisation of car parking and access, provision of a new
supermarket and redevelopment and additions to the existing podium buildings; • DA2 - A new serviced apartment building on Lot 11; • DA3 - A new mixed-use building on Lot 12; and • DA4 - Redevelopment of the Adelaide Terrace frontage, including a new
building. It is noted that DA2 and DA3 can not proceed under the current planning framework and that an amendment to City Planning Scheme No. 2 (CP2) will be required in order to for the site to be further redeveloped. Background: The subject site is comprised of three lots and has a total site area of 25,826m2 with street frontages to Adelaide Terrace, Plain Street and Terrace Road. The site is occupied by the Hyatt Centre which includes hotel, office, dining, retail and related land uses including public and tenant car parking. The existing development of the site is limited to Lot 10, with Lots 11 and 12 currently being vacant and landscaped. The northern portion of Lot 10 accommodates the Hyatt Hotel and includes associated functions rooms, amenities, restaurants and bars. A vehicle pick up and drop off is located along Adelaide Terrace, one level above the Adelaide Terrace footpath level. Access to the hotel loading dock is provided via a crossover from Adelaide Terrace along the western boundary of the site. To the west of the hotel building is an office building comprising four levels. To the east and south of the hotel building are four level podium buildings containing restaurants, shops and offices at the ground level and offices above. The surrounding area is characterised by a mix of recreational, residential and commercial land uses. To the west of the site are high rise residential apartment complexes ‘Panorama’ (fronting Terrace Road) being 18 storeys and ‘Infinity’ (fronting Adelaide Terrace) being 10 storeys in height respectively. To the south of the site is Langley Park. To the east of the site is a residential development, low rise commercial buildings, a public car park, a bowling club and vacant sites with approvals for hotel and residential uses. To the north of the site are high rise apartments and office buildings. The subject site has an extensive development approval history dating back to 1981 as summarised below. Original Development Approval – not constructed due to being superseded by subsequent approval Approved by the City of Perth Council at its meeting held 19 October 1981 and comprised:
Page 9
• a 39 level office tower (Lot 12); • three levels of retail space (podium buildings); • an eight level hotel (400 rooms) with three levels of ancillary facilities including
bars, function/conference facilities and restaurants (Hyatt Hotel formerly known as the Merlin Hotel);
• a 30 level apartment building (Lot 11), containing 64 apartments; • two levels of undercroft parking; and • an overall approved plot ratio of 3.8:1 (98,143m2). Scheme Amendment On 10 December 1982, Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14 was gazetted, which provided for the comprehensive redevelopment of land in the scheme area to be effected and allowed for a permissible plot ratio of 4:1 (103,304m2) over the entire scheme area. Amended Development Application – constructed (in part) Approved by the City of Perth Council at its meeting held on 13 December 1982 and comprised: • an office building staggered in height with 36 levels and 30 levels (Lot 12) – not
constructed; • a residential building of 28 to 30 levels containing 74 apartments (Lot 11) – not
constructed; • a nine level hotel and two levels of ancillary activities (Hyatt Hotel formerly
known as the Merlin Hotel) - constructed; • a six level building containing retail, office, health club and squash courts
(podium buildings) - constructed; and • two levels of car parking accommodating 960 bays - constructed. Car Parking Approvals Various approvals have been granted for the use of the basement level parking areas. The current status of approved car parking bay types and numbers is summarised as follows: • hotel car parking – 200 bays • short term public parking – (weekday/weekends) – 573 bays • tenant (office, retail etc.) car parking – 418 bays • bays reserved (unused) for the undeveloped residential development on Lot 11
– 120 bays • bays reserved (unused) for the undeveloped office tower on Lot 12 – 67 bays. The most recent approval on 5 October 2004 converted 176 of the unused basement car parking (bays reserved for Lots 11 and 12) to public short term fee paying bays. Therefore based on the above, the approvals include 618 tenant bays with the balance being short stay public car parking and the ability to use the tenant bays after hours and on weekends for short stay public car parking. At its meeting held on 6 July 2017, the City of Perth LDAP resolved to: “defer DAP Application reference DAP/17/01199 to no later than Tuesday, 15 August 2017 for the proponent to address the following:
Page 10
1. To review and modify the design as appropriate to address matters raised in the submissions lodged by members of the public, with particular reference to the western elevation and its interface with the adjoining Panorama apartments;
2. To give further consideration and enable the modification of the proposed built
form of the development in relation to the Terrace Road Design Policy, including building height and setback variations and the effect on adjoining properties;
3. The modification of the design to reduce the impact on neighbours and the
surrounding area of the proposed intensification of activities on Lot 11; and 4. Inconsistencies in the plans and perspectives provided. REASON: The DAP determined that a deferral would be beneficial for the applicant to resolve the above issues prior to a determination.” The applicant has submitted additional information and revised plans (dated 26 July 2017) to address the above which will be assessed in the following sections of this report. Legislation & policy: Legislation Planning and Development Act 2005 s.162 City Planning Scheme No. 2 (CPS2) Clauses 6, 8, 20, 26, 27, 28, 32, 33, 34 and 36 and the Adelaide Precinct Plan (P13) requirements Minor Town Planning Scheme No.14 – Withernsea Planning and Development (Local Planning Scheme) Regulations 2015 – Deemed Provisions for Local Planning Schemes Clauses 60, 64, 66, 67 and 68 Metropolitan Region Scheme State Government Policies Perth Parking Policy 2014 (PPP) Local Policies Special Residential (Serviced and Short Term Accommodation) Policy (3.9) City Development Design Guidelines (4.1) Building Heights and Setbacks (4.4) Plot Ratio (4.5) Bonus Plot Ratio (4.5.1) Signs (4.6) Parking Policy (5.1) Loading and Unloading (5.2) Bicycle Parking and End of Journey Facilities (5.3) Terrace Road Design Policy (6.4) The proposal generally complies with the abovementioned policies or otherwise justification has been provided to support variations to policy provisions or the application can be reasonably conditioned to ensure compliance. Details of non-compliance matters are addressed in the following sections of this report.
Page 11
Consultation: Public Consultation The proposed development includes a variation to the plot ratio requirements, by way of a public facilities bonus, variations to the street building height and side/rear setback requirements of CPS2 and the Terrace Road Design Policy and an ‘unlisted use’ being public car parking. Therefore, the application was originally advertised to the owners of the surrounding properties from 19 April 2017 until 8 May 2017 with the advertising period being 19 days in lieu of the standard 14 day period, noting the significance and high profile nature of the proposal. These included the owners of the properties directly adjacent at 42-52 Terrace Road and 131 Adelaide Terrace and those in the near vicinity at 108, 118 and 128 Adelaide Terrace, 4, 18 and 100 Plain Street and 69 Adelaide Terrace, East Perth. Eight submissions were received during this advertising period with respect to the application. The comments received from the affected property owners are included in Attachments 4 and 5 and are summarised below: Issue Raised Officer’s comments Building Height/Non-compliance with Terrace Road Design Policy ‘We expect that the intent of the Terrace Road Design Policy will be honoured by the Council and any other authority that might have the power to consider the proposed Hyatt Redevelopment’ ‘The facade rises vertically to full height at the boundary, instead of providing a tiered graduation of height and is not articulated to break up the perceived bulk and add complexity and interest as required by the Policy’ ‘The allowable height limit of four storeys (14 metres) for the first 10 metre depth on Terrace Rd. frontage is exceeded by the proposed 8 storey equivalent structure (double volume Function Rooms), of approx. 29 metre height – approximately double the height allowed by the Policy’ ‘The increased height, over and above that allowed by the Policy, will significantly reduce river views from many Panorama apartments, Clause 2.3.1 of the Policy, specifically states that - the maximum (four storeys) will ensure that Langley Park is not overshadowed,
Noted The variations proposed to the maximum street building heights applicable to the site and Terrace Road Design Policy are discussed in detail in ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. The reference within the Policy to ‘views from the rear of the site’ is reflective of the general building envelopes which are established by the Policy. The intent being for a graduated height plane to the rear of each site up to a maximum height of 52 metres. It is noted that many of the existing developments along Terrace Road, including the Panorama Apartments, include minor variations to the established building envelopes which have resulted in minor impacts on views from the development to the rear. The overall height of the building proposed for Lot 11 has also decreased by 9 metres (three standard levels) compared with the original design which was advertised for public comment. The reduction is considered to address, in part, some of the concerns raised by surrounding residents.
Page 12
and that views from the rear of the site over such buildings will not be unacceptably infringed’ Setbacks and Overshadowing ‘During hot summer afternoons, the western setting sun will reflect radiant heat and glare off the large close-by homogenous blank west wall of the proposed Function Room structure onto residential balconies and windows located on the south eastern facade of Panorama apartments. The additional heat will compromise use of these areas for the period from the spring equinox, through the Summer solstice and back to the autumn equinox. Conversely, during cool early mornings, the bulk of the Function Room structure will rob the same apartment areas of pleasant eastern sun, particularly during autumn and spring’ ‘The proposed high rise will remove sunlight access to my apartment’
Noted The variations proposed to the setback requirements applicable to the site are discussed in detail in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. The overall height and finish of the west facing wall of the building on Lot 11 has been modified from the original design advertised for public comment. The height has been reduced by approximately one third and the finish is now proposed to be of a stone (or equivalent) material. The cumulative impact being reduced surface area of the abutting elevation and reduced potential for nuisance caused by reflectivity. The proposed development is located to the south-east of the Panorama apartment tower building which means any overshadowing impacts to the south facing balconies and windows associated with any reduced setbacks are minimised due to the relevant solar travel paths.
Car Parking and Traffic ‘The alterations and additions will add further traffic to Terrace Road and Plain Street which are not designed for such heavy traffic’ ‘We already have events on Langley park that draw extra foot traffic and cars and the intersection at Terrace Road and Plain Street is not very well managed and dangerous to pedestrians at all hours of the day. With extra shops, this will make this intersection a nightmare’ ‘The manoeuvring will create traffic congestion and hazard on Terrace Road and is likely to impact on Panorama and other apartment building residents departing eastward from Panorama and other driveways. Increased incidence of rubbish trucks removing waste from the
Noted Matters relating to car parking and traffic management discussed in detail in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. City officers have reviewed the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) prepared in relation to the development and consider that the projected additional vehicular traffic generated by the intensification of the existing development can be accommodated within the existing surrounding road network without the requirement for modifications to the existing street layout. The existing level of car parking bays on site is also being retained and modified to provide for an improved layout which is anticipated to cater for the demand created by the new and refurbished uses on site.
Page 13
proposed supermarket and function rooms will add to noise and traffic congestion’ ‘Street parking in Terrace Road is already under pressure at times when events on Langley Park, the WACA, Gloucester Park or general evening entertainment occur and this is likely to increase with the opening of the new stadium. The proposal appears to indicate the removal of 14 existing public car parking bays on the north side of Terrace Road’ ‘Instead of the current single vehicular entry/exit point to and from the Hyatt parking area, the proposal splits entry and exit points into 3 locations for cars and adds an additional crossover for delivery/rubbish trucks on Terrace Road. This will increase the single conflict point between pedestrians and vehicles to four, thus increasing traffic hazard in Terrace Road and Plain Street footpaths’
The number of crossovers proposed as part of the redevelopment of the site are not considered onerous in the context of the site having approximately 470 metres of frontage across three streets and consists of three separate lots. The comments in relation street parking are supported and it is recommended that a condition be imposed ensuring minimal net loss of existing street parking bays.
Loss of Views and Property Values ‘I bought my apartment in good faith given the existing residential zoning of the City of Perth at the time and the proposed change would devalue my property’ ‘An 11 storey building around the FMG space would totally cut out our view of the Swan River and South Perth. To look at a building as your only view out of these apartments was not what we expected as the real estate told us that the Hyatt had a height restriction and could not be built up’ I am worried that the proposed new building bordering the Panorama Apartments would remove my view from my level east across the Swan River towards Heirisson Island and the Perth Hills. A building which is lower would not be of concern’ The proposed development will block a significant portion (around 25-30%) of
Noted The impact of the redevelopment on the value of properties, the loss of views as well as the ‘right to views’, are all matters that, whilst understandably of high importance to individual landowners, are not directly relevant in any assessment of the planning merit of a proposed development and cannot be specifically addressed within the relevant planning framework. The maintenance of views from the apartments on the land fronting Adelaide Terrace through the subject site can be considered to be an unrealistic expectation given the City’s City Planning Scheme No.2 provides for a maximum graduated building height of 100 metres for properties on the south of Adelaide Terrace in this location. With regards to the loss of views from existing apartments facing Terrace Road, it is noted the loss of views relates to only a small portion of the overall view
Page 14
our current uninterrupted 180 degree views from our apartment of Perth water, Heirisson Island, Kings Park and the southern and eastern suburbs and will also result in a loss of significant market value in our apartment, market value that we paid for’ ‘For apartments on Adelaide Terrace that are facing the Hyatt hotel, such as ours, this new building and its intended height will mean that we lose the only remaining section of partially-obstructed views that we have looking over the Hyatt’s West side office building’ ‘While the City of Perth regularly approves construction of several new apartment buildings within the CBD and surrounds, without consideration of the economic impact on existing homeowners and residents whose home values have already severely declined, the additional impact of a large new building, obstructing the view from Adelaide Terrace apartments to the river/park/skyline is another burden on already under-valued homes and homeowners’ ‘The decline of home values in the area due to new construction, noise, loss of aesthetic advantages and loss of natural light, may result in residents moving out of the area rather than into the area, resulting in a general decline of the area rather than a rejuvenation’
from these apartments noting the location and orientation towards the Swan River of existing rooms and balconies.
Noise ‘The proposed plan will add more powerful facilities to the centre whose low frequency noise at night is already a headache to the neighbouring residents’ ‘With an 11 storey building with two ballrooms and convenience shops/restaurants, these would increase the noise level of the area which also magnifies around apartment complexes’ ‘The positioning of a loading dock abutting our building and the expected
Noted Matters relating to noise are discussed in detail in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. Due to considerations relating to potential noise nuisance and the retention of street trees, the loading dock facility location has been modified from initially directly adjacent to the adjoining site to the west to approximately 25 metres east along Terrace Road. The relocation will provide for a reduced impact on the amenity of the adjoining
Page 15
truck and loading noise and road traffic will significantly impact our quiet enjoyment of our residential apartment in the Panorama building’ ‘The new pedestrian access to the Hyatt Centre proposed on Terrace Road will result in a significant increase in noisy pedestrian and vehicular traffic adjacent to our building’ ‘The proposal for a high rise bar and food terrace immediately next to our building which will expectedly result in a significant increase in noise and visual pollution’ ‘It is completely inappropriate and unacceptable to have a loading dock immediately next to apartments (within 30m). The impact from early morning and late night noise would significantly impact on the quiet enjoyment of our lot, when there are clearly options for the entry to be distanced from the boundary’ ‘Noise outbreak from the top Function Room open-air deck and noise outbreak from the Function Rooms will compromise quiet enjoyment of Panorama residents’ ‘High pitched reverse warning 'beeping' from commercial vehicles is particularly annoying and, from experience with event 'bump-in' activities on Langley Park in front of Panorama apartments, penetrates through thick glass apartment doors into Living and Bedroom areas-there is no escape from this noise. Truck movements in and out of the proposed loading dock and street loading bays will add considerably to the loss of quiet enjoyment to adjacent residential areas’ ‘The Hyatt to date has earned a reputation for noisy exhaust fans, condensers and smells emanating from cooking. The proposed location of Function Rooms, proposed supermarket and loading dock/rubbish bin area close to the Panorama building is very likely to result in increased noise and odour
building. In addition, the external deck area which was originally proposed for the upper level function space, has been removed from the proposed development. This is considered to address the concerns raised by adjoining landowners. Noise and odour from any service ducts and plant can be addressed through conditions of any approval and compliance with the relevant health regulations.
Page 16
problems emanating from these facilities which will impact detrimentally on Panorama residents’ Environmental Impacts ‘The proposal will require the removal of a number of established trees which currently adorn and are an attractive feature the street scape in our part of Terrace Road’
Noted As a result of a number of considerations, including the submissions received, the applicant has amended the design of the proposal to ensure the retention of the verge trees along Terrace Road. This has been achieved by relocating the loading dock and changes to the access arrangements which means there will be no loss of street trees as a result of the proposed development.
Development Demand ‘It appears that there is already so much development, but there is really not many people arriving to enjoy these places. To add another entertainment precinct to Plain Street, it is not really required. I have walked through the Hyatt on my way home from work/to work/on weekends and there is not too many people who are enjoying these food restaurants’ ‘To add another supermarket is not the correct place for this’
Noted The determination of whether there is any demand or economic viability for the facilities being proposed as part of the proposed redevelopment are not directly relevant in any assessment of the planning merit of the proposal.
Architectural Design ‘The visual appearance of the proposed Hyatt Redevelopment is violently out of character with the architecture of the street and will impact on the attractiveness of the street as a high value, residential location. In particular, the proposal to build a high rise commercial building along the footpath of Terrace Road and the design of this structure is very unattractive and out of keeping with the remainder of the street architecture’ ‘Whilst the illustration submitted by the proponent shows the door to the proposed loading dock closed, the reality is likely to be that this door will remain
Noted Matters relating to the architectural design of the proposal are discussed in detail in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. It is noted that the overall design of the proposal was conditionally supported by the City of Perth Design Advisory Committee.
Page 17
open, at least during busy times of deliveries to the supermarket and other facilities, but, as experienced in the Claremont Quarter shopping centre loading dock, will be left open most of the time to display a visual eyesore’ ‘The proposed facade consists of full height reflective glass which is discouraged by the Terrace Road Design Policy and in no way attempts to blend with existing buildings along Terrace Road to establish an urban edge characterised by complementary materials and finishes’ Bonus Plot Ratio ‘We consider there is nothing in the proposal that entitles the developers to access a bonus plot ratio as there is no evidence that there is a commercial demand for the business enterprises which the developers claim they will establish in the new centre We expect that if the redevelopment is approved, none of these businesses will come into existence in the centre, but instead, for commercial reasons the owners of the centre will require that they be allowed to lease the space for other commercial purposes’ ‘If the City were to grant the hotel their request of 20% additional plot ratio, we would like to see the additional height incorporated in a way that it is spread out more evenly, rather than in a couple of very tall buildings, in order to maintain the aesthetics and natural, relaxed ambience of the residential area’ ‘As with the public plaza, this facility currently exists, is freely available to the public and universal access is currently available via lifts. As with the Public Plaza, the facility will certainly benefit from an upgrade and improved public access, but again we do not see how it could be claimed as a new facility offered by the proponent as a basis for bonus plot ratio consideration’
Noted Matters relating to the awarding of bonus plot ratio are discussed in detail in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. It is noted that the bonus plot ratio sought was supported by the City of Perth Design Advisory Committee. Matters relating to how publicly available the facilities would be, are considered to have been adequately addressed by the applicant. In addition it is recommended that management plans be required as part of any approval to provide greater and specific details and surety regarding ongoing management and operation of the facilities.
Page 18
‘The proposed new Child Care Facility is acknowledged by the proponent to be a commercial venture run by a private operator, and there is no stated guarantee that the proposed operator will continue operations into the future if it proves not to be a commercial success, nor that the centre is guaranteed to be set up in the first place’ ‘It is our respectful opinion that the Public Facilities offered above are at best highly questionable as to their validity for granting bonus plot ratio’ Precedent ‘Every development along terrace road has required a setback before increasing to a height above 3 levels. To allow such a development as proposed would be entirely inconsistent with approvals over the last 15 years and would set an unacceptable precedent’
Noted Whilst the relevant planning framework provides for a consistent approach to development, each individual proposal is to be assessed on its merits. It is noted that existing developments along Terrace Road include variations which were granted in accordance with the relevant provisions of City Planning Scheme No.2 and the Terrace Road Design Policy.
Land Use ‘It is also noted that 6 floors in the new building are reserved for function spaces, pre-function spaces, or to facilitate function spaces (i.e. staircases and voids). While it is appreciated that the existing Terrace Ballroom will be demolished and needs to be replaced, replacing it with 6 floor spaces dedicated to functions, when “Entertainment” use in this Southern section is actually prohibited, seems excessive’ ‘The proposed provision of three Function Rooms located on Lot 11 Terrace Road, immediately adjacent to Panorama apartments, to replace the single internal Terrace Ballroom, is in direct contradiction to the Terrace Road Design Policy requirement to provide for a wide variety of high density residential accommodation’ ‘Only one of the Function Rooms is physically directly linked to the Hotel
Noted Matters relating to land uses within the proposal are discussed in detail in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report. Comments related to the use and operation of the proposed function centres are noted and it is recommended that any approval include conditions relating to these spaces being exclusively maintained and operated by the Hyatt Hotel as an incidental hotel use, rather than as a separate business entity. It is also noted that the levels and function space floor area of the proposed development have been reduced in the modified design.
Page 19
Lobby at level 4 to operate in association with the main part of the Hotel. The other Function Rooms are provided with separate entries and lifts off Terrace Road and would appear to be able to operate totally independently of the Hyatt Centre’ The LDAP deferral resolution of 6 July 2017 did not require any modifications to the design to be advertised for public comment as the matter was deferred in order for the applicant to address issues raised during the original advertising process with the required modifications reducing the extent of variations to the Scheme and policy provisions. Notwithstanding, and noting that the LDAP deferral resolution primarily related to specific and detailed matters raised by residents of the Panorama Apartments complex located directly to the west of the subject site, a representative of the Council of Owners was provided with the opportunity to view the revised plans and details. The Council of Owners have provided an updated submission (refer to Attachment 8) which is summarised below. Issue Raised Officer’s comments Land Use ‘In spite of the City’s interpretation of definitions and policies that exempt the Function Halls from prohibited use on the southern portion of the scheme area, and in spite of the City’s interpretation that the Halls of whatever size and whatever number are still classified as incidental to the main function of the Hotel, the fact remains that the Function Halls will, in practice, be major venues for entertainment (including exhibition booths), that are clearly different to the facilities offered by the Terrace Ball Room, will clearly impact negatively on the residential ambience of Terrace Road and clearly contradict the aims, objectives and intent of both CPS2 and the Terrace Road Design Policy for the southern portion of the scheme area.’ ‘Reference was made on page 34 of the previous RAR that the ‘site’ is a ‘super lot’ by virtue of its size, and a ‘node for the locality’. There is no reference in either of MTPS14, CPS2 or the Terrace Road Design Policy to the scheme area constituting a ‘node’ or a ‘super lot’. Whilst Lot 11 forms part of the MTPS14 scheme area, it is a separately surveyed and titled site in its own right.’
Noted Matters relating to land use permissibility or otherwise are addressed in detail in the ‘Land Use’ section of this report. References to the scale of the site are based on the existing functions and area of the three lots which are under common ownership and significantly larger than surrounding properties. The terminologies used are not included within any of the applicable planning controls or instruments mentioned as they do not provide provisions or requirements with regards to land tenure matters.
Page 20
Legal advice obtained by the City (that the provisions of CPS2, over the southern portion of the scheme area, prevail with regard to plot ratio), reinforces the fact that Lot 11 should not be exempt from any of the aims, objectives and detailed requirements of CPS2. The reasoning applied in the RAR, to allow variations to podium heights and setbacks to the building on lot 11, by virtue of a conferred status as being part of a ‘super lot’ or a ‘node for the locality’, is therefore invalid.’
The proposed variations were assessed on the basis of the physical form of the proposed building/s irrespective of the existing development to which it is attached. However, the development on Lot 11 is fully integrated with the development on Lot 10 and context is an important consideration when assessing the merits or otherwise of a proposal. All development proposals within the city can seek variations to the standard requirements (with the exception of plot ratio) in accordance with the relevant clauses of CPS2 and associated policies.
Non-compliance with Terrace Road Design Policy ‘The proposed provision of Function Rooms located on Lot 11 is in direct contradiction of The Policy requirement to provide for a wide variety of high density residential accommodation, and to maintain residential usage for the upper floors of buildings facing Terrace Rd. (Clause 2.1)’ ‘The building bulk of Function Rooms on Lot 11 exceeds the maximum allowable height limit of 14 metres on the boundary by approximately 6 metres’ ‘At the west side, the Function Halls structure is not contained within the building envelope set by figure 3 in order to limit the impacts of development on adjoining lots. (Clause 2.3.2). Articulation of the building façade, as required by clause 2.4.4 of The Policy, to break up the perceived bulk and add complexity and interest, is not provided. The proposed pattern of alternating clear and fritted glass can hardly qualify as ‘articulation’. ‘The proposed Function Halls façade consists of 21 metre height (7 storey equivalent), of glass above the loading dock level, which is discouraged by The Policy and in no way attempts to blend with existing buildings along Terrace
Noted Matters relating to the revised proposal’s compliance or otherwise are addressed in detail in the ‘Officers comments - Building Heights and Setbacks’ section of this report. It is also noted that the overall design of the proposal which includes its presentation to Terrace Road was supported by the City’s Design Advisory Committee.
Page 21
Road to establish an urban edge characterised by complementary materials and finishes. (Clause 2.4.6)’ Loading Dock ‘The proposal to locate a major truck service dock accessed from residential Terrace Road is totally inappropriate when measured against the disruption it will cause to the residential street. ‘Increased incidence of rubbish trucks removing waste from the proposed Function rooms and supermarket will create noise and traffic congestion. The crossover for delivery/rubbish trucks will add an additional conflict point between pedestrians and vehicles on Terrace Road.’ ‘We note that the proponent’s submission correctly identifies and acknowledges the seriousness of noise generating machinery and activities from the loading dock, but merely states that (apart from a suggestion to install high speed roller shutters), this aspect will be ‘considered further in the next stage’. This is a ‘catch up’ solution that will undoubtedly involve sound deadening materials and ‘management procedures’ which are notoriously difficult to police and sustain over time. Whilst the perspective illustration submitted by the proponent shows the door to the proposed loading dock closed, (and the proponent’s acoustic report refers to ‘high speed roller shutters’), the reality is that this door will remain open, as currently occurs at the existing Adelaide Tce. loading dock (where monitoring over 2 ½ months has confirmed it is left open all the time!), and will constitute a visual eyesore’ ‘Medium size delivery trucks approaching from the east down Terrace Road and wishing to use the proposed loading bays on the north side of Terrace Road will need to turn around to park. The temptation will be to use the private Panorama entry round-about (which currently frequently occurs), thus
Noted The location of the loading dock is considered acceptable in this case noting that it enables the retention of all existing street trees and that the associated Transport Impact Assessment, which was reviewed by City officers, does not identify any traffic safety issues with the proposed location of the loading dock. Noting the proposal has not progressed to the detailed design phase, it is not practical at this time to confirm proposed mitigation measures. This is common to all major developments within the city. However, it is considered that appropriate conditions on any approval relating to noise and ongoing management can suitably address the matters identified in the long term. Specific and enforceable conditions relating to service vehicles access and management are proposed as part of any approval. Evidence of any unauthorised use of adjacent developments will not be tolerated and will result in enforcement action by the City.
Page 22
increasing hazard to Panorama residents, visitors and children living in Panorama, plus increasing wear and tear on the driveway. ‘The proponent has not demonstrated that it is not possible to access the loading dock from the existing loading dock off Adelaide Terrace’
Whilst the City’s preference would also be for all servicing of the site to occur via the existing loading dock accessed from Adelaide Terrace, the proponent has provided detailed investigations and justification demonstrating the option was not feasible in this case.
Noise ‘The blank wall adjacent to Panorama will act as a giant ‘sounding board’ and reflect street traffic and other noise from events on Langley Park, back into apartments. Trees planted adjacent to the wall will not be effective in absorbing noise’ ‘The proposed open air Terrace leading out from the Function Hall at level 7 will be a source of noise during functions which will be a cause of nuisance to Panorama residents’ ‘Pedestrians exiting onto Terrace Road late at night from events in the proposed new Function Halls will be noisy and disruptive to Panorama residents trying to sleep’
Noted As detailed within the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report, the side setbacks of the revised proposal are predominantly compliant with the side setback requirements of the Terrace Road Design Policy, apart from the lower service corridor area of the proposed function facilities on Lot 11. It is therefore considered that whilst noise may reflect from the street environment, which is entirely consistent with a high density urban environment, sufficient separation has been provided between the existing and proposed developments. The addition of landscaping on this western elevation will assist in reducing the reflection of noise from the western façade. The deck area is only proposed to include landscaping and will not be accessed for any purpose other than maintenance. A relevant condition on any approval will restrict its use accordingly. As noted in the ‘Officers comments’ section of this report there are a variety of access/egress points to the site which has been in operation as a hotel and associated facilities site for over 30 years in this central city location.
Reflectivity ‘The rising and setting sun in summer will reflect off the glass façade on Terrace Road to shine in drivers’ eyes and is thus
Noted Whilst there is some potential for issues associated with reflectivity from the façade of the proposed development, the
Page 23
likely to create a traffic hazard’
presence of mature street trees, the proposed external treatment of the facade including fritting and the alignment of the site frontage along Terrace Road are considered to provide suitable mitigation and limit impacts of reflectivity from the development.
Consultation with other Agencies or Consultants Department of Transport The original proposal was referred to the Department of Transport (DoT) for comment in relation to the provision of public and tenant car parking bays and compliance with the Perth Parking Policy (PPP). In correspondence dated 26 April 2017, the DoT confirmed the proposal complies with the PPP with respect to the provision and allocation of public and tenant car parking across the site. The revised plans were not referred to the DoT as no changes were made to the car parking. State Heritage Office The original proposal was referred to the State Heritage Office (SHO) for advice as the subject site is located adjacent to Langley Park which is a State Registered Place. In its correspondence dated 20 April 2017, the SHO advised that the proposed development does not significantly impact on the identified cultural significance of Langley Park. The revised plans were not referred to the SHO on the basis that the revised form of the development would have a lesser impact on Langley Park. City of Perth Design Advisory Committee The proposed development was initially considered by the City of Perth Design Advisory Committee (DAC) at its meeting held on 6 April 2017, where it was resolved that it: ‘1. commends the ambition of the owners and their willingness to make a
substantial investment in the site, noting the proposed master plan and intended staged redevelopment of the site;
2. would support the awarding of 20% bonus plot ratio for:
2.1 improvements to the existing public plaza and pedestrian linkages subject to the design of the entrances being reviewed to significantly strengthen the visual and physical connectivity to the plaza to ensure the development offers a more welcoming and engaging pedestrian journey through and to facilities that are perceived as being genuinely public;
2.2 the provision of the following specific facilities on private land:
a) a child care centre; b) public end of trip facilities; and c) community theatres and performance spaces; subject to details about how these facilities will be operated and
managed to provide public benefit in this locality;
Page 24
3. supports the general design and aesthetic quality of the development and in
particular the proposed improvements to and activation of the Plain Street and Terrace Road frontages, but suggests that the following aspects require further refinement:-
3.1 the Terrace Road façade should have a more civic presentation to
Langley Park with greater attention being given to the material quality, articulation and detail of the facades;
3.2 the corner statement to Adelaide Terrace and Plain Street should be a
more inviting entry to the public and the form needs to be understood in the context of the broader design intent for the future development stages;
3.3 the proposed roof cover over the public plaza areas should be removed
or reduced to create an improved civic feel to the spaces and to address the thermal performance of the space;
4. supports the proposed variations to the front and side setback requirements of
the Terrace Road Design Policy noting their limited impact on the streetscape, surrounding properties and Langley Park.’
The applicant subsequently met with the City’s officers and submitted revised plans and details which aimed to address the abovementioned issues. The revised plans were subsequently considered by the DAC at its meeting held 4 May 2017 and resolved that it: ‘1. supports the awarding of 20% bonus plot ratio for the provision of the following
public facilities: 1.1 public space - improvements to the existing public plaza; 1.2 pedestrian facilities - improvements to the existing pedestrian access and
linkages; 1.3 specific facilities on private land:
a) provision of a child care centre; b) provision of public end of trip facilities; and c) provision of community theatres and performance spaces; in compliance with the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy 4.5.1;
2. considers that the applicant has adequately addressed the Committee’s
previous design issues in relation to:
2.1 reviewing the design of the entrances to improve the visual and physical connectivity to the plaza level, however, further details will be required to address potential wind impacts, entrapment areas and landscaping at the Terrace Road entrance;
2.2 improving the civic presentation of the Terrace Road façade to Langley
Park, but considers that the curtain walling detail is not fully resolved;
2.3 revising the design of the corner statement to Adelaide Terrace and Plain Street to ensure that it is a more inviting entry to the public and that the design complements the broader design intent for the overall
Page 25
redevelopment, but notes the need for the curtain walling detail to be resolved; and
2.4 the proposed roof cover over the public plaza areas, which is supported
in principle; 3. considers that additional detail is required to be submitted to clarify details of
the building interiors, particularly at the plaza level and including a review of the viability of the proposed landscaping, noting the volume and shape of the proposed planters.’
The applicant submitted revised plans and details on 12 June 2017 which aimed to respond to the most recent DAC comments identified above. These plans were considered by the LDAP at its 6 July 2017 meeting and the planning assessment section below details the extent to which the revised plans responded to the relevant matters raised by the DAC. Noting the most recent modifications resulting from the LDAP deferral relate to only a portion of the overall development, the latest revised plans date 26 July 2017 were not presented to the DAC for additional consideration however the revisions were undertaken in consultation with the City Architect and City officers. Planning assessment: Land Use The subject site is located in the Office/Residential and Residential-R160 Use Areas of the Adelaide Precinct (P13). The Precinct will be developed as a residential quarter accommodating a wide range of residential and visitor accommodation and employment opportunities serviced by activities which support these uses. The Precinct will also accommodate offices, functioning as a secondary, less intensive, general office district and contain a mixture of general commercial activities of a kind that will contribute to residential amenity. Noting the northern portion of the site is within the Office/Residential Use Area and the southern portion is within the Residential-R160 Use Area the following table outlines the proposed land uses and their relevant permissibility or otherwise under City Planning Scheme No.2 (CPS2):- Land Use Office/Residential Use
Area (northern portion) Residential R160 Use Area (southern portion)
Dining Preferred Contemplated Education 1 Contemplated N/A – not proposed in this
area Healthcare 2 Contemplated N/A - not proposed in this
area Office Preferred Prohibited Recreation and Leisure Contemplated Contemplated Retail (General) Contemplated Contemplated Special Residential Preferred Contemplated Entertainment Contemplated Prohibited Public Car Park Use not listed Use not listed
Page 26
As noted above the majority of proposed land-uses within the development are either preferred or contemplated and are therefore considered to be appropriately located and consistent within the mixed-use nature of the wider development site. ‘Office’ and ‘Entertainment’ uses are prohibited within the Residential-R160 Use Area which raises potential issues with the redevelopment of the site. The previously approved office floor space within the Residential-R160 Use Area is considered a non-conforming land use. The proposed offices are to be located westwards of their current location and the area of the office floor space is proposed to be reduced. As such it is considered that the retention of the use may be considered in line with the non-conforming use provisions of Clause 20 under CPS2. The proposed function spaces on the southern portion of Lots 10 and 11 are proposed to replace the existing Hotel’s ‘Terrace Ballroom’, which is to be demolished to make way for the proposed supermarket. The new function spaces are to be used as an incidental and integrated part of the Hotel offering and therefore, have been assessed as part of the hotel (‘Special Residential’) use and not as separate, stand-alone ‘Entertainment’ use. The City has received legal advice confirming that that the function halls are ancillary to the hotel and not an independent use. Notwithstanding the proposed increase in the size of the function facilities, given the scale of the existing hotel facilities on Lot 10, it is determined that the proposed function rooms are incidental or ‘naturally attaching’ components to the hotel use. This is emphasised by the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1) which recognises that function facilities are an integral component of ‘high end’ hotels in the city. The public car park, while existing, is being modified and is subject to the provisions of Clause 34 of CPS2 and requires an absolute majority decision as part of any approval. Development Requirements Within the Adelaide Precinct, buildings on the south side of Adelaide Terrace will be designed to minimise impact on the adjoining residential uses on Terrace Road, particularly in relation to overshadowing, privacy and wind deflection. The protection and enhancement of the amenity and general environmental standards of existing and future residential development in and around the Precinct is important. The Terrace Road residential area will remain an area for high density residential uses. The area will have a high level of amenity and be characterised by a constant urban edge which strengthens the legibility of the public domain, an active edge to Terrace Road, articulated building forms and an interactive relationship between ground floor uses and the street. The proposal’s compliance with the CPS2, MTPS14 and Terrace Road Design Policy development requirements is summarised below (note: figures and description in bold signify non-compliance with the development standards with all variations discussed in detail in the ‘Officers Comments’ section of this report):- Item Requirement Proposal Compliance Maximum Plot Ratio
Base Plot Ratio Northern portion
Northern portion 3.17:1 (42,854m²) and
Bonus plot ratio sought in accordance with
Page 27
4:1 (54,156m²) Southern portion 2:1 (24,574m²) Total – 78,730m2 Maximum Bonus Plot Ratio of 50% (northern portion) and 20% (southern portion) consisting of a combination of any of the below: Public Facility – total site (20% maximum) Special Residential Development – northern portion only (20% and 40% for high quality hotel maximum)
Southern portion 2.4:1 (29,458m2) being a total of 2.8:1 (72,312m2) across the site inclusive of a plot ratio bonus of 20% (15,746m²) on the basis of including public facilities
Clause 28 of CPS2.
Maximum Street (Podium) Building Height: CPS2 Adelaide Terrace Plain Street (northern portion)
21 metres 21 metres
28.5 metres (corner statement/entry feature) 19 metres
Variation sought Complies
Maximum Building Height: CPS2 Northern portion Terrace Road Design Policy Southern portion
100 metres 14 metres for the first 10 metres with additional height to
28.5 metres 12.6 to 20 metres within the first 10 metres with the
Complies Variations sought
Page 28
be contained within a 34 degree height plane measured from a point 30 metres beyond the front boundary and 75 degree height plane measured from the eastern boundary up to a height of 52 metres
remainder being contained within the height plane
Setbacks: CPS2 Adelaide Terrace (north) Plain Street - northern portion (east) Terrace Road Design Policy Plain Street - southern portion (east) Terrace Road (south)
Nil up to height of 21 metres with a 5 metre setback up to a height of 65 metres and then a 10 metre setback up to 100 metres Nil up to height of 21 metres with a 5 metre setback up to a height of 65 metres and then a 10 metre setback up to 100 metres Nil up to height of 14 metres for the first 10 metres with additional height to be contained within a 75 degree height plane measured from the street boundary up to 52 metres Nil up to height of 14 metres for the first 10 metres with additional height to be contained within a 34 degree height plane measured
Nil up to a height of 28.5 metres (corner statement/entry feature) Nil to 2 metres up to a height of 19 metres then 5 metres up to a height of 28 metres Nil to 2 metres up to a height of 19 metres then 5 metres up to a height of 28 metres Nil up to a height of 20 metres
Variation sought Complies Variation sought Variation sought
Page 29
Side (west)
from a point 30 metres beyond the front boundary Nil up to a height of 14 metres for the first 10 metres measured from the street boundary with additional height after the 10 metre front setback being setback a minimum of 3 metres and contained within a 75 degree height plane measured from the property boundary
Nil up to a height of 12.6 metres then 4 metres up to a height of 29.2 metres
Variation sought
Car Parking Commercial Tenant Scooter/Motorcycle Bays Public (long stay)
516 (maximum) Nil Nil
516 63 490
Complies Complies Complies
Bicycle Parking Bicycle Bays End of Journey Facilities Lockers
189 (minimum) 5 male and 5 female showers and change facilities 67
145 9 female, 10 male and 1 unisex showers and change facilities 200
Variation sought Complies Complies
Variations to the height, setback and bicycle parking provisions applicable to the development can be granted by an absolute majority decision of the Council, in accordance with Clause 36 of the City Planning Scheme and provided the Council is satisfied that: ‘36(3)(c)(i) if approval were to be granted, the development would be consistent with:
(A) the orderly and proper planning of the locality; (B) the conservation of the amenities of the locality; and (C) the statement of intent set out in the relevant precinct plan; and
Page 30
(ii) the non-compliance would not have any undue adverse effect on: (A) the occupiers or users of the development; (B) the property in, or the inhabitants of, the locality; or (C) the likely future development of the locality’.
Officer Comments Plot Ratio As previously outlined, development within the site is subject to the provisions of CPS2 and Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14 - Withernsea (MTPS14). MTPS14 was established to facilitate the comprehensive redevelopment of land in the scheme area. With regards to plot ratio controls, the provisions of MTPS14 were initially established to provide for a ‘permissible plot ratio’ of 4.0:1 to be applied over the whole of the site. This is in contrast with CPS2 which provides for a maximum plot ratio of 4.0:1 for the northern portion of the site and 2.0:1 for the southern portion of the site. CPS2 also includes provisions for the awarding of bonus plot ratio up to maximums of 50% (northern portion) and 20% (southern portion). Noting the above, the City sought legal advice with regards to the application of plot ratio controls across the site. The legal advice confirmed that notwithstanding MTPS14 providing for a ‘permissible plot ratio’ of 4.0:1 across the site, any development would need to be considered and approved in accordance with the provisions of CPS2. As such whilst a plot ratio of 4.0:1 is permissible across the site under MTPS14, the restrictions to development applicable under CPS2 mean a maximum plot ratio (inclusive of any bonuses or transfers) of 6.0:1 for the northern portion and 2.4:1 for the southern portion is applicable to any new developments. As identified within the compliance table above, the proposal is generally consistent with the plot ratio provisions of CPS2 with proposed bonuses being sought as outlined in the following section. Bonus Plot Ratio for Public Facilities In accordance with CPS2, the northern portion of the site, as depicted on the Maximum Bonus Plot Ratio Plan, is eligible for up to 50% bonus plot ratio while the southern portion of the site is eligible for up to 20% bonus plot ratio which may be comprised of: • Public Facilities and Heritage: Maximum 20% bonus (includes public spaces,
pedestrian links, provision of specific facilities on private land and conservation of heritage places).
• Special Residential Use (northern portion only): Maximum 40% bonus (20% for a special residential use or 40% for high a quality hotel use).
The applicant is seeking a total of 20% bonus plot ratio for the provision of new public facilities. This is based on the application complying with the requirements specified under clause 28 of the CPS2 and the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy 4.5.1. The application is seeking the maximum award of 20% bonus plot ratio across the whole of the site for the provision of the following public facilities: • Public space – redevelopment of and improving public accessibility to the
existing internal plaza;
Page 31
• Pedestrian facilities – new and improved pedestrian access and links through the site;
• Specific facilities on private land: o Provision of a child care centre; o Provision of public end of trip facilities; and o Provision of community theatres, performance spaces and an art gallery.
The 20% bonus plot ratio sought equates to 15,746m² of additional plot ratio floor area across the site. With the southern portion of the site comprising plot ratio of 2.4:1 which equates to an additional 4,884m2 plot ratio floor area and the northern portion comprising a plot ratio of 3.17:1 and 10,862m2 of additional plot ratio floor area. The applicant has provided the following information and justification for the facilities to satisfy the applicable requirements of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy 4.5.1: ‘Public Plaza • The plaza is strategically located in an area where there is an identified need
for such a space as indicated in the City of Perth’s Urban Design Framework; • The plaza will be freely available and accessible to the public and the changes
to the design provide a more inviting access located centrally along Terrace Road;
• As indicated above, the plaza will be of an outstanding design quality and attractive and inviting to the public;
• The overall space is 1000m2 metres in area, regular in shape with appropriate dimensions of 20 metres by 50 metres and has been framed by the vertical dimension of the podium buildings. The event space is 658m2 with dimensions of 14 metres by 47 metres;
• The design of the plaza access has been significantly improved by providing a direct access from Terrace Road and the introduction of active tenancies will invite the public to use the space;
• The plaza is well defined by the podium buildings with the edges of the plaza activated through tenancies;
• The plaza will have a distinctive identity and character which is appropriate to its location as a covered event space to build upon events hosted both at the hotel and Langley Park;
• The roof cover is glazed and therefore there will be natural light and sunlight that will enter the plaza;
• The entire space is weather protected as it is proposed as a space that is used in conjunction with hotel events and also events held at Langley Park;
• The plaza as indicated in the landscape design will be provided with a high level of landscaping, seating, public art and lighting; and
• As the public plaza is to be covered there will be no impacts of wind on pedestrians using the plaza.
Pedestrian Facilities • The pedestrian facility is strategically located linking Adelaide Terrace to the
public plaza and to Langley Park; • The proposed pedestrian access provides a significant improvement to the
current access by making the access direct and activated;
Page 32
• The access will be freely available to the public and has been designed for universal access;
• The pedestrian facility links Adelaide Terrace to the public plaza and to Langley Park;
• The pedestrian facility increases and significantly improves permeability; • The pedestrian facility meets the requirements of the Pedestrian Walkways
Policy in that a four metre wide access is provided; • The amendments to the pedestrian accessways significantly improves access,
and activity is provided within a covered space and therefore is not impacted by the wind; and
• The accessway is provided with active uses as well as flexible spaces to encourage temporary uses such as markets etc.
Child Care Centre • There are a lack of child care centres in the city and the proposed site is
appropriately located in East Perth to service East Perth and to provide a facility on the way into the CBD;
• The child care centre has been designed in consultation with an operator and includes 482m2 of internal area and 399m2 of external play area of which 159m2 is covered;
• There is a strategic public need for more child care centres within the City of Perth;
• The location of the child care on the podium level away from the residential areas to the west means that the child care centre will not impact the amenity of the area;
• The child care centre is of an appropriate size, including internal and external areas and a drop off is located in the car parking area; and
• The child care centre has been designed in consultation with an operator who intends on running the child care centre.
Public End of Trip Facilities • Cycling is becoming increasingly popular in the City of Perth and the provision
of public end of trip facilities seeks to enhance cyclist facilities; • The facility is appropriately located at ground level with easy access from Plain
Street; • The location is appropriate for the site and the design includes excellent
facilities for the cyclists; • The facility will be managed by centre management which means that the
facility will exist as part of the overall site facilities; and • Appropriate signage will be installed to identify the facility and the access
arrangements. Theatre/Performance Space • There is an identified need for spaces such as the one proposed given the
number of cultural events held within the City of Perth and the lack of spaces within the East Perth area;
• The performance spaces have been provided as flexible spaces and therefore are able to cater for small or larger events;
Page 33
• The location along the Plain Street frontage means that the events will not impact the residential area to the west;
• The spaces have been designed to include both internal and external spaces; • The theatre/performance spaces are located at Level 8 with access provided
via three lift lobbies, which can all be used or individually used, depending on security requirements;
• The facility includes three enclosed built spaces, being the flexible performance area of 538m2, and two black box theatre spaces of 225m2 and 224m2;
• The spaces are flexible in that various configurations can be achieved to cater for small or large performances;
• The spaces will be available during the day and at night, however, will be closed from approximately 11pm to 9am;
• The spaces include a separate ticket information centre opposite the theatres, to enable ticket sales or information relating to the performances;
• It is proposed to market the spaces to established arts groups, community groups, service groups, Tourism Commission, event groups, educational establishments;
• A separate website will be established for the theatre/performance spaces to identify the size, configuration, facilities, hire fees and the schedule of events;
• The spaces will be able to be catered from the surrounding food and beverage tenancies;
• The spaces will include the ability to hire equipment including seating, stages, audio equipment, video equipment, lighting;
• A schedule of events is to be created to both market the events and spaces; • The spaces will be leased on commercial rates for similar spaces in Perth,
however, it is proposed to offer discounts to community groups and not for profit groups on a reduced fee arrangement, as follows: o Standard rate – full cost recovery and will apply to individuals, large
businesses, government and profit making organisations with a capacity to pay or to receive a fee for use of the facility when delivering a service.
o Community rate – 75% of full cost and will apply to not for profit groups, organisations, the education sector and with a capacity to pay, but who make a community contribution through their activities. The organisation rate applies to groups and organisations such as primary and secondary schools, tertiary & training institutions, social enterprises, sporting clubs, non-government organisations, arts and Cultural activities – for profit.
o Not for Profit Rate - 50% of full cost and will apply to not for profit smaller groups and community based organisations. The not for profit rate applies to groups and organisations such as community Groups located in the City of Perth, service clubs and organised groups such as Lions, Rotary, Seniors groups, arts and cultural activities (not for profit) and social groups.
• It is intended to allocate between 25-50% of the time and use allocation to other than the Standard rates, however, this will depend on demand from the Community and Not for Profit Groups; and
• The facility will be a public facility and will offer reduced rates to those groups that are community based and not for profit. Significant marketing and advertising of the facilities will occur as they are considered one of the various programs that will encourage people to use the site.’
The DAC, In its initial consideration of the application at its meeting held on 6 April 2017, expressed some reservation with regards to the location, design and details of the public facilities being proposed. The applicant subsequently provided amended
Page 34
plans and additional details which were considered by the DAC at its meeting held on 4 May 2017 where it confirmed its support for the awarding of 20% bonus plot ratio for the proposed public space and specific facilities on private land. Initial concerns were raised with regards to the legitimacy of the ‘plaza space’ being considered a public space worthy of receiving bonus plot ratio noting its location adjacent to Langley Park and being located above ground level and potential issues with limited public accessibility. Improvements to the location and design of access and egress to the space by the applicant have resulted in the space being provided with acceptable levels of accessibility. In addition clarification of the internal design of the space has confirmed it will perform a different and supportive function to the public space and activities available within Langley Park. The public plaza’s compliance with the specific performance requirements of the Bonus Plot Ratio Policy is summarised as follows: Performance Requirement Comments Location • Identified need for such a facility • Available for public use for maximum
time • Identity and character appropriate to its
context
The City’s Urban Design Framework identifies the site as supporting a future node area The location, accessibility and design of space ensure its use throughout the day and night The space is consistent with the current tourist, retail and entertainment function of the Hyatt Centre site
Design • Well defined edges and continuity • Some weather protection to enable
year-round use • Moderate to high levels of sunlight
access • Provision of landscaping and functional
seating • Visual attractors to draw the public to
the space • Ensure the safety and security of users
particularly at night • Provide universal access and avoid
variations in levels (where possible)
The space is appropriately framed by structures and uses across numerous levels The space is provided with suitable roof cover which can be opened in favourable conditions and will provide for year round use It is noted that access to sunlight is limited by its location to the south of the existing Hotel building The internal design provides appropriate levels of landscaping and seating The proposed use of innovative landscaping treatments and the expansive entry area from Terrace Road in particular provide sufficient interest to draw the public to the site The mix of uses, cohesive framing and lighting of the space will provide suitable levels of safety/security for users Noting the level difference across the subject site, the provision of a space with ground level access from all frontages is not possible. However, the design includes appropriate measures to provide for suitable pedestrian access and transitions across to the space from
Page 35
the adjacent streets Function • Varied land uses at edge to encourage
extended activity • Commercial uses may be permitted to
increase public interest and use
The space is appropriately framed by a mix of uses which will provide for extended day and night time use of the space
Management • Managed and maintained to a high
standard • Available for a range of public events
and activities
The space will be managed and operated by a single landowner with appropriate conditions included on any approval to ensure ongoing management and maintenance of the space The size, location and accessibility of the space will ensure its capacity to cater for a wide range of events inclusive of public events and activities
In accordance with the above, it considered that the proposed public plaza, inclusive of the access links, satisfies the majority of the performance requirements and the intent of the Policy. The plaza facilities will be located in a part of the city where the residential population is growing and will be freely available and accessible. The design quality is also anticipated to be of a high standard commensurate with the overall redevelopment works for the site. It is therefore considered that the proposed public plaza and access links will meet the essential criteria of the Bonus Plot Ratio Policy, however, specific conditions relating to final details regarding the design and accessibility of the space are recommended to be included on any approval. The improvements proposed in relation to pedestrian accessibility are supported by City officers however they are not considered to be facilities which can be considered separately as part of the awarding of bonus plot ratio. While the pedestrian facilities might address many of the performance criteria under the bonus plot ratio, they do not address the essential criteria. In particular, there is sufficient connectivity provided around the site via the existing street and footpath network noting the site is bounded by three streets and is not a mid-block location which is traditionally where strategically located pedestrian links are required. The proposed child care centre, end of trip facilities and theatre/performance spaces/art gallery are considered to meet the respective criteria of the Bonus Plot Ratio Policy for the provision of specific facilities on private land. Initial concerns in relation to how publicly available the facilities would be have been adequately addressed by the applicant however it is considered that ‘final’ management plans should be required as part of any approval to provide greater and specific details regarding ongoing management and operation of the facilities in addition to those details already provided as part of the application. Based on the above it is considered that the awarding of 20% bonus plot ratio, as recommended by the City’s DAC, is consistent with the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy 4.5.1 in terms of the provision of specific facilities on private land and public spaces and can be supported. Whilst the ‘pedestrian links’ element is not considered to constitute a standalone facility worthy of consideration for a bonus, it is only a minor element of the overall public facilities being provided as part of the proposed development and should be seen as part and parcel of the access for the public plaza and event space.
Page 36
Building Design and Presentation to Street Under CPS2, development within the Adelaide Precinct shall generally be characterised by medium scale buildings with a nil street setback to provide a consistent and continuous urban edge. Buildings should be designed to a high standard and evoke a sense of prestige. The design of development for the southern portion of the site is also specifically guided by the City’s Terrace Road Design Policy (6.4) which encourages buildings that in both their form and materials make a positive contribution to this important location. The Policy also provides for buildings to address the street with facades generally parallel to the street, inclusive of windows and with clearly definable entry points visible and accessed from the street. New buildings are not expected to imitate the materials, finishes or colours of the existing area. In view of these requirements and as outlined previously, the overall design of the Stage One redevelopment works was generally supported by the DAC, subject to the submission of additional details to address matters relating to: • potential wind impacts, entrapment areas and landscaping at the Terrace Road
entrance; • curtain walling detail which was not fully resolved; • details of the building interiors, particularly at the plaza level; and • a review of the viability of the proposed landscaping. In order to the address the DAC’s latest comments, the Terrace Road entry area in particular was modified to provide for a more open, inviting and safer environment with increased opportunities for surveillance. It is noted that with regards to wind impacts, a detailed assessment will be carried out at the detailed design stage to determine the appropriate level of wind mitigation to the Terrace Road entrance to the site. It is recommended that this be required as a condition of any approval, with a ‘final’ wind assessment being submitted in relation to the entire redevelopment works proposed. The latest revised plans have provided greater detail and clarity with regards to the proposed construction of the curtain wall façades to Terrace Road and Plain Street. The additional details confirm the proposed selection and configuration of the materials will provide for cohesive and suitable external façade treatments across the site frontages. The applicant has also provided additional details and plans which include greater clarification of the design intent and functionality of the internal spaces within the site and proposed landscaping components. The additional details are considered to satisfactorily address the relevant matters raised by the DAC. It is noted that design and composition of the development proposed for the south western portion of the site (Lot 11) has been modified from the plans presented to the DAC. The modifications have been undertaken by the applicant in response to concerns raised by adjoining landowners and also on the advice of City officers. In particular, the building proposed for Lot 11 has been reduced in height by nine metres and the loading dock has been relocated 25 metres to the east of its original location with the intention of reducing any perceived amenity impacts on the adjoining residential development. The relocation has also resulted in the retention of all existing mature street trees within the adjacent verge, noting the City does not support any removal or relocation of existing street tree assets. Whilst the relocation is supported, it is considered that certain design and functional elements will require
Page 37
further details to be provided at the building permit stage to ensure the revised location is suitably treated to integrate with the surrounding redevelopment works and adjacent streetscape. It is recommended that additional details be required at the building permit stage to this effect. In the further revised plans submitted on 26 July 2017, additional changes have been made to the building proposed for Lot 11 with the aim of reducing any associated amenity impacts on the adjoining and surrounding sites. The building’s presentation to the street has been further improved by setting back the upper level function room 10 metres in accordance with the Terrace Road Design Policy. The resulting terrace area will be landscaped as will the Level 9 function room roof. Removing the vehicle access directly adjacent to the western boundary and consolidating an entry and exit to the east of the loading dock will also enhance the building frontage. The landscape plans submitted in support of the application refer to proposed works outside of the property boundaries within the adjacent Terrace Road verge area, (notated as ‘porte cochere entry/drop off’). Any development is required to be contained within the property boundaries as the City does not support any private works within the street environment. It is recommended that a condition be included on any approval restricting all development works to be suitably contained within the subject site. Overall the revised design of the proposal is considered to result in an improvement to the original proposal and to the current form and external appearance of the site. The proposed works will modernise the aesthetic quality of the site whilst respecting the original ‘mini city’ objectives of the original design noting its city block dimensions. Amenity within the site will also be improved with greater levels of street activation and legibility being provided. Building Height and Setbacks In accordance with the CPS2 Building Height and Setbacks Policy (4.4) and Terrace Road Design Policy (6.4), the site has prescribed maximum building heights of 100 metres for the northern portion and 52 metres for the southern portion. The proposed development is compliant with respect to the maximum building heights permitted across the site. The site is subject to different maximum street (podium) building height maximums noting it has frontages to Adelaide Terrace, Plain Street and Terrace Road. Minor variations are proposed to the Adelaide Terrace and Plain Street frontages in terms of building height and setbacks noting the proposed redevelopment works are adding to existing buildings and structures along these frontages. The proposed variations are not considered to detract from the existing streetscape and will not be dominant or imposing from the adjacent pedestrian street environment and can therefore be supported based on the design being consistent with the requirements of Clause 36 of CPS2. Particularly as they are not considered to compromise the objectives of the applicable Building Height and Setbacks Policy (4.4) which require street building heights to generally relate to the role of the street in the city’s hierarchy of streets as outlined in the City’s Urban Design Framework and maximise sunlight penetration into streets. The proposed building height and setback variations proposed along Terrace Road are by contrast, more significant with the variations also being subject to strong objections from the adjoining and surrounding landowners. The Policy prescribes a maximum height of 14 metres within the first 10 metres setback from the front boundary with additional height to be contained within a 34 degree height plane as
Page 38
measured from the northern boundary of Langley Park. The proposed development includes a nil setback up to maximum building heights of between 21 metres (central portion – Lot 10) and 28.5 metres (western portion – Lot 11) along the Terrace Road frontage. The variation proposed for the central portion, which is 21 metres in lieu of the 14 metres prescribed, is supported on the basis that it does not compromise the main objectives of the Policy which are to establish an appropriately scaled edge to Langley Park and minimise wind and overshadowing effects on Langley Park. An analysis of the potential overshadowing impacts of the development has confirmed that the variation will not result in any additional undue shadowing of Langley Park when compared with a compliant development. This is partly due to the building height not exceeding 21 metres or extending to the maximum permitted height of 52 metres within the central portion of the site. The corner location of the site also reduces its impact in terms of providing an inconsistent streetscape along Terrace Road noting existing development to the west are of a lower scale. In this regard, the variations can be supported in accordance with the requirements of Clause 36 of CPS2. The western building on Lot 11 which forms 25% of the frontage to Terrace Road was previously double the height of the 14 metre maximum prescribed by the Policy. The modifications to the heights and setbacks of the revised building proposed for Lot 11 are considered to provide for an improved interface with the adjacent site and streetscape. In addition, the increased setbacks provided to the street and western boundaries for the lower and upper function space levels have reduced the proposal’s non-compliance with the requirements of the Terrace Road Design Policy. In particular, the building is now fully contained within the prescribed 34 degree height plane from the south and the upper levels are fully contained within the 75 degree side setback height plane from the west. However variations are still proposed to the street front building height which is 20 metres in lieu of 14 metres and the western side setback for the lower level service corridor which encroaches into the 75 degree height plane up to a height of 12.6 metres. The incorporation of landscaping elements to the western setback area and upper levels along Terrace Road are considered to reduce the impacts of the variations improving the interface between the existing and proposed buildings. It is noted that the Policy’s requirement for a maximum of four storeys along the Terrace Road frontage is to ‘ensure that Langley Park is not overshadowed, and that views from the rear of the site over such buildings will not be unacceptably infringed’. The intent being for a graduated height plane to the rear of each site up to a maximum height of 52 metres. The proposed height does not result in additional overshadowing of Langley Park as indicated in a review of the relevant shadow analysis diagrams and does not result in an increased impact on surrounding properties in terms of shadow when compared to a fully compliant built form. Whilst the setbacks and podium building heights proposed are varied in comparison to the existing adjoining developments along Terrace Road, it is considered that the design provides sufficient interest and activation of the eastern portion of Terrace Road, reflective of its status and function as a node for the locality. As this section of the Terrace Road Design Policy makes specific mention to reduce impacts on views within individual sites and does not make reference to adjoining or surrounding sites, it is considered that the proposal generally satisfies this requirement noting the site is a ‘super lot’ by virtue of its size and is subject to
Page 39
different height requirements from north to south. It is also noted that many of the existing developments along Terrace Road, including the Panorama Apartments, include minor variations to the established building envelopes which have resulted in minor impacts on views from developments to the rear within the northern portion of the street block. Notwithstanding, the reduced height of the building on Lot 11 will reduce the proposal’s impact on the existing views of the Swan River from the adjoining development and also provides for a more consistent built form edge to the Terrace Road streetscape. The terracing of the building from the front and side boundaries results in the proposal’s built form aligning more closely with the objectives of the Terrace Road Design Policy. The increased use of landscaping is also considered to provide appropriate levels of softening and interest to the overall design and aesthetic appearance of the western elevation in particular. In addition the anomalies identified at the LDAP meeting have been addressed by the applicant with all plans and perspectives now being consistent. Given the above, it is considered that the proposed height and setback variations can be supported in accordance with the requirements of Clause 36 of CPS2 and will not compromise the objectives of the Terrace Road Design Policy. Amenity Impacts, Noise and Orderly and Proper Planning It is evident from the range of submissions received that there is concern from the local community that the proposed development, due to its scale and bulk will have a detrimental impact on the character and amenity of the locality. It is acknowledged that much of the concern has arisen as the proposal represents the first major redevelopment of the site in over 30 years and will have an impact on views currently and historically enjoyed by surrounding residential developments. The impact of the development on the value of properties, the loss of views as well as the ‘right to views’, are all matters that are not directly relevant in any assessment of the planning merit of a proposed development. It is noted that these concerns are of a high importance amongst existing residents however cannot be specifically addressed within the relevant planning framework. Given the development’s bulk and scale is generally consistent with the provisions of CPS2 and the Terrace Road Design Policy (with the exception of variations to Lot 11 as discussed previously) it is considered that perceived impacts relating to parking and traffic management, overshadowing, access to natural sunlight and ventilation have been adequately addressed by the proposal. The applicant submitted an Acoustic Report in support of the proposed development which provides a preliminary assessment in relation to proposed noise mitigation measures and potential for the development to comply with the associated noise regulations. While the City’s officers are supportive of its recommendations it was noted that: • the acoustic report (Section 4.1) advises that mechanical plant has not yet
been finalised and further assessment will be required once it is selected to ensure it complies with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997;
Page 40
• prior to submitting a building permit application, the applicant shall prepare an acoustic report that has assessed all mechanical plant and equipment, including kitchen exhaust, for the development and demonstrates compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997.
• a number of mitigation methods are required to be implemented in section as identified in Section 4.2.2 in relation to the loading dock area; and
• Section 4.4 of the report contains recommendations for the function spaces which will need to be implemented as part of construction and ongoing operation of the facilities.
It is therefore recommended that any approval include a condition requiring a final detailed acoustic report to be submitted addressing the above requirements. It is also recommended that the relevant building permit plans are to be certified by an acoustic consultant to confirm that the proposed development contains the appropriate acoustic requirements to achieve compliance with the relevant noise legislation. In addition, specific Noise Management Plans in relation to the ongoing management of the various function spaces should be required as part of any approval. In responding to the deferral by the LDAP the applicant has made the following modifications to address the matters of proposal’s impacts on neighbours and the surrounding area raised by the LDAP: • ‘the upper level function room has been reduced in area by 522m2; • the car park access along the western boundary has been removed and
relocated further east; and • the loading dock has been amended to ensure that vehicles are able to enter
and leave the loading dock in forward gear thereby reducing any auditable reversing alarms.’
In addition, the applicant has reiterated that: • ‘the function rooms are completely enclosed and will meet the relevant acoustic
requirements as conditioned by the recommended conditions 10 and 11 relating to acoustic treatments and noise management plans; and
• there are no open external areas located adjacent to the property to the west.’ It is noted that access/egress to and from the function facilities can be gained from a variety of locations, including: • directly from the basement public car park, • from within the Hyatt Hotel approaching from Adelaide Terrace; and • from the Terrace Road central pedestrian entrance. It is considered that only those function patrons that have parked in Terrace Road would exit onto this street with many more leaving via alternative routes, thereby reducing any perceived impact that may occur. It is also noted that the different function spaces are expected to operate at different times and be used for different purposes or events and that not all spaces will operate at capacity at all times. This further reduces the potential for any adverse impact the patron numbers may have on the locality. While it is acknowledged that the proposed facilities represent an increase in function space compared to the current facilities at the existing hotel, for the reasons explained above, the facilities are not considered to have a significant impact on
Page 41
traffic, parking, or anti-social behaviour. In addition, the function spaces are enclosed, a noise impact assessment has been undertaken and reviewed by City officers to confirm compliance with the relevant legislation and appropriate management plans are recommended as conditions of approval requiring ongoing compliance by the hotel operators at all times. Whilst the site is partly located within the ‘Residential – R160’ use area under CPS2, it has been a mixed use development consisting of a variety of functions and uses for over 30 years. Noting its central city location, it is considered that the proposed uses and the intensity of those uses are appropriate for the site and the general locality. In addition both existing and any future development is required to comply with the requirements of the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1977 at all times. Car Parking and Traffic Management The existing development has approval for 618 tenant bays and the proposal seeks to reduce the number of tenant bays to 516 bays, being a reduction of 102 bays. The existing approved development also includes the ability to use 749 bays for short- stay public car parking (which includes after hours use of tenant bays). The proposal’s allocation of 490 bays as public long stay bays is considered acceptable given the subject site is located in the general parking zone (GPZ) under the Department of Transport’s (DoT) Perth Parking Policy which permits both short stay and long stay public car parking. The revised allocations are compliant with the provisions of the Policy and are supported by the DoT as previously outlined. The applicant submitted a preliminary Transport Impact Assessment (TIA) for the City’s review in relation to the proposed car parking modifications and associated traffic impacts of the proposed intensification of the site. The TIA is generally consistent with the City’s requirements and it is considered that the additional vehicular traffic generated by the redevelopment of the site can be accommodated within the existing surrounding road network. Some matters relating to improving general safety and traffic flows were identified as follows: • all vehicles must be able to enter and exit the proposed development in a
forward gear including service vehicles, avoiding reversing movements which will create a risk to the road users including cyclist and pedestrians utilising the footpath adjacent to the proposed development;
• the proposed entry and exit point on Plain Street shall be restricted to left in/left out movements only; and
• the proposed access points on Terrace Road and Plain Street shall not result in any removal of street trees and minimal net loss of on-street parking bays.
Although not specifically related to the deferral by the LDAP, the applicant has amended the design of the loading dock to enable service and waste vehicles to enter and exit the facility in forward gear as required in the initial report’s proposed conditions of approval. In addition, a full movement crossover has now been provided along Terrace Road within Lot 12, with left in, left out movements being provided at the Plain Street entry/exit to the development. The modifications to the access/egress points have been reviewed by City officers and are supported from traffic safety and capacity aspects. Whilst the modifications have addressed the matters previously raised by City officers above, it is considered appropriate to include relevant conditions as part of any approval to highlight these and ensure compliance at the building permit stage. In addition, the removal and reinstatement
Page 42
of any redundant crossovers and all new crossovers should be required to be located and constructed to the City’s specifications as a condition of any approval. Bicycle Parking A minimum total of 189 bicycle parking bays is required under the City’s Bicycle Parking and End of Journey Facilities Policy (5.3) across the development site. The proposal is compliant with respect to provision of bays for the commercial tenancies (office, retail, dining etc.). The existing shortfall with regards to the provision of bays for the hotel use is proposed to be maintained. It is considered that the minimum bicycle parking requirement for the hotel component is onerous given guests are unlikely to be arriving by or using bicycles. Given the anticipated low demand, a variation to the Policy can be supported in this case. Waste The applicant has submitted a Waste Management Plan (WMP) in support of the application. The WMP confirms that the development will generally be consistent with the City’s servicing requirements however, some matters need to be further addressed in preparation of the final WMP to be submitted at the building permit stage. The matters identified by City officers as requiring additional information include: • bin quantities, waste stream and collection frequencies to be reviewed and
adequately addressed noting ‘PulpMaster’ is not currently available in Western Australia;
• a contingency plan is required should the implementation of the above technology be delayed; and
• updated swept path analysis required to demonstrate suitable manoeuvring for service vehicles.
It is recommended that an advice note be included on any approval advising of the above WMP requirements. Conclusion: The proposed redevelopment of the Hyatt Centre will increase the amenity, vibrancy and usability of the site and will encourage its more active use . The provision of public facilities including a public plaza, child care centre, end of trip facilities and theatre/performance spaces/art gallery in accordance with the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy will add to the existing public offerings and diversity of services in this area of East Perth. The submission of revised plans and additional details are considered to have satisfactorily addressed the matters raised by the LDAP in its deferral of the application at its meeting held 6 July 2017. To this end, the revised development proposal more closely complies with the requirements and intent of CPS2 and the Terrace Road Design Policy and is more in keeping with the character of this section of Terrace Road. In response to the concerns of adjacent landowners, the revised plans aim to integrate the development more sympathetically with the surrounding development and to minimise any negative impacts on the adjacent apartments in particular.
Page 43
Given the above, it is recommended that the proposed development be supported subject to relevant conditions.
Page 44
LG Ref: DAP-2017/5111DAP Ref: DAP/17/01199Enquiries: (08) 6551 9919
Mr Peter SimpsonPTS Town PlanningPO Box 538INGLEWOOD WA 6932
Dear Mr Simpson
CITY OF PERTH LDAP - CITY OF PERTH - DAP APPLICATION - DAP-2017/5111 –DETERMINATION
Property Location: Lot 10 (99) Adelaide Terrace, Lot 11 (40) and Lot 12 (10) Terrace Road, East Perth
Application Details: Redevelopment of Podium Building and Construction of Additional Levels (Hyatt)
Thank you for your Form 1 Development Assessment Panel (DAP) application and plans submitted to the City of Perth on 24 March 2017 for the above-mentioned development.
This application was considered by the Perth LDAP at its meeting held on15 August 2017, where in accordance with the provisions of the City of Perth City Planning Scheme No.2, it was resolved to approve the application as per the attached notice of determination.
Should the applicant not be satisfied by this decision, an application may be made to amend or cancel this planning approval in accordance with regulation 17 and 17A of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011.
Please also be advised that there is a right of review by the State Administrative Tribunal in accordance with Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005. Such an application must be made within 28 days of the determination, in accordance with the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004.
Should you have any queries with respect to the conditions of approval, please contactMr Roberto Colalillo on behalf of the City of Perth on 9461 3167.
Yours sincerely,
DAP Secretariat
21 August 2017
Encl. DAP Determination NoticeApproved plans
Cc: Mr Roberto ColalilloCity of Perth
Postal address: Locked Bag 2506 Perth WA Street address: 140 William Street Perth WA 6000Tel: (08) 6551 9919 Fax: (08) 6551 9961 TTY: 6551 9007 Infoline: 1800 626 477
[email protected] www.dplh.wa.gov.auABN 68 565 723 484
Planning and Development Act 2005
City of Perth City Planning Scheme No.2
City of Perth Local Development Assessment Panel
Determination on Development Assessment Panel Application for Planning Approval
Property Location: Lot 10 (99) Adelaide Terrace, Lot 11 (40) and Lot 12 (10) Terrace Road, East Perth
Application Details: Redevelopment of Podium Building and Construction of Additional Levels (Hyatt)
In accordance with regulation 8 of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011, the above application for planning approval was granted on15 August 2017, subject to the following:
That the City of Perth LDAP resolves to:
1. Approve by absolute majority DAP Application reference DAP/17/01199 and accompanying perspectives (Attachment 2) and development plans (Attachment 3) in accordance with Clause 68 of the Planning and Development (Local Planning Schemes) Regulations 2015 and the provisions of City Planning Scheme No. 2, Minor Town Planning Scheme No. 14 and the Metropolitan Region Scheme, subject to the following conditions as follows:
Conditions
1. the plot ratio for the development being restricted to a maximum of 4.8:1 (or 64,987m² of plot ratio floor area) on the northern ‘office zoned’ portion of the site and 2.4:1 (or 29,470m2 of plot ratio floor area) on the southern ‘Residential R160 zoned’ portion of the site, inclusive of 20% bonus plot ratio (or 15,746m² of plot ratio floor area) across the site for the provision of a public space (public plaza) and specific facilities on private land (child care centre, end of trip facilities and community theatres/performance spaces/art gallery) in accordance with Clause 28 of City Planning Scheme No. 2 and the requirements of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1);
2. final details of the design, treatment of and access to the public plaza, including provision of universal access, landscaping, furniture, art, lighting, security, maintenance and litter control, together with the proposed management and maintenance of these areas being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
3. the public being granted permanent, unrestricted access to the public plaza for 364 days out of every year, with the written consent of the City being first obtained if it becomes necessary for public access to this area to be restricted for more than one day per year;
4. the child care centre, end of trip and community theatres/performance spaces/art gallery facilities being available for use by the public to the City’s satisfaction and not being limited to the exclusive use by tenants or occupants of the buildings on the site, with these specific facilities on private land being operational within three months of the occupation of the approved development and thereafter maintained as public facilities to the satisfaction of the City;
Page 1 of 5
5. leasing strategies and management plans for the tenanting and on-going operation of the child care centre, end of trip and community theatres/performance spaces/art gallery facilities, demonstrating compliance with the above condition, being prepared in accordance with the provisions of Section 5.4 ‘Provision of Specific Facilities on Private Land’ of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1) and being submitted for approval by the City prior to the occupation of the approved development;
6. in the event of the child care centre, end of trip facility and community theatre/performance spaces/arty gallery facilities not continuing, any new use being proposed for approval being limited to a public facility complying with the objectives of the City’s Bonus Plot Ratio Policy (4.5.1) to the City’s satisfaction;
7. the function spaces and facilities located within Lot 11, as shown on the approved plans, remaining an integral part of the hotel on the site and being managed and operated by the operators of the hotel at all times and not operating as standalone or independent function spaces to the satisfaction of the City;
8. the landscaped terraces and roof areas adjoining the function spaces and facilities located within Lot 11 not being used for function or associated purposes or being accessed by patrons of the function facilities or by members of the public, with access only being provided to the landscaped areas for authorised maintenance purposes;
9. the development being constructed with high quality and durable materials and finishes and to a level of detailing that is consistent with the elevations and perspectives received on 26 July 2017, with particular attention to the:
a) treatment and integration of the loading dock area; andb) quality of materials and finishes to the western elevation of the new function
facilities on Lot 11;
with the final details of the design and a sample board of the materials, colours and finishes being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
10. any proposed air-conditioning condensers, external building plant, lift overruns, piping, ducting, water tanks, transformers, fire booster cabinets and fire control rooms being located or screened so that they cannot be viewed from any location external to the site and to minimise any visual and noise impact on the adjacent developments, including any such plant or services located within the vehicle entrance of the development, with details of the location and screening of such plant and services being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
11. the recommendations contained in the preliminary Acoustic Report prepared by Wood & Grieve Engineering on 15 March 2017 regarding the noise amelioration construction specifications and other noise management measures being implemented in full to the satisfaction of the City, with a final Acoustic Report (refer to advice note) being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit and the relevant building permit plans being certified by a qualified acoustic consultant confirming the development can achieve compliance with the relevant noise legislation;
12. Noise Management Plans for the function and plaza spaces being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit with all approved management measures being implemented by the operator/s thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
13. a final environmental wind assessment being undertaken to quantify and compare the wind conditions against the relevant pedestrian wind comfort criteria and, if necessary, including mitigation strategies to achieve compliance with the criteria, with details beingsubmitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit, with any
Page 2 of 5
significant design changes in the opinion of the City resulting from the amended wind impact analysis being the subject of a separate application for approval;
14. the proposed floor levels of the ground floor pedestrian and vehicle entrances to the building being designed to match the current levels of the immediately adjacent footpaths, to the City’s satisfaction;
15. on-site stormwater disposal/management being to the City’s specifications with details being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
16. a maximum of 512 tenant car parking bays being provided on site, for the exclusive use of staff, guests and visitors of the development and not being leased or otherwise reserved for use of the tenants or occupants of other buildings or sites;
17. a maximum of 490 public long stay car parking bays being provided on site and managed/operated in accordance with the provisions of the Perth Parking Policy;
18. a Parking Management Plan outlining the management and access arrangements for tenant and public car parking bays, including drop off areas, being submitted for approval by the City, in consultation with the Department of Transport, prior to the occupation of the development with the plan being implemented by the operator/s thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
19. all vehicles (including service vehicles and the City’s waste vehicles) being able to enter and exit the proposed development in a forward gear;
20. the proposed entry and exit point on Plain Street being restricted to left in and left out movement only with a suitable separation barrier being provided to the specification and satisfaction of the City;
21. the proposed vehicle access points on Terrace Road and Plain Street not resulting in any removal of street trees and minimal net loss of on-street parking bays;
22. the central ‘port cochere/entry drop off’ area along Terrace Road being deleted;
23. a Vehicular, Service and Delivery Access Plan, outlining the management and arrangements for on-site servicing of the building, being submitted for approval by the City prior to the occupation of the development with the plan being implemented by the proprietor/manager thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
24. the hours of operation of the loading dock facility being limited to between 7am to 9pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 9pm Saturday and Sunday, with the facility being closed and aesthetically screened from view from the street when not in operation, to the satisfaction of the City;
25. the dimensions of all car parking bays, vehicle entrance, aisle widths and circulation areas complying with the Australian Standard AS2890.1, ensuring that vehicles can enter and exit the building in forward gear with a certificate of compliance by an architect or engineer being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit;
26. all redundant crossovers being removed and the verge and footpaths being reinstated in accordance with the City’s specifications and satisfaction and at the expense of the developer/landowner and all new proposed crossovers being located and constructed to the City’s specification and satisfaction, with any additional works external to the property boundaries of the site not being approved as part of this development and being subject to a separate application for approval by the City;
Page 3 of 5
27. a final Waste Management Plan satisfying the City’s waste collection requirements being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit (refer to relevant advice note);
28. final details of all landscaped areas including soil depths, plant species, irrigation, protection and retention of existing trees on site being prepared by a qualified landscape architect and being submitted for approval by the City prior to applying for a building permit with the approved landscaping being installed and maintained to a high standard thereafter to the satisfaction of the City;
29. the existing street trees located in the road verges on Terrace Road, Plain Street and Adelaide Terrace being retained and protected from damage throughout any demolition or development works;
30. Lots 10 and 11 being amalgamated into one lot on one Certificate of Title prior to the occupation of any of the new buildings within the development;
31. any new signage for the development being integrated with the design of the buildings with details of any signage that is not exempt from approval under the City’s Signs Policy (4.6) being subject to a separate application(s) for approval; and
32. a construction management plan for the proposal being submitted prior to applying for a building permit for the City’s approval, detailing how it is proposed to manage:
a) the delivery of materials and equipment to the site;b) the storage of materials and equipment on the site;c) the parking arrangements for the contractors and subcontractors;d) any dewatering of the site;e) the protection of street trees and any other City assets; andf) other matters likely to impact on the surrounding properties.
Advice Notes
1. This decision constitutes planning approval only and is valid for a period of two years from the date of approval. If the subject development is not substantially commenced within the two year period, the approval shall lapse and be of no further effect.
2. With regards to plot ratio, the northern and southern portions of the site referred to in condition 1 are in accordance with those areas as depicted on the Town Planning Scheme No. 14 Scheme Map 1.
3. The City advises that the final Waste Management Plan is required to address the following additional matters:-a) bin quantities, waste stream and collection frequencies to be reviewed and
adequately addressed noting ‘PulpMaster’ is not currently available in Western Australia;
b) a contingency plan is required should the implementation of the above technology be delayed; and
c) updated swept path analysis required to demonstrate suitable manoeuvring for service vehicles.
4. With regards to the preliminary Acoustic Report, the City advises that the final Acoustic Report is required to address the following additional matters:-a) assessment of all mechanical plant and equipment, including kitchen and other
exhausts, for the development demonstrating compliance with the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations 1997; and
b) confirmation of mitigation measures to be implemented in relation to the loading dock area and various function spaces.
Page 4 of 5
Where an approval has so lapsed, no development shall be carried out without further approval having first been sought and obtained, unless the applicant has applied and obtained Development Assessment Panel approval to extend the approval term under regulation 17(1)(a) of the Planning and Development (Development Assessment Panels) Regulations 2011.
Page 5 of 5
L20
S6S7L10
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCTELECT.
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
RAMP DOWN FROM LEVEL 2
DISH
DRA
IN
SLAB OPENING OVER
S5
FIRESTAIR
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
L8L7
L6
GREASE TRAP GREASE TRAP
CORE I.
HOTEL PLANT ROOMRL -1.7
SLAB EDGE OVER
SLAB OPENING OVER
DUCTDUCT
DUCTDUCT
LOW RISE PLANT
CORE H.CORE J.
DIESELSTORE
DIESEL ALTERNATORPLANT ROOM
DIESEL ENGINEBATTERY ROOM
STORE
L4
L3
L1
L2
SLABEDGEOVER
SLAB
OPE
NING
OVE
R
FIRESTAIR
SLAB OPENING OVER
S4
L12
CORE B.
ELEC
T. L11
RAMP UP TO LEVEL 2
SEWERMANHOLESEWER EASEMENT
L19
ELECT.
S10
L17
L18
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
ELECT.
FIRESTAIR
S8FIRE DOOR
FIRE
DOO
R
S3
S2
S1
S9
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
RAMP
No 2
L15
ELECT.
L16CORE F.
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
COLUMN
DUCT
S11
L13 ELEC
T.
L14 ELEC
T.
DISH
DRA
IN
RAMP
No 1
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
STEE
L STA
IR
STEE
L STA
IR
STEEL STAIR
CAISSONTO LIFT 9
FUEL TANKS ROOM
ESCALATORSLEVEL 1 RL -1.7
MAINTENANCEWORKSHOP
EXISTING PUBLIC BAY
EXISTING TENANT BAY
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
ZM
ZM/HB
DA111
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 1 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
DUCT
L15
L20
S6S7L10
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCTELECT.
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
RAMP DOWN FROM LEVEL 2
DISH
DRA
IN
SLAB OPENING OVER
S5
FIRESTAIR
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
L8L7
L6
GREASE TRAP GREASE TRAP
CORE I.
HOTEL PLANT ROOMRL -1.7
SLAB EDGE OVER
SLAB OPENING OVER
DUCTDUCT
DUCTDUCT
LOW RISE PLANT
CORE H.CORE J.
DIESELSTORE
DIESEL ALTERNATORPLANT ROOM
DIESEL ENGINEBATTERY ROOM
STORE
L4
L3
L1
L2
SLABEDGEOVER
SLAB
OPE
NING
OVE
R
FIRESTAIR
SLAB OPENING OVER
S4
L12
CORE B.
ELEC
T. L11
RAMP UP TO LEVEL 2
SEWERMANHOLESEWER EASEMENT
L19
ELECT.
S10
L17
L18
SUMP
COLUMN
ELECT.
S3
S2
S1
S9
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
RAMP
No 2
ELECT.
L16CORE F.
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
COLUMN
DUCT
S11
L13 ELEC
T.
L14
DISH
DRA
IN
RAMP
No 1
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
STEE
L STA
IR
STEE
L STA
IR
STEEL STAIR
CAISSONTO LIFT 17
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
TENANCYSTORE
EXISTING MECH. SHAFTTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DIESEL TANKS TO BEREMOVED AND REPLACED WITHNEW WATER PUMPS AND TANKS
NEW RETAINING WALLAT BOUNDARY
EXISTING FIRE STAIRS FROML1-L2 TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING WIRE MESH & SCREENCLOTH TO BE REMOVED
NOPARKING
NOPARKING
SEWER EASEMENT
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
NEW RETAIL &FUNCTION HALL LOBBY
TRAV
ELAT
ORUP
FRO
ML1
TO
L2
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
NEWGREASE
TRAPROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
MAINTENANCEWORKSHOP
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DIAPHRAGMWALL TO BE REMOVED
NEW RETAIL LOBBY
CORE E.
SERVICE
EX'G BRICKWALL & DOORTO BEREMOVED EXIST COLUMN TO
BE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXISTING PUBLIC BAY
EXISTING TENANT BAY
NEW PUBLIC BAY
NEW PUBLIC MOTORCYCLE BAY
NEW TENANT BAY
NEW TENANT MOTORCYCLE BAY
NEW GREASETRAP ROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
NEW GREASETRAP ROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
ELECT.
RELOCATE ELEC. CUP'B
LIFTPIT
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
CAR STACKERS(11 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(11 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
SLABOPENINGOVER
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
EXIST SLAB TO HAVECAR STACKER CUTOUT. ( typical )
EXISTING ESCALATORS AND WALLENCLOSURE TO BE REMOVED
PULPMASTER4000L
SERVICE
2 X GOODS LIFT
TENANCYSTORE
SERVICE
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
HB
HB
DA112
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
PROPOSED LEVEL 1 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
H
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HBC 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
L20
S6S7L10
COLUMN
DUCT
TELECOM / ELECTRICAL.
RAMP DOWN TO LEVEL 1
DISH DRAIN
SLABOPENINGOVER
S5
FIRESTAIR
HOTEL PARKINGRL 1.3
L8L7
L6 CORE I.
UPPER PART HOTELPLANT ROOM 1
SLABEDGEOVER
SLAB VOID
DUCTDUCT
DUCTDUCT
HOTEL PLANT ROOM 2
CORE H.CORE J.
L4
L3
L1
L2
SLABEDGEOVER
SLAB
VOI
D
FIRESTAIR
S4
L12
CORE B.LOBBY RL 1.3L11
RAMP UP FROM LEVEL 1
FMG'S GENERATOR
L19ELECT.
S10
L17
L18
COLUMN
DUCT
FIRESTAIR
S8
S3
S2
S1
S9
COLUMN
RAMP
No 2
L15
L16
COLUMN
DUCTL13
L14
ESCALATORS
KERB
KERB
RAMP
DOW
N FR
OM LE
VEL 3
RAMP No 3
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF LOADING BAY BEAM OVER
ACCESS HATCHOPENING INSLAB OVER.SLAB BEAMOVER.
STORE
LIFTLOBBY
SLABOPENINGOVER
HOTELBATTERYROOM
LOW RISEBATTERYROOM
HOTELSWITCHROOM
LOW RISETRANSF.ROOM
HOTELTRANSF.ROOM
11 KV SWITCHROOM
RL 2.3
RL 2.3
RL 2.3
RL 2.3
RL 1.3
RL 1.3
LOW RISESWITCHROOM
MDF ROOM
PABX ROOM
TELECOM.
LOBBY DUCT
S12
HOTELMAINTENANCEWORKSHOP
HOTELMAINTENANCEWORKSHOP
SLABBEAMUNDER.
FIRE
DOO
R
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
LOW RISEPLANT ROOM
STEE
L STA
IR
STEE
L STA
IR
STEEL STAIR
SLABBEAMUNDER.
HOTEL PLANT ROOM
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
HOTEL PLANT ROOM
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
FIREDOOR
ELECT.
PUMPROOM
CAISSONTO LIFT 9
L9
SPRINKLERROOM
FIRECONTROLROOM
SECURITY OFFICEBATTERY ROOMS
GAS METERROOM
PUMPROOM
SLABOPENINGLEVEL 2 & 3.
CONCRETE BALUSTRADE WALL TO RAMP
CONCRETE BALUSTRADE WALL TO RAMP
SLABOPENINGOVER
SLABOPENINGOVER
SLABOPENINGOVER
SLABOPENINGOVER
DISHDRAIN
RAMP UP TOPORT COCHERE
RAMP
No 5
DUCT
STORE
GARBAGEROOM
SLABOPENING
SLABOPENING
STORES14 OVER
HOTEL PARKINGRL 1.3
FIRE
DOO
R
STORE
PUBLIC PARKINGRL 1.3
ELECT./ M
ECH./TELECOM
SLABOPENINGOVER
S13CORE A.LOBBY RL 1.5
GARBAGEROOM
FIREINDICATIONBOARDROOM
RL 1.5
RL 1.5
SLABOPENINGOVER
RL 1.5
CUSTOMERSERVICE
M.F.S20
CORE F.LOBBY RL 1.5
ELECT./ M
ECH./TELECOM
STORE
PLANT
ELECT./ MECH./TELECOM
S11
GARB.ROOM
SLABOPENINGOVER
ROLLER DOOR
KERB
KERB
KERB
BIKEPARKING
CORE E.LOBBY RL 1.5
S19
STORE
STOREMALECHANGE
FEMALECHANGE
DUCT
GARB.ROOM
LIFTLOBBY
DISH
DRA
IN
RAMP
No 1
GARB.ROOM
SLABOPENINGOVER
FIRE
DOO
R
PARKINGRL 1.3
SLAB EDGEOVER RAMP
ELECT./ MECH./TELECOM
DUCT
CORE G.
BOOTH
CAGESTORE
STORE
RAMP
TUBEART
ROLLER DOOR
RAMP
DUCT
DUCT
LEVEL 1RL -1.7
LEVEL 2RL 1.3
DISABLEPICK-UP &DROP OFF ZONE
RAMP
RL 1.3
SLABOPENING
HYATT CENTREWORKSHOP
SLABOPENING
STORE
STORE
SERVICES
SERVICES
STORE
No standingC
learway
No standing3P
No Standing3P
No Standing3P
No Standing3P
No Standing
3PN
o Standing
3PN
o Standing
3PN
o Standing
Loading Zone3P
No S
tanding
3PN
o Standing
3PN
o Standing
MC BayMC BayMC BayMC BayMC Bay
Loading Zone
Disabled Zone
Loading Zone
Loading Zone3P
MC
Bay
PLAIN STREET
TER
RA
CE
RO
AD AD
ELA
IDE
TER
RA
CE
EXISTING PUBLIC ACROD BAY
EXISTING PUBLIC BAY
EXISTING TENANT ACROD BAY
EXISTING TENANT BAY
STORE
FUEL TANKEXTENT BELOW
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE AT >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE A
T >2
1-65
M HE
IGHT
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
ZM
HB
DA121
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 2 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
RAMP
DOW
N TO
LEVE
L 2
RAMP No 3
L20
S16
AHURL 5.129
CORE B.LOBBYRL 5.309
CORE C.LOBBY RL 5.309
RAMP DOWN TO LOADING BAY
DISH
DRA
IN
RAMP
No 4
11 KV SWITCHROOM RL 2.3
RL 2.3
RL 1.3
S5
FIRESTAIR
LOW RISESWITCHROOM
RL 1.3
SLABOPENING
DISH DRAIN
DISH DRAIN
RAMP
UP
TO P
ORT
COCH
ERE
RAMP
No 5
RAMP
DN
FROM
PORT
COC
HERE
RAMP No 6
RL 4.380
RL 5.309
LOUV
RE
RL 5.309
RL 4.380
FIRESTAIR
S4
SLABOPENINGLEVEL 2 & 3.
UPPERPUMPROOM
S34
VOIDUNDERRAMP
DUCT
L12
L11
S3
S15
ELECT./ MECH./TELECOM
S2 S14
DUCTDUCT
ARCADERL 5.309
S25
DUCT
S24
COURT No 1RL 5.128
DUCTDUCT
L4
L3
L1
L2
CORE G.LOBBYRL 5.309
DUCT
TELECOM
ELECTRIC. ELECTRIC.
ELECTRIC.
MALE
FEMALE
DUCT
DUCT
COOLROOM
FEMALE
MALEDICTATION
DICTATION
TYPINGTELEX
COOLROOM
BARSTORE
RL 5.309
KITCHENRL 5.179
MALE
FEMALE
FEMALE
MALE
CLN
BOARDROOMRL 5.309
STORESECRETARY
RECEPTION
DUCT
DUCT
CONCESSIONROOMSERVICEOFFICE
TELEPHONES
DUCT
HOIST
DUCT
TELECOM
DUCTDUCT
ELECTRIC. ELECTRIC.
STEWARDSSTORE
CROCKERY LINENSTORE
ROOMSERVICE
ROOMSERVICETROLLEYS
DISHWASH
POTWASH
BAKERY
CORE H.CORE J. POTWASH
EXECCHEF
COOLROOM
DRYSTORE
TOILETS
COOLROOM
GARDEMANAGER
COLDSERVICE DRY
STORE
DRYSTORECOOL
ROOM
COOLROOM
ELECTRIC.
DISHWASH
COFFEE
COLDSERVICE
COOKINGPREPSERVICE
DUCT
DUCT
FEMALE
MALE
STOREUNDER
S28
ESCALATORS
L8
L6
L7
DUCT
S12
DUCT
CORE I.SERVICELIFT LOBBYRL 5.309
S26
S23
S27
UNIFORMSTORE
MALE CHANGE ROOM
STATS &RECORDS
WINESTORE
ROLLERDOOR
ELEC
TRIC
.
FEMALE CHANGE ROOM
SENIOR FEMALECHANGE ROOM
HOUSEKEEPER DUCT
SENIOR MALECHANGE ROOM
LINENCHUTE
DIRTYLINEN
CLEANER
MAINDRYSTORE
ADMINISTRATIONPAYROLL
RECEPTION
SECURITY
PERSON'LPURCH.
REC.ISSUE
SODA FACTORY
KEG & BOTTLECOOL ROOM
DAIRY
VEG. STORE
DUCTCOOL ROOM
FREEZERROOM MEAT &
POULTRYPREP
FRUIT &VEG. PREP
FREEZERCOOL ROOM
SEAFOODPREP
CLEANLINENSTORE
FLOORHATCH
LOADING BAYRL 4.300
RL 5.329
OPENTREADSTAIR
MALE
FEMALE
CLEA
NER
STAFFRL 5.259
RL 5.309
RL 5.329
S7L10
L9
S17
REFRIGERATEDGARBAGE STORERL 5.204
TOILETSRL 5.289
RETURNCONTAINERSRL 5.329
STAFF ROOMRL 5.309CENTRE
MANAGERRL 5.309
S18
AHURL 5.329
L19
ELECT./ M
ECH./TELECOM
DUCT
CORE D.LOBBYRL 5.309
LAUNDRYRL 5.259RL 5.329
RL 5.289
DUCTDUCT
L17
L18
CORE E.LOBBYRL 5.309
S19
ELECT./ M
ECH.
TELECOM
AHURL 5.329
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
TOILETSRL 5.289
S10
S21
L16
L15
CORE F.LOBBYRL 5.309
S20
ELECT./ MECH.
TELECOM
AHURL 5.329
RESTAURANTRL 5.309
RESTAURANTKITCHENRL 5.309
TOILETSRL 5.289
S10
S21
TOILETSRL 5.289
TOILETSRL 5.289
COURT No 4RL 5.129
DUCT
COURT No 3RL 5.129
DUCT
COURT No 2RL 5.129
L13
L14S13
CORE A.LOBBYRL 5.309
ELECT./ M
ECH./TELECOM
AHURL 5.329
DUCT
LEVE
L 2 R
L 1.3
CONCRETE BALUSTRADEWALL TO ESCALATORS
STAGERL 5.980
DUCT
STAGERL 5.980
STAGERL 5.980
STAGERL 5.980
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDENGARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
RL 5.259
DUCT
HOTELSTAFFENTRANCE
ROLLER DOOR
COURT No 8RL 5.129
COURT No 7RL 5.129
COURT No 6RL 5.129
COURT No5RL 5.129
ROLLERDOOR
1PN
o Standing
1PN
o Standing
No standingC
learway
No standing3P
No Standing3P
No Standing3P
No Standing3P
No Standing
3PN
o Standing
3PN
o Standing
3PN
o Standing
Loading Zone3P
No S
tanding
3PN
o Standing
3PN
o Standing
Charter V
ehicle ZoneB
us Zone
MC BayMC BayMC BayMC BayMC Bay
Loading Zone
Disabled Zone
Loading Zone
Loading Zone3P
MC
Bay
PLAIN STREET
TER
RA
CE
RO
AD
AD
ELA
IDE
TER
RA
CE
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GARDEN
GOODSHOIST
TUBEART
PUBLIC BAR319M²
P10-L3-029
RL 5.309
CHINESERESTAURANT
253M²
P10-L3-030
CAFE143M²
P10-L3-031
RL 4.380
SHOP26M²
P10-L3-032
RL 4.380
SHOP26M²
P10-L3-033
RL 5.309
RETAIL106M²
P10-L3-034
F&BRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
OFFICERL 5.309
OFFICERL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
OFFICERL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RETAILRL 5.309
RL 5.309
TERRACEBALLROOM
633M²
FUNCTIONS415M²
RL 5.259
FUNCTIONS415M²
FUNCTIONS233M²
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE AT >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE A
T >2
1-65
M HE
IGHT
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
ZM
HB
DA131
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 3 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
RAMP
DOW
N TO
LEVE
L 2
RAMP No 3
L20
S16
AHU
CORE B.LOBBYRL9.338
CORE C.LOBBYRL 9.338
DISH DRAIN
DISH DRAIN
RAMP
UP
TO P
ORT
COCH
ERE
RAMP
No 5
S34
L12
L11
AHU
S15S14
OFFICESRL 9.338
BALCONYRL 9.233
DUCTDUCT
S25S24
DUCTDUCT
L4
L3
L1
L2
CORE G.LOBBYRL 5.309
RL 9.809
DUCT
TELECOM
ELECTRIC. ELECTRIC.
ELECTRIC.
MALE
FEMALE
DUCT
DUCT
RL 9.809
HOTELRECEPTIONRL 9.489
HOUSE PHONES
DUCT
DUCT
TELECOM
ELECTRIC.
DISHWASH
POTWASH
CORE H.
CORE J.
COOLROOM
ICE
ICEMAKING
COOLROOM
ELECTRIC.
DUCT
ENTRY
S28
L8L7
L6
DUCT
S12
DUCT
ELECTRIC.
CORE I.SERVICELIFT LOBBYRL 5.309
S26
S23
S27
RL 9.338
DUCT
LINEN CHUTE
DUCT
LOADING BAYDOUBLE VOLUMERL 4.300
L10
L9
S17
S18
L19
DUCT
CORE D.RL 9.338
L17
L18
CORE E.LOBBYRL 9.338
S19
S21
L16
L15
CORE F.LOBBYRL 5.309
S20
S22
L13
L14S13
CORE A.LOBBYRL 9.338
DUCT
CLOAK
ROLLER SHUTTER
FEMALE
MALEBANQUETKITCHENRL 9.459
ROLLERSHUTTER
RAMPUP
RL 9.358
COOLROOM
ROLLERSHUTTER
RL 9.338
COURT 5RL 9.248
COURT 10RL 9.248
STORE
COURT 6RL 9.248
GLASSSTOREWINE &
SPIRITS STORE
GLASSWASH
BAR
RL 9.404
RL 9.489FURNITURESTORERL 9.489
SERVICE PASSAGE
OPERABLEWALL
OPERABLEWALL
OPERABLEWALL
RL 9.489
RL 9.509
PASSENGERLIFTS
ENTRYRL 9.489
ENTRY
LUGGAGE
SECURITYDEPOSITBOXES
HOTELADMINSTRATIONRL 9.489
MALE
FEMALE
DUCT
BARSTORE
LOWERDININGRL 9.509
LOWERDININGRL 9.509
FEMALE
MALE
AHUMALE FEMALE
DUCT
DUCT
RL 9.338
BALCONYRL 9.233
OFFICESRL 9.338
AHU
DUCT
FEMALE
MALE
TERRACERL 9.233
AHU DUCT
GALLERYRL 9.233
AHUDUCT
FEMALEMALE
BRIDGERL 9.233
OFFICESRL 9.338
AHUDUCT
FEMALEMALE
OFFICESRL 9.338
AHU DUCT
TERRACERL 9.233
GALLERYRL 9.233
MALE
FEMALE
AHU DUCT
GYM
SQUASHCLUB
MALE CHANGE
FEMALE CHANGE
PORTE COCHERERL 8.000
RL 8.819RL 9.489
RAMP UP TO ENTRY
RAMP UP TO ENTRY
COURT 2RL 9.248
COURT 7RL 9.248
COURT 3RL 9.248
COURT 8RL 9.248
COURT 4RL 9.248
COURT 9RL 9.248
STORE
COURT No 1BELOW
COURT No 3BELOW
COURT No 2BELOW
COURT No 8BELOW
COURT No 7BELOWCOURT No 6
BELOW
COURT No 5BELOW
RAMP
DN
FROM
PORT
COC
HERE
RAMP No 6
GOODSHOIST
FEMALE
MALE
TOILETS
ESCALATORS BELOWSTAGEBELOW
ESCALATOR
STAIR
ESCALATOR
CONFERENCE159M²
PRE-FUNCTION220M²
RL 9.489
GRANDBALLROOM
794M²
RL 9.489
PRE-FUNCTION220M²
RL 9.509
CONFERENCE52M²
RL 9.509
CONFERENCE75M²
HOTEL LOUNGE421M²
HOTEL DINING605M²
OFFICE450M²
OFFICE2416M²
OFFICE944M²
RL 9.338
OFFICE939M²
RL 9.338
SQUASH CENTRE1115M²
P10-L4-011
P10-L4-012
P10-L4-013
P10-L4-014
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE FOR >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE F
OR >
21-6
5M H
EIGH
T
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
ZM
HB
DA141
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 4 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
HOTEL ATRIUM
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
PASSENGERLIFT LOBBY
L10
L12
L11
L13DUCT
CORE G
S24 S25
S27 S26
SERVICELIFT LOBBY
L15
L14
L16
LINENCHUTE
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
VOID
VOIDVOID
CORE J CORE H
CORE I
WC
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
DUCT
DUCT
L5 RL 13.709
SUPERIOR
DELUXE
DELUXE
FANRM
DELUXE
DELUXE
SUPERIOR
GUESTLOUNGE
GUESTLOUNGE
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
FANRM
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
UPPER BALLROOM
CONTROLBROADCAST
BIO BOXUPPER STRFOR PANELS
LINENROOM
CONTROLBROADCAST
FANRM
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL. BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
BAL.
F.WC
M.WC
GENERALMANAGER
ASST.MANAGER
SEC.
BANQ.COORD
BANQ.MANAGER
F.B.MANAGER
ASST. F.B.MANAGER
PROFFICE
GENERAL OFFICE
FANRM
HOTELADMINISTRATIONLOBBY
VOID
MEETINGROOM
GENERALOFFICE
ASST.SALESMANAGER
SALESEXCT
SALESMANAGER
MANAGER'SSUITE
PASS
AGE
PASS
AGE
ST.
CORE BLOBBYRL 12.938
L12
L11
AHU
S15AHU S14MALEWC
FEMALEWC
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
CORE ALOBBYRL 12.938
L13
S13
AHU
L14
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
S22
AHU
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
AHU
S21
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
CORE FLOBBYRL 12.938
L15
S20
AHU L16
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
CORE ELOBBYRL 12.938
S19
L18
AHU L17
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
RL 12.938OFFICESRL 12.938
OFFICESRL 12.938
OFFICESRL 12.938
OFFICESRL 12.938
OFFICESRL 12.938
UPPERCOURT 6
UPPERCOURT 7
UPPERCOURT 8
UPPERCOURT 9
UPPERCOURT 10
UPPERCOURT 2
UPPERCOURT 3
UPPERCOURT 4
UPPERCOURT 5
SQUASH CENTRECORE DLOBBYRL 12.938
S18
AHU
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
UPPER LOADING BAY
UNDER POOL SPACE
DUCT DUCTDUCT
DUCT DUCT DUCT
L9
CORE CLOBBYRL 12.938
S16
L20
AHU
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
S23
PLANT ROOMRL 12.958
PLANT ROOMRL 12.958
GUESTLOUNGE
GAMES ROOMRL 12.938 RL 13.709
COURT No 1BELOW
COURT No 3BELOW
COURT No 2BELOW
COURT No 8BELOW
COURT No 7BELOWCOURT No 6
BELOW
COURT No 5BELOW
L19
COURT No 4 GLAZED VAULT ROOF
OFFICE3285M²
RL 12.938
OFFICE2706M²
RL 12.938
OFFICE607M²
P10-L5-001
P10-L5-002
P10-L5-003
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE FOR >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE F
OR >
21-6
5M H
EIGH
T
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
HB
HB
DA151
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 5 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
ATRIUM
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIORSUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
PASSENGERLIFT LOBBY
L10
L12
L11
L13DUCT
CORE GMINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
S24 S25
S27 S26
SERVICELIFT LOBBY
L15
L14
L16
LINENROOMLINEN
CHUTE
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
VOID
VOID VOID
VOIDVOID
VOIDVOID
CORE J CORE H
CORE I
WC
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
DUCT
DUCT
L6 RL 17.929
FAMILYSUITE
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
CORE BLOBBYRL 16.538
L12
L11
AHU
S15AHU S14MALEWC
FEMALEWC
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
CORE ALOBBYRL 16.538
L13
S13
AHU
L14
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
S22
AHU
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
AHU
S21
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
CORE FLOBBYRL 16.538
L15
S20
AHU L16
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
CORE ELOBBYRL 16.538
S19
L18
AHU L17
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
OFFICESRL 16.538
OFFICESRL 16.538
OFFICESRL 16.538
RL 16.538
OFFICESRL 16.538
CORE DLOBBYRL 16.538
S18
AHU
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
DUCT DUCTDUCT
DUCT DUCT
CORE CLOBBYRL 12.938
S16
L20
AHU
FEMALEWC
MALEWC
S23
UPPER TERRACERL 17.029
DUCT
EXISTINGGLAZEDROOFOVER
EXISTINGGLAZEDROOFOVER
POOL TERRACERL 16.433
RL 17.029
RL 16.433RL 16.433
SWIMMING POOL
TERRACE ATLEVEL 5
TENNIS COURT TERRACERL 16.433
TENNIS COURT
COURT No 1BELOW
COURT No 4BELOW
COURT No 3BELOW
COURT No 2BELOW
COURT No 8BELOW
COURT No 7BELOWCOURT No 6
BELOW
COURT No 5BELOW
L19
P10-L6-003OFFICE3058M²
RL 16.538
P10-L6-004OFFICE558M²
RL 16.538
P10-L6-002OFFICE1881M²
RL 16.538
P10-L6-001OFFICE1113M²
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE FOR >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE F
OR >
21-6
5M H
EIGH
T
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
HB
HB
DA161
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 6 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
ATRIUM
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIORSUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
PASSENGERLIFT LOBBY
L10
L12
L11
L13DUCT
CORE GMINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
S24 S25
S27 S26
SERVICELIFT LOBBY
L15
L14
L16
LINENROOMLINEN
CHUTE
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
VOID
VOID VOID
VOIDVOID
VOIDVOID
POSITION OF
BRIDGE L12
POSITION OF
BRIDGE L12
CORE J CORE H
CORE I
WC
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
BRIDGE L7
BRIDGE L7
DUCT
DUCT
L7 RL 20.759L12 RL 34.909(L12 SIMILAR W/ SUITES INPLACE OF FAMILY SUITES)
FAMILYSUITE
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
FAMILYSUITE
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
SLABOPENING L6
SLABOPENING L6
SLABOPENING L6
L13
L14
AHU
S15AHU S14
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE APLANT ROOMRL 20.158
L13
S13
AHU
L14
S22
AHU
S21
L15
S20
AHU L16
S19
L18
AHU L17
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
S18
AHU
DUCT DUCT
S16
L20
DUCT
GLAZEDROOF
POOL TERRACEBELOW
SWIMMING POOLBELOW
TENNIS COURT TERRACEBELOW
TENNIS COURTBELOW
COURT No 1BELOW
COURT No 4BELOW
COURT No 3BELOW
COURT No 2BELOW
COURT No 8BELOW
COURT No 7BELOWCOURT No 6
BELOW
COURT No 5BELOW
UPPER TERRACEBELOW
GLAZEDROOF
DUCT
COOLINGTOWER
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
DUCT
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
DUCT
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
COOLINGTOWER
LIFTMOTORROOMRL 21.758
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158 ROOF
RL 20.158
CORE BPLANT ROOMRL 20.158
LIFTMOTORROOMRL 21.758
PLANT ROOMRL 20.158
CORE FPLANT ROOMRL 20.158
LIFTMOTORROOMRL 21.758
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE EPLANT ROOMRL 20.158
LIFTMOTORROOMRL 21.758
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
L19
CORE DLIFT MOTORROOMRL 21.758
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE CLIFT MOTORROOMRL 21.758
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
AHU
PLANTROOMRL 20.158
PLANTROOMRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE FOR >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE F
OR >
21-6
5M H
EIGH
T
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
HB
HB
DA171
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 7 & 12 PLAN &LOW RISE ROOF LEVEL PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
ATRIUM
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIORSUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
PASSENGERLIFT LOBBY
L10
L12
L11
L13DUCT
CORE GMINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
S24 S25
S27 S26
SERVICELIFT LOBBY
L15
L14
L16
LINENROOMLINEN
CHUTE
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
DUCT
VOID
VOID VOID
VOIDVOID
VOIDVOID
BRIDGE L8, 10
BRIDGE L8, 10
CORE J CORE H
CORE I
WC
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
DELUXE
DELUXE
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
DELUXE
DELUXE DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXEDELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
DELUXE
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
DELUXE
DELUXE
POSITION OF
BRIDGE L9,11
POSITION OF
BRIDGE L9,11
DUCT
DUCT
L8 RL 23.589L9 RL 26.419L10 RL 29.249L11 RL 32.079
ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
POOL TERRACEBELOW
SWIMMING POOLBELOW
TENNIS COURT TERRACEBELOW
TENNIS COURTBELOW
COURT No 1BELOW
COURT No 4BELOW
COURT No 3BELOW
COURT No 2BELOW
COURT No 8BELOW
COURT No 7BELOWCOURT No 6
BELOW
COURT No 5BELOW
UPPER TERRACEBELOW
COOLINGTOWERBELOW
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
COOLINGTOWERBELOWROOF
RL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158 ROOF
RL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE C ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
CORE D ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOF PARAPETRL 23.658
CORE B ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE A ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
CORE F ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
CORE E ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOF PARAPETRL 23.658
ROOF PARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE FOR >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE F
OR >
21-6
5M H
EIGH
T
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
HB
HB
DA181
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 8-11
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
SPECIALSUITE
ATRIUM
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SUPERIORSUPERIOR
SUPERIOR
SPECIALSUITE
SUITE SUITE
SUITE
SUITE
SUITESUITE
TERRACE
TERRACE TERRACE
TERRACE
TERRACE
TERRACE TERRACE
TERRACE
PASSENGERLIFT LOBBYRL 37.739
L10
L12
L11
L13DUCTDUCT
CORE GMINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
MINORATRIUM
S24 S25
S27 S26
SERVICELIFT LOBBYRL 37.739
L15
L14
L16
LINENROOMLINEN
CHUTE
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
WALKWAY
DUCT
DUCT
DUCTDUCT
DUCT
DUCT
VOID
VOID VOID
VOIDVOID
VOIDVOID
BRIDGE
BRIDGE
CORE J CORE H
CORE I
WC
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
ADDITIONALBEDROOM
POSITION OF
BRIDGE L12
POSITION OF
BRIDGE L12
ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
POOL TERRACEBELOW
SWIMMING POOLBELOW
TENNIS COURT TERRACEBELOW
TENNIS COURTBELOW
COURT No 1BELOW
COURT No 4BELOW
COURT No 3BELOW
COURT No 2BELOW
COURT No 8BELOW
COURT No 7BELOWCOURT No 6
BELOW
COURT No 5BELOW
UPPER TERRACEBELOW
COOLINGTOWERBELOW
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
LANDSCAPED ROOFRL 20.158
COOLINGTOWERBELOWROOF
RL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158 ROOF
RL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE C ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
CORE D ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOF PARAPETRL 23.658
CORE B ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
CORE A ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
CORE F ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
CORE E ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFPARAPETRL 23.658
ROOF PARAPETRL 23.658
ROOF PARAPETRL 23.658
ROOFRL 20.158
ROOFRL 20.158
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
ADA501
ADA501
BDA502
BDA502
CDA503
CDA503
DDA504
DDA504
WDA404
SDA403
EDA402
NDA401
10M SETBACK LINE ABOVE 14M HEIGHT
5M SETBACK LINE FOR >21-65M HEIGHT
4M SIDE SETBACK LINE (R-CODE)
10M
SETB
ACK
LINE
ABOV
E 14
M HE
IGHT
5M S
ETBA
CK LI
NE F
OR >
21-6
5M H
EIGH
T
10-Storey ResidentialApproximate Top of Building RL : 35.60m
RL 11.840
RL 69.540
RL 63.660
RL 61.360
RL 9.560
HB
HB
DA191
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m 20m15m10m0m
EXISTING LEVEL 13
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HBB 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREETCLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888F / +61 8 9285 6893
E / [email protected] 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHTThis drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Groupand subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or usedwithout expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writingprior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior toreview of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENTINITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
H
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HBD 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HBE 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBF 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBG 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HBH 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
2.5 5 10 15 25m0
JUN 2017REV GC1.101JOB NO. 1608501
1:250 A1
P R O P O S E D A S S E T E N H A N C E M E N T I N I T I A T I V E S O N 9 9 A D E L A I D E T E R R A C E L O T 1 0 , 4 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 1 & 1 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 2
L A N E W A Y F & B / C O U R T Y A R D L E V E L 3
P R E P A R E D F O R G R A N D H O T E L G R O U P
L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T SL A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S4 1 4 R O K E B Y R D S U B I A C O W A 6 0 0 8T : ( 0 8 ) 9 3 8 8 9 5 6 6 E : m a i l @ p l a n e . c o m . a uL A N D S P A C E P T Y L T D A C N 0 5 6 5 3 8 6 7 9
COPYRIGHT This document i s and sha l l rema in the property o f P lan E
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
GRAND LOBBY / ENTRY FORECOURT, WITH CASCADE WATER FEATURE & BOARDWALK PAVING WHICH VISUALLY CONNECTS TO THE RIVER
FLEXIBLE EVENTS COURTYARD FRAMED BY LARGE POTS WITH FEATURE TREES
CATENARY LIGHTING ADDS TO THE FESTIVE ENERGY OF THE LANEWAY
ADELAIDE TERRACE PEDESTRIAN FORECOURT WITH WATER FEATURE AND FORMAL ENTRY
FUNCTION COURTYARDS PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INTIMATE SEATING AREAS AS WELL AS POP-UP EVENT AND PRIVATE FUNCTION OPPORTUNITIES
PAVING DESIGN RADIATES FROM THE BUILDINGS ORIGINAL ARCHITECTURAL FORM, RESPECTING AND REINFORCING THE AXIAL DESIGN.
FOOD & BEVERAGE LANEWAY BASED ON THE ‘CHINA TOWN’ IDEA. THE LANEWAY AESTHETIC CREATES A VIBRANT ATMOSPHERE WITH DIVERSE CULTURAL OFFERINGS OF BOTH RESTAURANTS AND BARS
LEGEND
2.5 5 10 15 25m0
JUL 2017REV JC1.102JOB NO. 1608501
1:250 A1P O R T E C O C H E R E / A R R I V A L & S T R E E T S C A P E L E V E L 2
P R E P A R E D F O R G R A N D H O T E L G R O U P
L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T SL A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S4 1 4 R O K E B Y R D S U B I A C O W A 6 0 0 8T : ( 0 8 ) 9 3 8 8 9 5 6 6 E : m a i l @ p l a n e . c o m . a uL A N D S P A C E P T Y L T D A C N 0 5 6 5 3 8 6 7 9
COPYRIGHT This document i s and sha l l rema in the property o f P lan E
1
11
2
2
3
4
3
5
4
6
5
6
PORTE COCHERE ENTRY / DROP OFF. FEATURE PAVING ACTS AS A WELCOME MATT CONNECTING THE RIVER TO THE PORTE COCHERE.
LUSH GREEN PLANTING FRAMES THE ARRIVAL DROP OFF CREATING A SOFT TRANQUIL SPACE.
LANEWAY CONNECTION.
LOT 11 DEVELOPMENT.
E.O.T - PUBLIC END OF TRIP FACILITIES.
TWO PERSON ALFRESCO SEATING ALONG PLAIN STREET.
LEGEND
P R O P O S E D A S S E T E N H A N C E M E N T I N I T I A T I V E S O N 9 9 A D E L A I D E T E R R A C E L O T 1 0 , 4 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 1 & 1 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 2
MAY 2017REV DC1.103JOB NO. 1608501
NTS L A N D S C A P E S P A C I A L U S E SS I T E E V E N T S P A C E S L E V E L 3
P R E P A R E D F O R G R A N D H O T E L G R O U P
L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T SL A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S4 1 4 R O K E B Y R D S U B I A C O W A 6 0 0 8T : ( 0 8 ) 9 3 8 8 9 5 6 6 E : m a i l @ p l a n e . c o m . a uL A N D S P A C E P T Y L T D A C N 0 5 6 5 3 8 6 7 9
COPYRIGHT This document i s and sha l l rema in the property o f P lan E
P R O P O S E D A S S E T E N H A N C E M E N T I N I T I A T I V E S O N 9 9 A D E L A I D E T E R R A C E L O T 1 0 , 4 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 1 & 1 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 2
major public event spacesHawkers night marketArts Fes valLaneway Music Fes valPerth Interna onal Arts Fes val
circula on
minor events / everydaylocal community / public spaces- gardens- relaxed sea ng- in mate spaces- Pop-Up stalls venders
major eventeveryday
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
41 4
everydayfood & beverage spill out
2.5 5 10 15 25m0
JUL 2017REV AC1.104JOB NO. 1608501
1:250 A1
P R O P O S E D A S S E T E N H A N C E M E N T I N I T I A T I V E S O N 9 9 A D E L A I D E T E R R A C E L O T 1 0 , 4 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 1 & 1 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 2
L E V E L 5 L A N D S C A P E
P R E P A R E D F O R G R A N D H O T E L G R O U P
L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T SL A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S4 1 4 R O K E B Y R D S U B I A C O W A 6 0 0 8T : ( 0 8 ) 9 3 8 8 9 5 6 6 E : m a i l @ p l a n e . c o m . a uL A N D S P A C E P T Y L T D A C N 0 5 6 5 3 8 6 7 9
COPYRIGHT This document i s and sha l l rema in the property o f P lan E
L E V E L 5 L A N D S C A P E
1
1
LOW TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES GROUND COVER PLANTING, WITH FICUS LYRATA TREES, AT 5M SPACINGS.
FICUS LYRATA TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES
LEGEND
2.5 5 10 15 25m0
JUL 2017REV AC1.105JOB NO. 1608501
1:250 A1L E V E L 7 L A N D S C A P E
P R E P A R E D F O R G R A N D H O T E L G R O U P
L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T SL A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S4 1 4 R O K E B Y R D S U B I A C O W A 6 0 0 8T : ( 0 8 ) 9 3 8 8 9 5 6 6 E : m a i l @ p l a n e . c o m . a uL A N D S P A C E P T Y L T D A C N 0 5 6 5 3 8 6 7 9
COPYRIGHT This document i s and sha l l rema in the property o f P lan E
P R O P O S E D A S S E T E N H A N C E M E N T I N I T I A T I V E S O N 9 9 A D E L A I D E T E R R A C E L O T 1 0 , 4 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 1 & 1 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 2
L E V E L 7 L A N D S C A P E
1
3
2
1
2
3
FICUS LYRATA TREES FRAME ENDS OF TERRACE AND VIEW FROM FUNCTION ROOM.
JASMINE GROUND COVER PLANTING WITH STEEL EDGING.
DECORATIVE STONE GRAVEL WITH STEEL EDGING.
FICUS LYRATA TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES DECORATIVE GRAVEL STEEL EDGE & GRAVEL INDICATIVE TERRACE VIEW
LEGEND
2.5 5 10 15 25m0
JUL 2017REV AC1.106JOB NO. 1608501
1:250 A1L E V E L 9 L A N D S C A P E
P R E P A R E D F O R G R A N D H O T E L G R O U P
L A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T SL A N D S C A P E A R C H I T E C T S4 1 4 R O K E B Y R D S U B I A C O W A 6 0 0 8T : ( 0 8 ) 9 3 8 8 9 5 6 6 E : m a i l @ p l a n e . c o m . a uL A N D S P A C E P T Y L T D A C N 0 5 6 5 3 8 6 7 9
COPYRIGHT This document i s and sha l l rema in the property o f P lan E
P R O P O S E D A S S E T E N H A N C E M E N T I N I T I A T I V E S O N 9 9 A D E L A I D E T E R R A C E L O T 1 0 , 4 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 1 & 1 0 T E R R A C E R O A D L O T 1 2
L E V E L 9 L A N D S C A P E
12
3
1
2
3
FICUS LYRATA TREES AT 5M SPACINGS
JASMINE GROUND COVER PLANTING WITH STEEL EDGING.
DECORATIVE STONE GRAVEL WITH STEEL EDGING.
FICUS LYRATA TRACHELOSPERMUM JASMINOIDES DECORATIVE GRAVEL STEEL EDGE & GRAVEL INDICATIVE TERRACE VIEW
LEGEND
DUCT
L15
L20
S6S7L10
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCTELECT.
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
RAMP DOWN FROM LEVEL 2
DISH
DRA
IN
SLAB OPENING OVER
S5
FIRESTAIR
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
L8L7
L6
GREASE TRAP GREASE TRAP
CORE I.
HOTEL PLANT ROOMRL -1.7
SLAB EDGE OVER
SLAB OPENING OVER
DUCTDUCT
DUCTDUCT
LOW RISE PLANT
CORE H.CORE J.
DIESELSTORE
DIESEL ALTERNATORPLANT ROOM
DIESEL ENGINEBATTERY ROOM
STORE
L4
L3
L1
L2
SLABEDGEOVER
SLAB
OPE
NING
OVE
R
FIRESTAIR
SLAB OPENING OVER
S4
L12
CORE B.
ELEC
T. L11
RAMP UP TO LEVEL 2
SEWERMANHOLESEWER EASEMENT
L19
ELECT.
S10
L17
L18
SUMP
COLUMN
ELECT.
S3
S2
S1
S9
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
RAMP
No 2
ELECT.
L16CORE F.
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
COLUMN
DUCT
S11
L13 ELEC
T.
L14
DISH
DRA
IN
RAMP
No 1
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
STEE
L STA
IR
STEE
L STA
IR
STEEL STAIR
CAISSONTO LIFT 17
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
TENANCYSTORE
EXISTING MECH. SHAFTTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DIESEL TANKS TO BEREMOVED AND REPLACED WITHNEW WATER PUMPS AND TANKS
NEW RETAINING WALLAT BOUNDARY
EXISTING FIRE STAIRS FROML1-L2 TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING WIRE MESH & SCREENCLOTH TO BE REMOVED
NOPARKING
NOPARKING
SEWER EASEMENT
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
NEW RETAIL &FUNCTION HALL LOBBY
TRAV
ELAT
ORUP
FRO
ML1
TO
L2
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
NEWGREASE
TRAPROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
MAINTENANCEWORKSHOP
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DIAPHRAGMWALL TO BE REMOVED
NEW RETAIL LOBBY
CORE E.
SERVICE
EX'G BRICKWALL & DOORTO BEREMOVED EXIST COLUMN TO
BE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXISTING PUBLIC BAY
EXISTING TENANT BAY
NEW PUBLIC BAY
NEW PUBLIC MOTORCYCLE BAY
NEW TENANT BAY
NEW TENANT MOTORCYCLE BAY
NEW GREASETRAP ROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
NEW GREASETRAP ROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
ELECT.
RELOCATE ELEC. CUP'B
LIFTPIT
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
CAR STACKERS(11 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(11 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
SLABOPENINGOVER
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
EXIST SLAB TO HAVECAR STACKER CUTOUT. ( typical )
EXISTING ESCALATORS AND WALLENCLOSURE TO BE REMOVED
PULPMASTER4000L
SERVICE
2 X GOODS LIFT
TENANCYSTORE
SERVICE
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
HB
HB
DA112
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m
20m15m10m
0m
PROPOSED LEVEL 1 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
I
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HB
D 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HB
E 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
F 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
G 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
H 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
I 06.11.2017 ISSUED FOR DAP AO
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREET
CLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888
F / +61 8 9285 6893
ABN 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT
This drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Group
and subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or used
without expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:
Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writing
prior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:
Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior to
review of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENT
INITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE
(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &
10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project:
DUCT
L15
L20
S6S7L10
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCTELECT.
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
EXTENT OF HOTEL RAFT S
LAB OVER
RAMP DOWN FROM LEVEL 2
DISH
DRA
IN
SLAB OPENING OVER
S5
FIRESTAIR
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
L8L7
L6
GREASE TRAP GREASE TRAP
CORE I.
HOTEL PLANT ROOMRL -1.7
SLAB EDGE OVER
SLAB OPENING OVER
DUCTDUCT
DUCTDUCT
LOW RISE PLANT
CORE H.CORE J.
DIESELSTORE
DIESEL ALTERNATORPLANT ROOM
DIESEL ENGINEBATTERY ROOM
STORE
L4
L3
L1
L2
SLABEDGEOVER
SLAB
OPE
NING
OVE
R
FIRESTAIR
SLAB OPENING OVER
S4
L12
CORE B.
ELEC
T. L11
RAMP UP TO LEVEL 2
SEWERMANHOLESEWER EASEMENT
L19
ELECT.
S10
L17
L18
SUMP
COLUMN
ELECT.
S3
S2
S1
S9
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
RAMP
No 2
ELECT.
L16CORE F.
SUMP
COLUMN
DUCT
COLUMN
DUCT
S11
L13 ELEC
T.
L14
DISH
DRA
IN
RAMP
No 1
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
CAR PARKINGRL -1.7
STEE
L STA
IR
STEE
L STA
IR
STEEL STAIR
CAISSONTO LIFT 17
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
TENANCYSTORE
EXISTING MECH. SHAFTTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DIESEL TANKS TO BEREMOVED AND REPLACED WITHNEW WATER PUMPS AND TANKS
NEW RETAINING WALLAT BOUNDARY
EXISTING FIRE STAIRS FROML1-L2 TO BE REMOVED
EXISTING WIRE MESH & SCREENCLOTH TO BE REMOVED
NOPARKING
NOPARKING
SEWER EASEMENT
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
PULPMASTER4000L
NEW RETAIL &FUNCTION HALL LOBBY
TRAV
ELAT
ORUP
FRO
ML1
TO
L2
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
NEWSERVICECORRIDOR
NEWGREASE
TRAPROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
MAINTENANCEWORKSHOP
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING BRICK WALLTO BE REMOVED
EXISTING DIAPHRAGMWALL TO BE REMOVED
NEW RETAIL LOBBY
CORE E.
SERVICE
EX'G BRICKWALL & DOORTO BEREMOVED EXIST COLUMN TO
BE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXISTING PUBLIC BAY
EXISTING TENANT BAY
NEW PUBLIC BAY
NEW PUBLIC MOTORCYCLE BAY
NEW TENANT BAY
NEW TENANT MOTORCYCLE BAY
NEW GREASETRAP ROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
NEW GREASETRAP ROOM
NEW SEWAGEEJECTOR PIT
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
ELECT.
RELOCATE ELEC. CUP'B
LIFTPIT
PUBLIC CAR PARK
STORE & USABLE ROOM
HOTEL
ZONI
NG B
OUND
ARY
CAR STACKERS(11 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(11 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
SLABOPENINGOVER
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(15 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
CAR STACKERS(7 BAYS)
EXIST SLAB TO HAVECAR STACKER CUTOUT. ( typical )
EXISTING ESCALATORS AND WALLENCLOSURE TO BE REMOVED
PULPMASTER4000L
PUBLIC / TENANT SHARED ACCESSPUBLIC (48.77%)TENANT (51.23%)
SERVICE
2 X GOODS LIFT
TENANCYSTORE
SERVICE
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
EXIST COLUMN TOBE REMOVED
HB
HB
DA112
HB/JC
N
1:250 @ A0
VISUAL SCALE 1:250 @ A0
5m
20m15m10m
0m
PROPOSED LEVEL 1 PLAN
A 02.11.2016 PROGRESS ISSUE HB
I
B 06.11.2016 95% SCHEMATIC DESIGN HB
C 11.11.2016 FOR CLIENT APPROVAL HB
D 17.11.2016 ISSUED FOR DA HB
E 16.03.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
F 27.04.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
G 09.06.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
H 26.07.2017 ISSUED FOR DA HB
I 06.11.2017 ISSUED FOR DAP AO
Drawn: Scale:
Drawing Title:
Job Number:
RevisionDrawing Number
Checked:
Status:
Client:
12 GUGERI STREET
CLAREMONT WA 6010
T / +61 8 9285 6888
F / +61 8 9285 6893
ABN 87 152 933 885
ACN 152 933 885
FORMERLY JAMES CHRISTOU + PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
COPYRIGHT
This drawing is copyright and the property of CHRISTOU Design Group
and subject to the Copyright Act must not be retained, copied or used
without expressed written authority.
CONTRACTORS MUST:
Verify all figured dimensions. Report any discrepancies in writing
prior to commencing on site.
CONTRACTORS MUST NOT:
Scale dimensions. Commence manufacture or construction prior to
review of shop drawings by CHRISTOU and the consultant group.
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
PROPOSED ASSET ENHANCEMENT
INITIATIVES ON 99 ADELAIDE TERRACE
(LOT 10), 40 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 11) &
10 TERRACE ROAD (LOT 12)
REV DATE DESCRIPTION BY
Building Certifier:
Surveyor:
Acoustics:
Structural & Civil:
MEP:
Approved:
FOZDAR
TY LIN INTERNATIONAL GROUP
WOOD & GRIEVE ENGINEERS
RM SURVEYS
JMG BUILDING SURVEYORS
GRAND HOTEL GROUP
Fire Engineer: STRATEGIC FIRE CONSULTING
16005
Landscape: PLAN E
Traffic: CARDNO
Environmental: FULL CIRCLE DESIGN SERVICES
Quantity Surveyor: RIDER LEVETT BUCKNALL
Waste: ENCYCLE CONSULTING
Planner: PTS
IN COLLABORATION WITH:
Project: