Council meeting held on 26/04/2021 - Item RP-3 Adoption of ...

SUBMISSION #1

SUBMISSION #2

Version: 1, Version Date: 06/07/2020Document Set ID: 5081890

SUBMISSION #3

From:To: City of Wagga Wagga; Wood, Adam; Councillor Greg Conkey; Councillor Dan Hayes; Councillor Vanessa

Keenan; Councillor Rod Kendall; Councillor Dallas Tout; Councillor Yvonne Braid; Councillor Paul Funnell;Councillor Tim Koschel; Councillor Kerry Pascoe

Cc: Thompson, PeterSubject: Amendments to DCP for Heritage Conservation AreaDate: Monday, 29 June 2020 1:22:08 PMAttachments: DCP Amendments - Heritage - Suggested Site Specific Controls.docx

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unlessyou recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor, Councillors and General Manager,As residents of Cooedong Lane we write to you all to beg for some site specific controls andobjectives for our laneway. This is a unique public access road in central Wagga, and for all theresidents of Wollundry Avenue top block , it is our only vehicular access. It is also a very busyroadway as it leads directly to Wagga Public School and many students use it as their route toschool every day. We just wish to see the character and architectural detail of this blockpreserved, and not overshadowed and dominated by two storey buildings situated right on thelane. The erection of such a building at 17 Wollundry Ave is a blindingly obvious example of inappropriate and ill-advised development, and if any further similar buildings were allowed, wewould have a giant wind tunnel with overshadowing and lack of privacy for any neighbouringhouses.Please take the time to consider our suggestions in the attached document, many of which arealready supposedly in use in the current DCP.Yours sincerely

This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.For more info visit www.bullguard.com

Submission on RP-1 DCP Amendment

As the owners of , a building in the heritage conservation area, which borders both Wollundry Ave and Cooedong Lane, we are writing to express our concerns about changes to the management of building development within said heritage conservation area. Our residence has been described (August 21, 2018) by the Council’s heritage adviser, John Oultram, as being “very unusual” and “a contributary item in the conservation area.”

Therefore it worries us enormously that development along Cooedong Lane appears to consist of Council agreeing to multiple secondary dwellings above large garage/shed buildings which will overshadow neighbouring houses and gardens, and create a wind tunnel effect along the lane. We purchased in this area partly because of the heritage conservation restrictions, and yet it appears that any developer can erect these very large buildings in the backyards of Victorian, Federation and Californian bungalow-style houses with no thought to the overall streetscape or traffic movements in a narrow lane.

The proposed amendments include “ensuring new work has suitable bulk, scale, proportions and detailing so that it does not dominate …the heritage conservation area’. Another proposal mentions that “opportunities for secondary dwellings fronting rear lanes …does not affect the amenity of adjoining sites.” With regard to Cooedong Lane further restrictions are proposed, including in 9.1.2.2 C3 that upper floors be contained within the roof form so as not to be visible from the lane frontage. One such very bulky secondary residence/garage development has already been approved by Council against the strongly-held objections of neighbours and a DA for another similar building is currently being sought.

Worryingly, the proposed amendment document notes that “inclusion of provisions specific to Cooedong Lane is at the discretion of Council.” Given building permissions that have already been granted at the discretion of Council, we are concerned that this area is not seen as unique or of special heritage value, and that developers will have a lot of freedom in their plans.

Regarding specific changes to the DCP, we are very worried by the proposed removal of C4 and C5, both of which refer to the need for additions to be “subservient in form and scale to the primary form of the building” and that they should “maintain a descending scale to the rear.” The proposed inclusion of a new clause C8 stating that “the scale or size of the carport, garage or shed should not dominate the main house” is potentially a good move. However, what exactly is meant by the word “dominate”? The current DA application before council for a secondary residence/garage at 21 Wollundry Avenue has the height of the house at 5.8metres and the height of the proposed new building at 6.3 metres. Surely having the additional building standing half a metre higher than the existing house comes under the definition of “dominate’?

We would strongly urge all the Councillors to drive down Cooedong Lane (especially at school pick-up times) and see for yourselves the unique qualities of this short roadway. It is our only road access, and therefore the visual impact of large buildings in a very confined space and the addition of more traffic, is of great concern.

We acknowledge that Wagga needs to grow and that there is space for more infill in central areas. However, this heritage conservation area is called that for a reason. Please do not allow an historic and very beautiful area to be ruined by over-development and greed.

Site Specific Controls – Cooedong Lane 9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Characters Cooedong Lane is a residential precinct within the Heritage Conservation Area where dwellings have primary frontage to Wollundry Lagoon. The dwellings incorporate Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar Bungalow styles of single storey structure. Vehicular access is only available through Cooedong Lane, that consists of single storey garages only, which has its own streetscape value that contributes to the neighbourhood’s character. Whilst the trend within Wagga may be for the addition of second-storey secondary dwellings, these second-storey secondary dwellings are considered inappropriate in the Cooedong Lane conservation area, due to Cooedong Lane being the only access to the residences along Wollundry Lane and its existing neighbourhood character. To ensure all development applications abide by this Desired Future Character statement, all applications must be accompanied by a Council supplied heritage consultant’s report and Council should adhere to the recommendations of this heritage consultant’s report. 9.1.2.2 Distinctive Neighbourhood Statement Objectives: O1 To facilitate development that is consistent with the desired Future Character of Cooedong Lane Distinctive Area. O2 Maintain the character and consistency in architectural detail consistent with the laneway. O3 Preserve and maintain the historic subdivision pattern of Wollundry Ave and Cooedong Lane. O4 Encourage alterations and additions which are sympathetic to the building’s significant features and which will not compromise heritage significance. O5 Ensure that alterations and additions respect the scale, form and massing of the existing building. O6 Maintain the harmony/character of the neighbourhood by ensuring development is complementary in form and materials and reflects the cohesiveness of the streetscape. O7 Preserve existing significant vegetation and landscape within front and rear setbacks of Cooedong Lane. Controls: C1 Design new work to complement the style and period of the building in terms of style, scale, form, roof form and materials. New works can be a modern interpretation but need to follow the original style. C2 Alterations and additions are to be designed so as to maintain the historical integrity and visual prominence of the existing building within the heritage streetscape. C3 Alterations should generally be to the rear of the property. Alterations to the side can be considered where side setbacks are sufficient. C4 Additions are to retain, and be subservient in form and scale, to the primary form of the building. C5 New work is to be below the main ridge height of the building, and be articulated from the primary form by setbacks in the walls and height of the roof. Maintain a descending scale to the rear. C6 Any dwelling addition, secondary dwelling or outbuilding proposed in the heritage conservation area must avoid being visible from the public domain, other than rear lane elevations. C7 Any addition that is attached to an existing dwelling or structure shall be suitably articulated to avoid a monolithic appearance. For example, by using stepped or rebated connections, compound roof forms, etc. C8 Use vertically proportioned windows. C9 Select materials to complement the period and style of the building and the conservation area. Use compatible, but not necessarily matching C10 The addition is not to extend across the full width of the building form. C11 Access at least 1m in width must be provided from the rear lane frontage to the back yard of properties via an unenclosed area. C12 A rear setback of at least 1m from laneways must be maintained by any garage structures.

Two storey and roof additions C13 Two storey additions are not appropriate in Cooedong Lane within the conservation area. C14 Attic additions may be considered on top of garages or car-ports only if they are fully contained within the roofline and no windows are to face adjoining or surrounding properties. Infill development C15 Infill development is to reflect the characteristic buildings in the vicinity in terms of bulk, scale, roof form, setbacks and materials. C16 Setbacks are to reflect the patterns of adjoining houses and the general pattern of the street. C17 Use pitched roofs with slate, terracotta tiles or corrugated metal. C18 Contemporary design is acceptable where it is sympathetic to the characteristic built form of the conservation area, particularly in terms of bulk, scale, height, form or materials. C19 Designs that provide for open front verandahs are encouraged. C20 Infill development will be supported by a heritage impact assessment and demonstrate that new development is compatible and sympathetic to the characteristics of the built form in the conservation area. C21 With all infill development in Cooedong Lane, all parking must be provided within the property boundaries. Garages and carports Objectives O1 Minimise visual intrusion from garages and carports, and require structures to be located behind the building line. O2 Establish parameters for the proportion and detailing of garage and carports. Controls C1 Car access must be from Cooedong Lane. Driveways, crossings and garages are not to be provided on the Wollundry Lagoon frontage. C2 Materials are to be compatible with the materials of the main building. Any detailing is to be subservient to the detailing or decorative features of the main building. C3 Max size of garages: Single garage – 3000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to an apex 3400mm high. Garage roller door 2600mm wide. Double garage – 6000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to apex 3900mm high. Two roller doors 2600mm wide in 3 equal wall bays. C4 The height of the garage or secondary dwelling must not be more than 4.8m above ground level (existing). The building shall be single storey construction with a maximum roof pitch of 27 degrees or steeper to match the roof pitch of the main building. C5 Specifications: Walls can be in Custom Orb corrugated metal, weatherboards, fibre cement sheet or face brick. Galvanised corrugated metal roof must be preferred rather than Zincalume. Roll barge and roll top and Gutters are to be quad or ogee profile and are to be the same colour and material as the roofing. C6 Doors may be tilt doors of a simple design and neutral colour. Roller doors may be considered on merit. C7 The scale or size of the carport, garage or shed should not dominate the main house. Carports C8 Where a carport is to be constructed to the side of a house: Use a skillion or flat roof form in corrugated metal with the high point set below the eave of the principal building form. C9 Double carports can be considered on rear lanes.

SUBMISSION #4

From: Tribe, KylieSent: Wed, 6 May 2020 06:49:30 +1000To: T1ConnectSubject: Fw: DCP Amendment No.16

#ECMBODY #NOREG #SILENT #QAP Default

From: City of Wagga Wagga <[email protected]>Sent: Wednesday, 6 May 2020 6:47 AMTo: Tribe, Kylie <[email protected]>Subject: Fw: DCP Amendment No.16

Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 4:56 PMTo: City of Wagga Wagga <[email protected]>Subject: DCP Amendment No.16 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Attention: Adam Wood, Strategic Planner Hi Adam, I am writing in relation to the Draft Development Control Plan Amendment No.16 that relates to the Heritage Conservation Area. I have spent some considerable time looking at the detail of the proposed amendments and would like to add my support to the changes. The proposal will be a great stimulus for infill development that will, in turn, have massive benefits for the CBD. The proposed amendments would allow modern but sympathetic development, whilst maintaining the integrity of the historical buildings. I have seen many examples of this type of development around the world in places with much longer history than Wagga Wagga, and find it stimulating and visually interesting. Please record my support for the proposed amendments. Regards,


SUBMISSION #5

SUBMISSION #6

SUBMISSION #7

SUBMISSION #8

SUBMISSION #9

From: Sent: Tue, 26 May 2020 13:08:35 +1000To: City of Wagga WaggaSubject: Heritage Conservation Area - Draft Development Control Plan Amendment No. 16

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

As a long term resident of I strongly support the recommended inclusion of ensuring those planning alterations to buildings/dwellings in the heritage area, must undertake a heritage impact assessment Kind regards


SUBMISSION #10

SUBMISSION #11

From: Kell, TristanTo: Wood, AdamSubject: FW: Submission to Draft DCP Amendment No. 16Date: Tuesday, 26 May 2020 2:15:37 PM

From: Sent: Tuesday, 26 May 2020 1:37 PMTo: Kell, Tristan <[email protected]>Subject: Submission to Draft DCP Amendment No. 16 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unlessyou recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

We spoke a few weeks ago about upper floor development within the roof form and I saidI intended to make a submission to the Draft DCP Amendment No. 16. Below is a draft ofthe text and I'd appreciate any concept(s) of 2-storey development from other conservationareas that illustrate alternate development styles that you can give me. ---===--- I thank Council for preparing the Draft DCP Amendment No.16 in an effort to resolvesome of the planning issues in the conservation area. In summary, I am generallysupportive of Section 3 subject to the comments below. I don't support:

1. Section 9 on the basis of not considering Cooedong Lane a Distinctive Area,2. Section 3.3.2 Controls C5 (Site cover) from WLEP2010 unless changes are

intended on the basis the provisions already apply,3. The continual loss of business at the western end of Johnston Street (see below),

and 4. A silent policy that upper floors should be contained within the roof form (see

below).I expressed a view during the 2010 planing process that I still hold on thecomplementary nature of business and residential development in Johnston Streetbetween Trail and Simmons Streets. This is particularly about people's continualpresence in the area (passive surveillance). Car parking doesn't provide thisbenefit and Council's planning policy continues to reduce actual businesses in thisarea. I am particularly concerned with the following proposed control which it seems,although unwritten, is already being applied:

C3 Contain upper floors within the roof form, so as not to be visible from thelane frontage

I realise this draft DCP Amendment is focused on Cooedong Lane but I expect thethemes will be considered for wider adoption with the review of the Wagga WaggaDevelopment Control Plan 2010 (DCP). I'd like to give my experience.

SUBMISSION #12

From: Tribe, KylieSent: Tue, 12 May 2020 09:22:36 +1000To: T1ConnectSubject: Fw: Adam Wood Draft development control plan amendment No.16

#ECMBODY #NOREG #SILENT #QAP Default

From: City of Wagga Wagga <[email protected]>Sent: Tuesday, 12 May 2020 9:21 AMTo: Tribe, Kylie <[email protected]>Subject: Fw: Adam Wood Draft development control plan amendment No.16 From: Sent: Tuesday, May 12, 2020 9:13 AMTo: City of Wagga Wagga <[email protected]>Subject: Adam Wood Draft development control plan amendment No.16 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organisation. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and know the content is safe.

Objection to site specific controls – Cooedong lane.See my objections in RED9.1.2.2 Distinctive Neighbourhood StatementObjectiveO1 To facilitate development that is consistent with the desired FutureCharacter of Cooedong Lane Distinctive Area.The 2010 DCP clearly states the future desire of central wagga lanes.Cooedong lane should be no different to any other lane.ControlsC1 Maintain the character and consistency in architectural detail consistentwith the laneway.There is no consistency of design in the laneway, It’s a mish mash of sheds, garages and carportsin a variety of old and modern design. Some structures have no design worthy of mention.C2 Preserve and maintain the historic subdivision pattern of Wollundry Aveand Cooedong Lane.Cooedong lane didn’t exist in the historic subdivision. circa 1800’sC3 Contain upper floors within the roof form, so as not to be visible from thelane frontageCouncil recently approved a rear lane development with a 1st floor and now you want tostop other residents of having the opportunity to develop their properties. I don’t agree.


SUBMISSION #13

1 July 2020

The General Manager

Wagga Wagga City Council

PO BOX 20

Wagga Wagga NSW 2650

Submission of comments to Wagga Wagga City Council, relating to the current Planning

Amendment on Exhibition.

Heritage Conservation Area – Draft Development Control Plan Amendment No. 16.

Having my own business as a Building Designer within the Wagga Wagga precinct this particular

DCP section has caused many past & current clients much grief and in turn many headaches for

both my business and council town Planners.

Both our company and the Association we are members of, BDAA – Building Designers Association

of Australia, have been pressuring council many years for changes to this particular Section of the

DCP.

It has been a painful 10 years having to justify ourselves for every garage we have completed in

the Heritage zone. This is because the controls just don’t practically work, nor are they a realistic

representation of people’s expectation for what a garage/shed/storage area needs to include.

Gone are the days of when these homes were built where families were lucky if they actually

owned one car. These days most adults and even older teenagers have their own vehicles to get

around, travel or just get to work in. Then you can also add to the vehicle list the ever-increasing

amounts of trailers, boats, caravans, camper trailers, motorbikes, pushbikes, etc that again most

families have at least one of.

So where is everyone going to house all of these vehicles, accessories, and still allow some space

for people to have hobbies, gardening equipment, camping equipment, etc.? The streets down in

the central areas are becoming more crowded when much of this can be improved by allowing

extra vehicle spaces in their own back yards.

I commend Council Planners on finally tackling this issue and actually doing something to improve

a heavily regulated issue into something that is more open to design opportunities and helping us

to provide the land owners in this area something closer to what they are really asking for.

Most of the Heritage zone is not like your standard suburbs where you get a double garage or

carport at the front of your house and then also allowed a large shed (up to 8% of the land area)

in the backyard, if needed.

So many homes outside the conservation area can end up with 4 or 5 secure spaces plus their

own driveway which could add on average another 2 parking spaces.

In central, if you have a rear lane you don’t generally get the front garage/carport or any extra

driveway parking, so these owners are fully reliant on whatever they can fit along the back. Which

currently is very little. Then any visitors instead of being able to pull up in someone’s driveway

have to rely on finding something on the streets, which for any streets near the main street

outside of limited hour controls can be quite difficult. The people tend to park in these positions

for the full day until work is finished.

It is due to this reason that houses in these zones that have rear lane access only, should have an

extension or exemption to the 8% rule in Section 9 of the DCP.

Outbuildings aren’t always built to store vehicles, they could have hobby rooms, rumpus rooms,

entertaining areas near pools, bathroom amenities, a man cave, or many other unmentioned

uses. Just because it is not connected to the house should not limit it to 8% of the block in size.

Can’t we just rely on the total site coverage of 50% to predict the overall size allowed?

Currently people are extending their homes from one end of the block to the other end of the

block just so they can avoid the outbuilding controls, this doesn’t make sense. They should be

allowed to have the space & garden between the two structures without being penalised as all of

a sudden it becomes an outbuilding and limited to 8%. The current controls are actually forcing

people to fill up their yards (against heritage values) to avoid the outbuilding issue.

So, I am in general agreement with council’s proposal but will address a few queries on some of

the new proposed DCP controls below: -

Alteration & Additions

C6 – any addition, secondary dwelling, or outbuilding should avoid being visible from the public

domain.

This control doesn’t really make any sense, we are separating the new and old by steps in walls

and roofs to clearly identify the new and old structures – so why the need to hide it. It’s just not

possible. Especially when council are encouraging secondary dwellings above garages – how can

this be hidden behind a single storey structure and how can the roof be lower than the main

house unless the house has a really high roof.

C8 – use vertically proportioned windows??

Why – especially when you state any extensions should be all hidden from the public domain

anyway, who’s going to see it. Depending on the window orientation, the views and the actual

room type generally determines the shape of the window we put in. This is a very restrictive

control that doesn’t need to be in there and it needs to be removed to prevent many ongoing

arguments between designers and Planners.

If it’s a side extension yes it may be needed to match in a window with the front elevation &

streetscape but other than this the window shape should be determined by the factors I

mentioned above.

I discussed this same issue with Planners recently who questioned my high horizontal window in

a main living area that was facing west. I stated that vertical windows facing west just on this job

would not pass Basix (without external blinds), not to mention the fact that the fence was only a

metre away and this would be all you would see. Basix is quite severe on extensions and windows

have to be thought about in great detail.

A vertical window facing west is just not a good design outcome unless it has good shading and

looking into an actual yard space.

So prescriptive controls such as this should be removed.

C10 – The addition is not to extend across the full width of the building form.

Does this mean the existing building?

Extensions have been allowed in the past to extend right across the existing structure, as long as

the roof depicts the difference between the new and old structures, it was seen as alright with

Planners and Heritage Advisor’s

Many of these homes and blocks are quite long and narrow and many homes are built from

boundary to boundary. This is the characteristic of these areas. Surely to make maximum usage

of the block, the walls should be able to continue on from the existing structure. Of course, it will

always be easy to determine where the old finished and the new started as there are articulation

joints, generally different coloured bricks, and changes in the roof form.

What about a building that is only using up half the block it is sitting on – are you saying that no

side extensions extending the building form to the side are allowed as it will make the building

wider than it was before?

Again, it is a restrictive control that is not needed, all applications should be assessed on merit

and discussions with Planners and the current Heritage Advisor.

Garages & Carports

Generally, very happy with council’s proposal in this section.

C2 – where lanes exist with vehicular access to the rear of the property, driveway crossings and

garages are not to be provided on the primary street frontage.

Is referring to existing crossovers and driveways? If a house has a front driveway and has a back

lane, do they have to remove the front part to get approval for the back part.

I have no issue with the control but it is not clear, and I do feel houses with an existing crossing

and structure should not have to remove it to put a rear garage in. Fair enough for new proposals.

C8 – the scale & size of the carport, garage should not dominate the main house

I realise you are trying to open up the controls removing size limits which is great but this control

brings personal opinion in and that as we know is where issues arise. It becomes one person’s

opinion against another.

C10 – Double Carports can be considered on rear lanes.

Seems a strange control, and is altering how someone tends to use their outbuilding.

Couldn’t the whole outbuilding be a carport if the owner so wished. It might serve as a second

outdoor entertaining area next to the pool, etc.

From the back it can look the same with garage doors and an articulated roof but why do they

have to put the other 3 walls around it if they don’t want to?

So, the controls saying you can have a 3 or 4 car garage, but not a 3 or 4 car carport?

I don’t understand the reasoning behind this control and I think it needs further clarification.

Cooedong Lane

I will also note that I am not in support of the proposed changes to Cooedong lane.

To make changes to the DCP that effect so few in the community seems narrow minded and

seems like council are just trying to appease a few local residents that have been jumping up and

down over a few recent developments.

These developments which fit within the current DCP are just as entitled to be there as they are

in any other residence in the conservation area with rear lane access.

Conclusion

Overall, I am very pleased that council is finally tackling this issue and thank council staff for their

efforts in pursing the proposed changes.

So, whilst I have had a bit to say in this letter most of it is in support of the proposed changes and

the rest is just trying to iron out some future issues, I can see arising from some of the controls

proposed.

I will finish in saying that a great percentage of the people we deal with in the conservation area

are older retired couples that are willing to spend a considerable amount on making an old

crumbling home into a new grand residence which will last for the next hundred years. They don’t

want to ruin the character of the existing home; they want to embrace it whilst at the same time

provide for their needs in retirement.

The current controls do not allow for these needs – I urge the councillors to support their Planners

and help them to provide what the general public in this area are wanting. Which is a place with

secure back yards, adequate parking, and peace of mind that what they have worked their whole

life for is secure and locked away from all the opportunistic crime that is occurring in this day and

age.

Yours Sincerely

SUBMISSION #14

SUBMISSION #15

From:To: Wood, Adam; Councillor Greg ConkeyCc: City of Wagga Wagga; Councillor Paul Funnell; Councillor Yvonne Braid; Councillor Dan Hayes; Councillor

Vanessa Keenan; Councillor Rod Kendall; Councillor Tim Koschel; Councillor Kerry Pascoe; Councillor DallasTout

Subject: Amendments to DCP - Conservation AreaDate: Friday, 3 July 2020 4:50:46 PMAttachments: DCP Amendments - Heritage - Suggested Site Specific Controls.pdf


30 June 2020

Adam WoodStrategic Town PlannerWagga Wagga City Council

Dear Adam,

Re: Heritage Conservation Area - Draft Development Control Plan Amendment No.16

As a resident of I am very concerned that the character and amenity of the Heritage Conservation Area is indanger of being destroyed through inappropriate development. There already exists a large proportion of the Conservation Area(approximately one quarter) which has been zoned R3 allowing for medium density residential buildings, as well as a considerableadjacent area of the CBD. Surely this is sufficient to allow for the development council is encouraging to revitalise the retail andbusiness sector of the main street and CBD.

Even before Covid-19 media reports indicated that more families are looking to move from the high-rise of the cities to countrytowns with more affordable homes and a yard for the children to play. This move has strengthened further since the pandemic hitand the ability to work from home has been realised. Hence there is the need to retain the availability of such property, not only inthe suburbs but in close proximity to the CBD.

When considering development applications within the conservation area Council should adhere to the recommendations of theheritage impact assessment supplied by Council’s heritage adviser in accordance with NSW heritage guidelines and requirements,and the controls within Part B Section 3 Heritage Conservation of the DCP.

Some of the objectives of 6.4.4. Heritage Conservation - LEP Clause 5.10 which should also be taken into consideration are:

a. to conserve the environmental heritage of Wagga Waggab. to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas including associated fabric, settings

and views.

Attached are recommendations specifically relating to controls for Cooedong Lane prepared by a majority of residents of the lane.Please give these your careful consideration for incorporation in the revised DCP in order to protect the integrity of the conservationarea from further inappropriate development.

Yours faithfully,

From:To: Wood, Adam; Councillor Greg ConkeyCc: City of Wagga Wagga; Councillor Paul Funnell; Councillor Dan Hayes; Councillor Vanessa Keenan; Councillor

Rod Kendall; Councillor Kerry Pascoe; Councillor Yvonne Braid; Councillor Dallas ToutSubject: DCP Amendments - Conservation AreaDate: Friday, 3 July 2020 4:45:21 PMAttachments: DCP Amendments - Heritage - Suggested Site Specific Controls.pdf


30 June 2020

Adam WoodStrategic Town PlannerWagga Wagga City Council

Dear Adam,

RE: Heritage Conservation Area - Draft Development Control Plan Amendment No. 16

After meeting with Peter Thompson the general manager in December 2019 and further discussions and a zoommeeting with council officers from the planning department who recommended we submit a list of Objectives andControls we would l ke included in the Amended Development Control Plan, residents of Cooedong Lane met on severaloccasions to consider Draft DCP Amendment No.16. Please find attached our recommendations for changes.

We feel the proposals of Draft DCP No.16 do not strengthen the controls sufficiently to preserve the character andamenity of the conservation area, particularly Cooedong Lane which is unique. The proposals often refer to the centralbusiness area of Wagga without acknowledging that the Conservation Area is a separate entity as indicated in Part BSection 3 Heritage Conservation of the DCP.

“Background” in Reports from Staff presented to Council Meeting of 16 March 2020 incorrectly states that theConservation Area “does not identify any individual property as being of individual heritage significance…” We suggestthis be replaced with:

Background

The Heritage Conservation Area applies to a large tract of residential area in Central Wagga Wagga to the west of theCBD which incorporates the area of the town’s early settlement. The Heritage Conservation Area has key characterattributes which should be taken into account during ongoing development. Contained within this area is the HeritageWalking Tour of the city’s most significant historic buildings, a number of which have been placed on the National TrustRegister. Central Wagga is one of the finest examples of urban development in Australia and its character and amenityshould be protected on an ongoing basis. Development needs to take particular care to ensure that the particularthemes, features or characteristics that make the item or area significant are not compromised by change.

Site specific controls 9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Character also incorrectly states that there are two storeydwellings fronting Wollundry Lagoon in the Cooedong Lane precinct. Our suggested replacement is:

9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Character

Cooedong Lane is a residential precinct within the Heritage Conservation Area where dwellings have primary frontageto Wollundry Lagoon. The dwellings incorporate prominent Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar Bungalow styles of singlestorey structure. Vehicular access is only available through Cooedong Lane, which has its own streetscape value thatcontributes to the neighbourhood’s character. Development is to be designed so as to maintain the historical integrityand visual prominence of the existing buildings within the heritage streetscape

We ask that you please give serious consideration to our submissions and the attached Objectives and Controls forCooedong Lane in order to protect Wagga’s heritage for future generations.

Yours faithfully,

Draft Amendments DCP No.16 PART B Section 3 Heritage Conservation - July 2020

Background The Heritage Conservation Area applies to a large tract of residential area in Central Wagga Wagga to the west of the CBD which incorporates the area of the town’s early settlement. The Heritage Conservation Area has key character attributes which should be taken into account during ongoing development. Contained within this area is the Heritage Walking Tour of the city’s most significant historic buildings, a number of which have been placed on the National Trust Register. Central Wagga is one of the finest examples of urban development in Australia and its character and amenity should be protected on an ongoing basis. Development needs to take particular care to ensure that the particular themes, features or characteristics that make the item or area significant are not compromised by change.

Site Specific Controls – Cooedong Lane 9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Characters Cooedong Lane is a residen-al precinct within the Heritage Conserva-on Area where dwellings have primary frontage to Wollundry Lagoon. The dwellings incorporate Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar Bungalow styles of single storey structure. Vehicular access is only available through Cooedong Lane, which has its own streetscape value that contributes to the neighbourhood’s character and consists of single storey garages only.

Whilst the trend within Wagga may be for the addi-on of second-storey secondary dwellings, these second-storey secondary dwellings are considered inappropriate in the Cooedong Lane conserva-on area, due to Cooedong Lane being the only access to the residences along Wollundry Lane and its exis-ng neighbourhood character.

To ensure all development applica-ons abide by this Desired Future Character statement, all applica-ons must be accompanied by a heritage impact assessment supplied by Council’s heritage adviser in accordance with NSW heritage guidelines and requirements, and the controls within Part B Sec-on 3 Heritage Conserva-on of the DCP. Council should adhere to the recommenda-ons of this assessment.

9.1.2.2 Dis<nc<ve Neighbourhood Statement Objec<ves: O1 To facilitate development that is consistent with the desired Future Character of Cooedong Lane Dis-nc-ve Area. O2 Maintain the character and consistency in architectural detail consistent with the laneway. O3 Preserve and maintain the historic subdivision paRern of Wollundry Avenue and Cooedong Lane. O4 Encourage altera-ons and addi-ons which are sympathe-c to the building’s significant features and which will not compromise heritage significance. O5 Ensure that altera-ons and addi-ons respect the scale, form and massing of the exis-ng building. O6 Maintain the harmony/character of the neighbourhood by ensuring development is complementary in form and materials and reflects the cohesiveness of the streetscape. O7 Preserve exis-ng significant vegeta-on and landscape within front and rear setbacks of Cooedong Lane.

Controls: C1 Design new work to complement the style and period of the building in terms of style, scale, form, roof form and materials. New works can be a modern interpreta-on but need to follow the original style. C2 Altera-ons and addi-ons are to be designed so as to maintain the historical integrity and visual prominence of the exis-ng building within the heritage streetscape. C3 Altera-ons should generally be to the rear of the property. Altera-ons to the side can be considered where side setbacks are sufficient. C4 Addi-ons are to retain, and be subservient in form and scale, to the primary form of the building.

C5 New work is to be below the main ridge height of the building, and be ar-culated from the primary form by setbacks in the walls and height of the roof. Maintain a descending scale to the rear. C6 Any dwelling addi-on, secondary dwelling or outbuilding proposed in the heritage conserva-on area must avoid being visible from the public domain, other than rear lane eleva-ons. C7 Any addi-on that is aRached to an exis-ng dwelling or structure shall be suitably ar-culated to avoid a monolithic appearance. For example, by using stepped or rebated connec-ons, compound roof forms, etc. C8 Use ver-cally propor-oned windows. C9 Select materials to complement the period and style of the building and the conserva-on area. Use compa-ble, but not necessarily matching C10 The addi-on is not to extend across the full width of the building form. C11 Access at least 1m in width must be provided from the rear lane frontage to the back yard of proper-es via an unenclosed area. C12 A rear setback of at least 1m from laneways must be maintained by any garage structures. Two storey and roof addi<ons C13 Two storey addi-ons are not appropriate in Cooedong Lane within the conserva-on area. C14 A`c addi-ons may be considered on top of garages or car-ports only if they are fully contained within the roofline and no windows are to face adjoining or surrounding proper-es. Infill development C15 Infill development is to reflect the characteris-c buildings in the vicinity in terms of bulk, scale, roof form, setbacks and materials. C16 Setbacks are to reflect the paRerns of adjoining houses and the general paRern of the street. C17 Use pitched roofs with slate, terracoRa -les or corrugated metal. C18 Contemporary design is acceptable where it is sympathe-c to the characteris-c built form of the conserva-on area, par-cularly in terms of bulk, scale, height, form or materials. C19 Designs that provide for open front verandahs are encouraged. C20 Infill development will be supported by a heritage impact assessment and demonstrate that new development is compa-ble and sympathe-c to the characteris-cs of the built form in the conserva-on area. C21 With all infill development in Cooedong Lane, all parking must be provided within the property boundaries.

Garages and carports Objec<ves O1 Minimise visual intrusion from garages and carports, and require structures to be located behind the building line. O2 Establish parameters for the propor-on and detailing of garage and carports. Controls C1 Car access must be from Cooedong Lane. Driveways, crossings and garages are not to be provided on the Wollundry Lagoon frontage. C2 Materials are to be compa-ble with the materials of the main building. Any detailing is to be subservient to the detailing or decora-ve features of the main building. C3 Max size of garages: Single garage – 3000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to an apex 3400mm high. Garage roller door 2600mm wide. Double garage – 6000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to apex 3900mm high. Two roller doors 2600mm wide in 3 equal wall bays. C4 The height of the garage or secondary dwelling must not be more than 4.8m above ground level (exis-ng). The building shall be single storey construc-on with a maximum roof pitch of 27 degrees or steeper to match the roof pitch of the main building. C5 Specifica-ons:

Walls can be in Custom Orb corrugated metal, weatherboards, fibre cement sheet or face brick. Galvanised corrugated metal roof must be preferred rather than Zincalume. Roll barge and roll top and GuRers are to be quad or ogee profile and are to be the same colour and material as the roofing. C6 Doors may be -lt doors of a simple design and neutral colour. Roller doors may be considered on merit. C7 The scale or size of the carport, garage or shed should not dominate the main house. Carports C8 Where a carport is to be constructed to the side of a house: Use a skillion or flat roof form in corrugated metal with the high point set below the eave of the principal building form. C9 Double carports can be considered on rear lanes.

SUBMISSION #16

2

(p13) C5 New work is to be below the main ridge height of the building, and be articulated from the primary form by setbacks in the walls and height of the roof. Maintain a descending scale to the rear.

We are supportive of this change, on the understanding that this section is permissive of well-designed sympathetic two-story additions that may be marginally higher than the original main ridge height (although this is not what the section specifies). It would be clearer if this section specified that two-story additions are permitted.

(p13) C6 Any dwelling addition, secondary dwelling or outbuilding proposed in the heritage conservation area should avoid being visible from the public domain, other than rear lane elevations.

We are concerned at the vague nature of this section. It is not possible for most additions etc to totally avoid being visible from the street. We suggest that this wording be modified to accommodate additions that are mostly obscured from the street and that do not dominate the heritage streetscape.

(p13) C7 Any addition that is attached to an existing dwelling or structure shall be suitably articulated to avoid a monolithic appearance. For example, by using stepped or rebated connections, compound roof forms, etc.

We especially support this section. Distinguishing modern additions from the original building in the heritage areas will preserve the heritage values and appeal of these buildings for future generations.

(p14) C10 The addition is not to extend across the full width of the building form.

We are concerned with the vague wording of this section. It should be clear that additions at the rear of buildings can extend across the full width of the existing house, and that this section refers to the front of the building.

(p14) C11 Access at least 1m in width must be provided from the rear lane frontage to the back yard of properties via an unenclosed area.

We have significant concerns with this section. We would like to build across the full width of the rear lane so that our house is more secure, and not open to access from trespassers.

I will never forget sitting at the breakfast table one Saturday morning with my elderly parents, when I saw an intruder run into our backyard through our back gate, with blood on his hands and his shirt. I instinctively ran out and guided him out around to the side gate and into the street as I was concerned of what would occur if he entered our house with my elderly parents. Sometime later several police cars arrived in pursuit.

We are aware of at least three similar instances of trespass or burglary where access has been from the rear lane in our block of alone. As Wagga grows into a larger city this problem will likely increase, not decrease, and we would like to use our renovation to build across the back lane so that our family home will be secure. All of our neighbours have

3

already done so for this reason. Enclosing the rear lane frontage is the most effective way to prevent access to the property.

We are aware that controls on rear lane access are proposed to give better access to emergency services. We are not aware of any situations where a fully enclosed rear lane frontage has caused a problem, and note that whole suburbs in large Australian cities (for example Melbourne, Adelaide and Sydney) have fully enclosed rear lane frontages. If it is not a problem in Melbourne and Sydney, why will it be a problem in Wagga?

(p14) C1 Two storey additions are generally not appropriate in the conservation area unless there is a fall of the site to the rear. Where they can be considered, the addition is to be set behind the principal building form and be lower than the ridge height of the principal roof. The addition is not to extend across the full width of the building form.

We think that this section is unclear and in conflict with the section (p13) C5 above. The section regarding height relative to the ridge height of the principal roof should be removed in favour of wording to ensure two story additions are mostly obscured and do not dominate the streetscape. In particular, we think that Council should be supportive of two-story additions so that backyard space can be maximised. Too many heritage area houses have already been extended to the point where they have no backyards left, nowhere for children to play, and no green open space. The heritage area is a lovely space to raise a family but by reducing the ability to build a second story the only option is to build the length of the block thereby removing the backyards. If it is not possible to increase sizes of small houses in the heritage area by adding a second story it could have a long term effect on the demographic of the area as it will no longer become a viable option for families as the houses will either be too small or have very little backyard space.

(p17) C5 Side and rear fences greater than 1.8m in height will not generally be supported.

Our concerns regarding this section relate to the proposed changes to (p14) C11 above. If the DCP changes prevent us from building across the rear lane frontage, and the rear fence can’t be higher than 1.8m, the rules make it very difficult to secure our property. This is a problem that we feel will only get worse over time.

We are happy the DCP are being updated to reflect the evolving needs of the area. We understand that the draft amendments to the DCP will now go to a Council meeting for consideration. As we are following this process with interest, we would very much appreciate you including us on a mailing list (if you have one) to notify us of the next stages in the process, including the date of the Council meeting.

Yours sincerely,

SUBMISSION #17

From:To: Wood, Adam; Grp- Councillors; Councillor Greg ConkeyCc: City of Wagga WaggaSubject: DCP Amendments - HeritageDate: Tuesday, 30 June 2020 11:34:33 PMAttachments: DCP Amendments - Heritage - Suggested Site Specific Controls.pdf

17 Wollundry Ave - Pictures of current garage being built.pdf21 Wollundry Ave - Town Planners Report 24.06.2020.pdf

Importance: High


Attention: Mr Adam Wood Strategic Town Planner, Wagga Wagga City CouncilCopied: Mr Peter Thompson General Manager, Wagga Wagga City Council Mr Greg Conkey Mayor, Wagga Wagga City Council All Councillors Hello Adam,RE: SUBMISSION TO WAGGA WAGGA CITY COUNCIL FOR WAGGA WAGGA 2010 DCP –AMENDMENTS TO HERITAGE CONSERVATIONI write to you in support of the attached Site Specific Controls be included in the Wagga Wagga2010 DCP, specifically for the Cooedong Lane Conservation Area, of which have beenresidents . My wife and I relocated back to Wagga Wagga in , basically for therelaxed lifestyle that we could not enjoy in the inner-west suburbs of Sydney.

I spoke at the Councillors’ Meeting on 16th March 2020, and my main message was for Counciland the Councillors to take heed in the submissions of the residents of Wagga Wagga andactually listen to us. Whilst Wagga is a growing city, growth needs to be appropriate and the central Wagga district’sconservation area needs to be protected, because once you destroy a heritage building, beeither by addition or replacement, you can never get that history back. Council has supportedthe Committ4Wagga’s goal of 100,000 residents by 2038. This is a reason given for encouragingthe expansion of Wagga’s residential offerings and the amending of various DCP’s to allow forgreater infill development. Please note this was mentioned before as “Exercise 100,000” in the1970’s, promising that Wagga would have a population of 100,000 by 2000. That was 20 yearsago, so it should be easier to achieve now? But Wagga has a growth rate of only 0.6% - 1.23%over the last 8 years – to achieve 100,000 by 2038, we need a consistent growth rate of over2.1% annually each year till 2038. And then we add in Covid19, that Mr Michael Keys (WWCCDirector of Regional Activation) and former Riverina MP Kay Hull both acknowledged would havea negative effect on the population growth rate of Wagga over the coming years (Daily

Advertiser, 8th May 2020).

On 12th December 2019, a group of residents from Cooedong Lane met with Mr PeterThompson (WWCC General Manager) and Councillors Yvonne Braid and Kerry Pascoe. Thismeeting was called by the residents out of serious concern that Council had made a dramaticmistake in the approval of the Development Application for 17 Wollundry Ave’s 2-storey garage(DA18-0572). I attended in support of my parents, . It wascommented at this meeting, that Cooedong Lane needed special consideration in the Wagga

Wagga 2010 DCP, a document that Councillors and the Council Report ignored in their approvalof DA18-0572. This approval was also granted against the Council’s own heritage consultant’srecommendations, despite the need for Council to refer to the heritage consultant, as he wasdeemed the expert in this field as Council has no expert. I have attached a document that showspictures of the garage being constructed at 17 Wollundry Ave, showing how it is not keepingwith the streetscape of the laneway. If you query, these pictures, I invite you to walk downCooedong Lane and see it for yourselves.

In the Council Report for the Councillors’ Meeting on 16th March 2020, it was recommendedthat Cooedong Lane have “site specific controls”, a very good recommendation. Yet the desiredfuture character statement was factually incorrect and the controls lacked substance andreduced the protection of this part of Wagga Wagga. The residents also contracted a Town Planner, Warwick Horsfall of Habitat Planning, to provideus a report supporting our objections to the 2-storey garage development application for 21Wollundry Ave, owned by the same family as 17 Wollundry Ave. This report is attached andshows that this current development application fails the Wagga Wagga 2010 LEP, Wagga Wagga2010 DCP and the Heritage Consultant’s report’s recommendations. I bring this to your attentionbecause it supports our desire that the 2-storey garages are not appropriate within theCooedong Lane conservation area. The residents have worked together and have had meetings with some Councillors and Councilstaff, with the result of these meetings being that we have discussed and created a documentthat the existing residents would like to be inserted in the Wagga Wagga 2010 DCP. Attached isthis document “DCP Amendments – Heritage – Site Specific Controls”. This document refers tothe requested “Cooedong Lane Future Desired Character” statement and “DesiredNeighbourhood Statement” that Council recommends be inserted under Section 9.1.2, but alsoneeds to be referred to in Section 3 – Heritage. I refer to the Habitat Planning report in relation to using the approval of 17 Wollundry Ave (DA-0572) as a case for precedence in either approving 21 Wollundry Ave (DA20-0062) or allowingsimilar developments in the DCP for Cooedong Lane. As has been witnessed by many residentsof Cooedong Lane, the approval of DA18-0572 was a mistake that does not comply with thestreetscape of Cooedong Lane and should not be repeated. Basically, as my mother always toldme as a child, two wrongs don’t make a right! I now make comments to the major items within the “DCP Amendments – Heritage – SiteSpecific Controls” document. 9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Characters“Cooedong Lane is a residential precinct within the Heritage Conservation Area where dwellingshave primary frontage to Wollundry Lagoon. The dwellings incorporate Victorian, Edwardian andInterwar Bungalow styles of single storey structure. Vehicular access is only available throughCooedong Lane, that consists of single storey garages only, which has its own streetscape valuethat contributes to the neighbourhood’s character”.This is the truer description of the area as the proposed Future Character statement wasincorrect in stating that there are two-storey dwellings currently in Cooedong Lane (except forthe garage being built at 17 Wollundry Ave, against the wishes of a majority of residents of

Cooedong Lane). I now refer you to the major inclusions within these suggested Site Specific Controls:

a. “Whilst the trend within Wagga may be for the addition of second-storey secondarydwellings, these second-storey secondary dwellings are considered inappropriate in theCooedong Lane conservation area, due to Cooedong Lane being the only access to theresidences along Wollundry Lane and its existing neighbourhood character.”

As a combined number of residents do not want to see any further 2-storey dwellingsin Cooedong Lane as they will negatively impact on the surrounding residences andthe character of the laneway.

b. To ensure all development applications abide by this Desired Future Character statement,

all applications must be accompanied by a Council supplied heritage consultant’s reportand Council should adhere to the recommendations of this heritage consultant’s report.

I understand that the application for 17 Wollundry Lane did have a Heritage Reportrequested for it, yet Council decided to ignore the recommendations of therecommendations of this report. This seems strange as it is the heritage consultantthat is the assumed expert in this field, and not the Council officers.

c. C4 Additions are to retain, and be subservient in form and scale, to the primary form of

the building.Again, the character of the laneway comes from the fact that there are currently,except for 17 Wollundry Ave, no obtrusively bulky buildings, as they all are not as tallas the main residence on the block.

d. C5 New work is to be below the main ridge height of the building, and be articulated from

the primary form by setbacks in the walls and height of the roof. Maintain a descendingscale to the rear.

This protects the main residence as the primary feature of the block, protecting theheritage features of the houses. Even if some houses are not listed as items of StateHeritage Significance on the Council’s Schedule of Locally Listed Heritage Items, theirsurroundings are exposed to the potential of destruction by over or inappropriatedevelopment.

e. C13 Two storey additions are not appropriate in Cooedong Lane within the conservation

area.The existing residents do not want two-storey additions in Cooedong Lane, and thereare other areas within the conservation area where 2-storey developments oradditions are considered appropriate.

f. C14 Attic additions may be considered on top of garages or car-ports only if they are fully

contained within the roofline and no windows are to face adjoining or surroundingproperties.

This is to protect the privacy of surrounding residences, which should be an objectiveof the DCP document.

g. C20 Infill development will be supported by a heritage impact assessment and

demonstrate that new development is compatible and sympathetic to the characteristicsof the built form in the conservation area.

As Council has no heritage experts in Council, then Council needs to rely on an expertin this field, and must adhere to the recommendations of this contracted expert.

The attached suggested site controls is a documents that the affected residents of CooedongLane have had an input into and feel strongly about. I would appreciate your feedback and any concerns you may have about my email and theattached suggested site specific controls. Please respond via email only, or we could meet todiscuss if you wish.

Site Specific Controls – Cooedong Lane

9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Characters Cooedong Lane is a residen-al precinct within the Heritage Conserva-on Area where dwellings have primary frontage to Wollundry Lagoon. The dwellings incorporate Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar Bungalow styles of single storey structure. Vehicular access is only available through Cooedong Lane, which has its own streetscape value that contributes to the neighbourhood’s character and consists of single storey garages only.


To ensure all development applica-ons abide by this Desired Future Character statement, all applica-ons must be accompanied by a Council supplied heritage consultant’s report and Council should adhere to the recommenda-ons of this heritage consultant’s report.

9.1.2.2 Dis<nc<ve Neighbourhood Statement Objec<ves: O1 To facilitate development that is consistent with the desired Future Character of Cooedong Lane Dis-nc-ve Area. O2 Maintain the character and consistency in architectural detail consistent with the laneway. O3 Preserve and maintain the historic subdivision paOern of Wollundry Ave and Cooedong Lane. O4 Encourage altera-ons and addi-ons which are sympathe-c to the building’s significant features and which will not compromise heritage significance. O5 Ensure that altera-ons and addi-ons respect the scale, form and massing of the exis-ng building. O6 Maintain the harmony/character of the neighbourhood by ensuring development is complementary in form and materials and reflects the cohesiveness of the streetscape. O7 Preserve exis-ng significant vegeta-on and landscape within front and rear setbacks of Cooedong Lane.

Controls: C1 Design new work to complement the style and period of the building in terms of style, scale, form, roof form and materials. New works can be a modern interpreta-on but need to follow the original style. C2 Altera-ons and addi-ons are to be designed so as to maintain the historical integrity and visual prominence of the exis-ng building within the heritage streetscape. C3 Altera-ons should generally be to the rear of the property. Altera-ons to the side can be considered where side setbacks are sufficient. C4 Addi-ons are to retain, and be subservient in form and scale, to the primary form of the building. C5 New work is to be below the main ridge height of the building, and be ar-culated from the primary form by setbacks in the walls and height of the roof. Maintain a descending scale to the rear. C6 Any dwelling addi-on, secondary dwelling or outbuilding proposed in the heritage conserva-on area must avoid being visible from the public domain, other than rear lane eleva-ons. C7 Any addi-on that is aOached to an exis-ng dwelling or structure shall be suitably ar-culated to avoid a monolithic appearance. For example, by using stepped or rebated connec-ons, compound roof forms, etc. C8 Use ver-cally propor-oned windows. C9 Select materials to complement the period and style of the building and the conserva-on area. Use compa-ble, but not necessarily matching C10 The addi-on is not to extend across the full width of the building form. C11 Access at least 1m in width must be provided from the rear lane frontage to the back yard of proper-es via an unenclosed area.

C12 A rear setback of at least 1m from laneways must be maintained by any garage structures. Two storey and roof addi<ons C13 Two storey addi-ons are not appropriate in Cooedong Lane within the conserva-on area. C14 A_c addi-ons may be considered on top of garages or car-ports only if they are fully contained within the roofline and no windows are to face adjoining or surrounding proper-es. Infill development C15 Infill development is to reflect the characteris-c buildings in the vicinity in terms of bulk, scale, roof form, setbacks and materials. C16 Setbacks are to reflect the paOerns of adjoining houses and the general paOern of the street. C17 Use pitched roofs with slate, terracoOa -les or corrugated metal. C18 Contemporary design is acceptable where it is sympathe-c to the characteris-c built form of the conserva-on area, par-cularly in terms of bulk, scale, height, form or materials. C19 Designs that provide for open front verandahs are encouraged. C20 Infill development will be supported by a heritage impact assessment and demonstrate that new development is compa-ble and sympathe-c to the characteris-cs of the built form in the conserva-on area. C21 With all infill development in Cooedong Lane, all parking must be provided within the property boundaries.

Garages and carports Objec<ves O1 Minimise visual intrusion from garages and carports, and require structures to be located behind the building line. O2 Establish parameters for the propor-on and detailing of garage and carports. Controls C1 Car access must be from Cooedong Lane. Driveways, crossings and garages are not to be provided on the Wollundry Lagoon frontage. C2 Materials are to be compa-ble with the materials of the main building. Any detailing is to be subservient to the detailing or decora-ve features of the main building. C3 Max size of garages: Single garage – 3000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to an apex 3400mm high. Garage roller door 2600mm wide. Double garage – 6000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to apex 3900mm high. Two roller doors 2600mm wide in 3 equal wall bays. C4 The height of the garage or secondary dwelling must not be more than 4.8m above ground level (exis-ng). The building shall be single storey construc-on with a maximum roof pitch of 27 degrees or steeper to match the roof pitch of the main building. C5 Specifica-ons: Walls can be in Custom Orb corrugated metal, weatherboards, fibre cement sheet or face brick. Galvanised corrugated metal roof must be preferred rather than Zincalume. Roll barge and roll top and GuOers are to be quad or ogee profile and are to be the same colour and material as the roofing. C6 Doors may be -lt doors of a simple design and neutral colour. Roller doors may be considered on merit. C7 The scale or size of the carport, garage or shed should not dominate the main house. Carports C8 Where a carport is to be constructed to the side of a house: Use a skillion or flat roof form in corrugated metal with the high point set below the eave of the principal building form. C9 Double carports can be considered on rear lanes.

TOWN PLANNING + URBAN DESIGN CONSULTANTS

Habitat Planning Suite 1/ 622 Macauley Street Albury NSW 2640 p.02 6021 0662 f.02 6021 0663 [email protected] habitatplanning.com.au

24 June 2020

The Residents of Cooedong Lane

Dear Residents,

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO 20/0062 SECONDARY DWELLING 21 WOLLUNDRY AVENUE, WAGGA WAGGA

As per your instructions, I have reviewed the available information relating to this application with a view to determining the extent of compliance with the heritage planning provisions relevant to the proposal. As a result, the following matters should be taken into account by Council in its assessment and determination of the application.

First and foremost, it is noted that Council’s appointed Heritage Advisor does not support the proposal at two storeys. In the absence of any staff member having the appropriate qualifications, it is the Heritage Advisor’s role to provide Council with professional advice on heritage matters within the city. Consequently, the advice given should be heeded by Council officers when assessing the application against the heritage provisions. To not heed the advice undermines Council’s assessment process and defeats the purpose of having a Heritage Advisor in the first place.

Having regard for the not insignificant scale of the development and its location adjoining a heritage item, a ‘heritage management statement’ is required to be prepared and submitted with the application as required by clause 5.10(5) of the Wagga Local Environmental Plan 2010 (“the LEP”). If such a statement has not been submitted, Council is not in a position to fully determine the impact on heritage from the development and therefore discharge its responsibilities as a consent authority under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Clause 5.4 of the LEP limits ‘secondary dwellings’ to 60sqm floorspace (excluding garages) or 33% of the floor area of the main dwelling – whichever is the greater. The application states that the proposal is a ‘secondary dwelling’ hence compliance with this control is required. I am unable to accurately determine the floorspace of the secondary dwelling from the information provided but Council must be satisfied that it does not exceed this limit.

Clause 3.3.2 within Chapter 3 of the Wagga Wagga Development Control Plan 2010 (“the DCP”) is relevant because the proposal represents development within the residential precinct of the Wagga Wagga Heritage Conservation Area. Development Control C1 relating to two storey and roof additions requires that “Two storey additions are generally not

habitatplanning.com.au

appropriate in the conservation area unless there is a fall of the site to the rear.” As there is no fall across the site, the proposal in non-compliant with this control.

Clause 9.4.4 within Chapter 9 of the DCP limits garages facing a ‘public road’ to 50% of the width of the house and 6m in width. Double garages are only permitted on lots wider than 12.5m. As the proposal is for a secondary dwelling with a garage that is part of its façade facing the lane and the lane is a public road, the proposal in non-compliant with all of these controls.

Clause 9.4.4 also limits the height of ‘outbuildings’ to 4.8m. Outbuildings are bracketed with garages in this control, in which case the proposal is non-compliant.

It is not known whether the applicant undertook the appropriate assessment in accordance with the Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales to determine the likelihood of Aboriginal archaeological items being present at the site of the proposed development. This assessment is necessary as the location next to the lagoon would be classified as a place exhibiting landscape characteristics for which items are likely to be present. There are significant consequences for developers who have not undertaken a ‘due diligence’ assessment and subsequently inadvertently destroy items of Aboriginal archaeological significance during site works.

It is understood that an almost identical development has been approved and developed at 17 Wollundry Avenue. Council should not be concerned as to whether this creates a precedent for the current application as the planning legislation requires each application to be dealt with on its merits. In addition, the application at #21 differs from that at #17 in that it adjoins a listed heritage item, which necessitates greater weight be given to the heritage impacts of the development. What the development at #17 does do is give the opportunity for Council officers and Councillors to actually gauge the impact of a two-storey secondary dwelling on the environment of Cooedong Lane and Heritage Conservation Area.

Council is in the process of reviewing the DCP controls relating to the Heritage Conservation Area and in particular the Cooedong Lane precinct at the rear of Wollundry Avenue. This has been initiated following concerns about development in this area having a detrimental impact on the heritage of central Wagga Wagga, such as that proposed in this application. In assessing the merits of the application Council also needs to take this into consideration.

In conclusion, it would seem there are some elements for the which the proposal appears to be non-compliant with various planning provisions and other matters for which application requirements need to be confirmed.

Picture of Garage at 17 Wollundry Ave, from rear yard of Wollundry Ave:

Picture of Garage at 17 Wollundry Ave, from Cooedong Lane:

SUBMISSION #18

From:To: Wood, Adam; Grp- CouncillorsCc: City of Wagga Wagga; Councillor Greg ConkeySubject: Fwd: Submission to Wagga Wagga City Council for Wagga Wagga 2010 DCP - Amendments to Heritage

ConservationDate: Monday, 29 June 2020 6:22:25 PMAttachments: 21 Wollundry Ave - Town Planners Report 24.06.2020.pdf

17 Wollundry Ave - Pictures of current garage being built.pdfDCP Amendments - Heritage - Suggested Site Specific Controls.docx


Attention: Mr Peter Thompson, General Manager, Wagga Wagga City Council

Mr Greg Conkey, Mayor, Wagga Wagga City Council Mr Adam Wood, Strategic Town Planner, Wagga Wagga CityCouncil All Councillors.

RE: SUBMISSION TO WAGGA WAGGA CITY COUNCIL FOR WAGGA WAGGA 2010DCP – AMENDMENTS TO HERITAGE CONSERVATION I write to you in support of the attached Site Specific Controls be included in theWagga Wagga 2010 DCP, specifically for the Cooedong Lane Conservation Area, ofwhich my husband and I have been residents of since . You may remember that I spoke in objection to the Development Application for a2-storey garage with secondary dwelling for 17 Wollundry Ave (DA18-0572),

We were let down by the Councillors that theydecided to approve this application despite it not complying with the Wagga WaggaLEP and Wagga Wagga DCP and ignoring all of the objections submitted to Council.Now that this garage is being constructed, and we have been able to physically seethe monstrosity that it is, we are vehemently opposed to the further destruction ofthe residents’ amenity by way of any further 2-storey garages being constructed. Ihave attached pictures of this monstrosity as well to highlight the effect it is havingon our conservation area. I refer to the attached Habitat Planning report, provided to us in objection to the 2-storey garage being proposed at 21 Wollundry Ave (DA20-0062). It was noted in both Heritage Consultants’ reports for 17 Wollundry Ave and 21Wollundry Ave that a 2-storey garage with secondary dwellings should not beconsidered appropriate for Cooedong Lane, and advised against approving bothapplications in their current form. Yet Council and the Councillors decided to ignorethis recommendation. So we have inserted in the Desire Future CharacterStatement that a Heritage Consultants report must accompany any development

application within the Cooedong Lane Conservation Area, and that Council adhereto the recommendations of this report. Clause 9.4.4. of the DCP limits the height of “outbuildings “ to 4.8 metres and thatoutbuildings are bracketed with garages in this control. Section 9 is not beingconsidered within these amendments and as such should be adhered too. I have always taught my children that “two wrongs don’t make a right” and insaying this, the approval of 17 Wollundry Ave’s 2-storey garage with a secondarydwelling should not be used as a case of precedence in approving a further“wrong”. The residents have been meeting with Council staff and some Councillors,and we all are opposed to any allowance or approval of buildings that do not meetthe current streetscape and/or negatively affect the amenity of the existingresidents. Currently, all of the garages, except for 17 Wollundry Ave( a “wrong”) aresubservient in size, scale and bulk to the main residence and this adds to thecharacter of the laneway. We all feel that this does not need to be altered and havere-inserted it in our Suggested Site Specific Controls. The allowance of an attic within either the main residence or the garage needs tobe limited so as this attic doesn’t increase the height of the main residence orgarage. This can be achieved by ensuring that all attics be contained within theroofline of the building, with no adjustments to the roofline to allow for theinclusion of the attic. A further protection of the surrounding residences is that nowindows from the attic be allowed where that window overlooks a surroundingproperty. This control will allow for attic inclusions but is not intended to allow forsecond storey developments or additions. Basically, the residents of Cooedong Lane do not want 2-storey garages on thelaneway, and that objective needs to be reflected in the DCP section specific toCooedong Lane. The residents have done a lot of work on these amendments and, as we are theresidents of this area, and the Councillors are elected so as to represent usresidents, my husband and I strongly urge Council to include the attachedSuggested Site Specific Controls in the amended Wagga Wagga DCP. We appreciatethat Wagga needs to grow, but not at the expense of the qualities of theconservation area and at the expense of the current residents. If you have any question, please contact me and we would be happy to welcomeyou to our part of Wagga Wagga. Sincerely

Site Specific Controls – Cooedong Lane

9.1.2.1 Cooedong Lane Desired Future Characters Cooedong Lane is a residen-al precinct within the Heritage Conserva-on Area where dwellings have primary frontage to Wollundry Lagoon. The dwellings incorporate Victorian, Edwardian and Interwar Bungalow styles of single storey structure. Vehicular access is only available through Cooedong Lane, which has its own streetscape value that contributes to the neighbourhood’s character and consists of single storey garages only.


To ensure all development applica-ons abide by this Desired Future Character statement, all applica-ons must be accompanied by a Council supplied heritage consultant’s report and Council should adhere to the recommenda-ons of this heritage consultant’s report.

9.1.2.2 Dis<nc<ve Neighbourhood Statement Objec<ves: O1 To facilitate development that is consistent with the desired Future Character of Cooedong Lane Dis-nc-ve Area. O2 Maintain the character and consistency in architectural detail consistent with the laneway. O3 Preserve and maintain the historic subdivision paOern of Wollundry Ave and Cooedong Lane. O4 Encourage altera-ons and addi-ons which are sympathe-c to the building’s significant features and which will not compromise heritage significance. O5 Ensure that altera-ons and addi-ons respect the scale, form and massing of the exis-ng building. O6 Maintain the harmony/character of the neighbourhood by ensuring development is complementary in form and materials and reflects the cohesiveness of the streetscape. O7 Preserve exis-ng significant vegeta-on and landscape within front and rear setbacks of Cooedong Lane.

Controls: C1 Design new work to complement the style and period of the building in terms of style, scale, form, roof form and materials. New works can be a modern interpreta-on but need to follow the original style. C2 Altera-ons and addi-ons are to be designed so as to maintain the historical integrity and visual prominence of the exis-ng building within the heritage streetscape. C3 Altera-ons should generally be to the rear of the property. Altera-ons to the side can be considered where side setbacks are sufficient. C4 Addi-ons are to retain, and be subservient in form and scale, to the primary form of the building. C5 New work is to be below the main ridge height of the building, and be ar-culated from the primary form by setbacks in the walls and height of the roof. Maintain a descending scale to the rear. C6 Any dwelling addi-on, secondary dwelling or outbuilding proposed in the heritage conserva-on area must avoid being visible from the public domain, other than rear lane eleva-ons. C7 Any addi-on that is aOached to an exis-ng dwelling or structure shall be suitably ar-culated to avoid a monolithic appearance. For example, by using stepped or rebated connec-ons, compound roof forms, etc. C8 Use ver-cally propor-oned windows. C9 Select materials to complement the period and style of the building and the conserva-on area. Use compa-ble, but not necessarily matching C10 The addi-on is not to extend across the full width of the building form. C11 Access at least 1m in width must be provided from the rear lane frontage to the back yard of proper-es via an unenclosed area.

C12 A rear setback of at least 1m from laneways must be maintained by any garage structures. Two storey and roof addi<ons C13 Two storey addi-ons are not appropriate in Cooedong Lane within the conserva-on area. C14 A_c addi-ons may be considered on top of garages or car-ports only if they are fully contained within the roofline and no windows are to face adjoining or surrounding proper-es. Infill development C15 Infill development is to reflect the characteris-c buildings in the vicinity in terms of bulk, scale, roof form, setbacks and materials. C16 Setbacks are to reflect the paOerns of adjoining houses and the general paOern of the street. C17 Use pitched roofs with slate, terracoOa -les or corrugated metal. C18 Contemporary design is acceptable where it is sympathe-c to the characteris-c built form of the conserva-on area, par-cularly in terms of bulk, scale, height, form or materials. C19 Designs that provide for open front verandahs are encouraged. C20 Infill development will be supported by a heritage impact assessment and demonstrate that new development is compa-ble and sympathe-c to the characteris-cs of the built form in the conserva-on area. C21 With all infill development in Cooedong Lane, all parking must be provided within the property boundaries.

Garages and carports Objec<ves O1 Minimise visual intrusion from garages and carports, and require structures to be located behind the building line. O2 Establish parameters for the propor-on and detailing of garage and carports. Controls C1 Car access must be from Cooedong Lane. Driveways, crossings and garages are not to be provided on the Wollundry Lagoon frontage. C2 Materials are to be compa-ble with the materials of the main building. Any detailing is to be subservient to the detailing or decora-ve features of the main building. C3 Max size of garages: Single garage – 3000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to an apex 3400mm high. Garage roller door 2600mm wide. Double garage – 6000mm wide x 7500mm long, 2400mm walls, 27-degree roof pitch rising to apex 3900mm high. Two roller doors 2600mm wide in 3 equal wall bays. C4 The height of the garage or secondary dwelling must not be more than 4.8m above ground level (exis-ng). The building shall be single storey construc-on with a maximum roof pitch of 27 degrees or steeper to match the roof pitch of the main building. C5 Specifica-ons: Walls can be in Custom Orb corrugated metal, weatherboards, fibre cement sheet or face brick. Galvanised corrugated metal roof must be preferred rather than Zincalume. Roll barge and roll top and GuOers are to be quad or ogee profile and are to be the same colour and material as the roofing. C6 Doors may be -lt doors of a simple design and neutral colour. Roller doors may be considered on merit. C7 The scale or size of the carport, garage or shed should not dominate the main house. Carports C8 Where a carport is to be constructed to the side of a house: Use a skillion or flat roof form in corrugated metal with the high point set below the eave of the principal building form. C9 Double carports can be considered on rear lanes.

TOWN PLANNING + URBAN DESIGN CONSULTANTS

Habitat Planning Suite 1/ 622 Macauley Street Albury NSW 2640 p.02 6021 0662 f.02 6021 0663 [email protected] habitatplanning.com.au

24 June 2020

The Residents of Cooedong Lane

Dear Residents,

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO 20/0062 SECONDARY DWELLING 21 WOLLUNDRY AVENUE, WAGGA WAGGA

As per your instructions, I have reviewed the available information relating to this application with a view to determining the extent of compliance with the heritage planning provisions relevant to the proposal. As a result, the following matters should be taken into account by Council in its assessment and determination of the application.

First and foremost, it is noted that Council’s appointed Heritage Advisor does not support the proposal at two storeys. In the absence of any staff member having the appropriate qualifications, it is the Heritage Advisor’s role to provide Council with professional advice on heritage matters within the city. Consequently, the advice given should be heeded by Council officers when assessing the application against the heritage provisions. To not heed the advice undermines Council’s assessment process and defeats the purpose of having a Heritage Advisor in the first place.

Having regard for the not insignificant scale of the development and its location adjoining a heritage item, a ‘heritage management statement’ is required to be prepared and submitted with the application as required by clause 5.10(5) of the Wagga Local Environmental Plan 2010 (“the LEP”). If such a statement has not been submitted, Council is not in a position to fully determine the impact on heritage from the development and therefore discharge its responsibilities as a consent authority under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Clause 5.4 of the LEP limits ‘secondary dwellings’ to 60sqm floorspace (excluding garages) or 33% of the floor area of the main dwelling – whichever is the greater. The application states that the proposal is a ‘secondary dwelling’ hence compliance with this control is required. I am unable to accurately determine the floorspace of the secondary dwelling from the information provided but Council must be satisfied that it does not exceed this limit.

Clause 3.3.2 within Chapter 3 of the Wagga Wagga Development Control Plan 2010 (“the DCP”) is relevant because the proposal represents development within the residential precinct of the Wagga Wagga Heritage Conservation Area. Development Control C1 relating to two storey and roof additions requires that “Two storey additions are generally not

habitatplanning.com.au

appropriate in the conservation area unless there is a fall of the site to the rear.” As there is no fall across the site, the proposal in non-compliant with this control.

Clause 9.4.4 within Chapter 9 of the DCP limits garages facing a ‘public road’ to 50% of the width of the house and 6m in width. Double garages are only permitted on lots wider than 12.5m. As the proposal is for a secondary dwelling with a garage that is part of its façade facing the lane and the lane is a public road, the proposal in non-compliant with all of these controls.

Clause 9.4.4 also limits the height of ‘outbuildings’ to 4.8m. Outbuildings are bracketed with garages in this control, in which case the proposal is non-compliant.

It is not known whether the applicant undertook the appropriate assessment in accordance with the Due Diligence Code of Practice for the Protection of Aboriginal Objects in New South Wales to determine the likelihood of Aboriginal archaeological items being present at the site of the proposed development. This assessment is necessary as the location next to the lagoon would be classified as a place exhibiting landscape characteristics for which items are likely to be present. There are significant consequences for developers who have not undertaken a ‘due diligence’ assessment and subsequently inadvertently destroy items of Aboriginal archaeological significance during site works.

It is understood that an almost identical development has been approved and developed at 17 Wollundry Avenue. Council should not be concerned as to whether this creates a precedent for the current application as the planning legislation requires each application to be dealt with on its merits. In addition, the application at #21 differs from that at #17 in that it adjoins a listed heritage item, which necessitates greater weight be given to the heritage impacts of the development. What the development at #17 does do is give the opportunity for Council officers and Councillors to actually gauge the impact of a two-storey secondary dwelling on the environment of Cooedong Lane and Heritage Conservation Area.

Council is in the process of reviewing the DCP controls relating to the Heritage Conservation Area and in particular the Cooedong Lane precinct at the rear of Wollundry Avenue. This has been initiated following concerns about development in this area having a detrimental impact on the heritage of central Wagga Wagga, such as that proposed in this application. In assessing the merits of the application Council also needs to take this into consideration.

In conclusion, it would seem there are some elements for the which the proposal appears to be non-compliant with various planning provisions and other matters for which application requirements need to be confirmed.

Picture of Garage at 17 Wollundry Ave, from rear yard of Wollundry Ave:

Picture of Garage at 17 Wollundry Ave, from Cooedong Lane:

SUBMISSION #19

SUBMISSION #20

SUBMISSION #21

From:To: Grp- Councillors; City of Wagga WaggaCc:Subject: Heritage Conservation Area - Draft DCP Amendment No 16Date: Friday, 3 July 2020 1:59:09 PM


03/07/2020

Dear Mayor of the City of Wagga Wagga, Councillors, and Mr Thompson

We are writing to express our concern regarding the proposed amendments to the DCP WaggaHeritage Conservation Area. Specifically, we object to amendments that reduce the number ofcontrols that limit incompatible development in this unique part of our city.

Having lived in the Conservation Area for , we appreciate the time and effort thatCouncillors have invested in working with the residents to control new and inappropriatedevelopment. DCP controls are designed to protect this historical precinct and ensure thatWagga’s rich built heritage is preserved.

We request that the existing controls for Cooedong Lane are maintained and clarified. Afterseveral meetings with our concerned neighbours, a list of proposed site-specific controls forCooedong Lane were developed. The Character Statement for Cooedong Lane has been sent toCouncil. We unreservedly support maintaining and clarifying controls as listed in this document.

We trust Council will not erode any existing controls through the amendment process. Further,we look forward to Officers and Councillors of the City actively committing to the enforcement ofthe existing Conservation Area building controls.

Yours faithfully

Council meeting held on 26/04/2021 - Item RP-3 Adoption of ...

Documents

Transcript of Council meeting held on 26/04/2021 - Item RP-3 Adoption of ...