43 Macdonald Street Erskineville

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

310257700Will Marshall

Professional Practice

CONTENTSSTATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

1.0 – INTRODUCTION

2.0 – SITE AND CONTEXT2.1 – Site location2.2 – Real Property Description2.3 – Area and Frontage2.4 – Topography2.5 – Access and Car Parking2.6 – Existing built form.2.7 – Context

3.0 – PROPOSAL3.1 – Urban form3.2 – Expression Materials and finishes3.3 – Land Use3.4 – Demolition

4.0 – DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS4.1 – City of Sydney Draft LEP 20124.2 – City of Sydney Draft DCP 2010

DRAWING LIST

001. – SURVEY PLAN

002. – ROOF PLAN

003. - SITE ANALYSIS PLAN

004. – GROUND FLOOR PLAN

005. – FIRST FLOOR PLAN

006. – SHADOW DIAGRAMS

007. – SECTIONS

008. – ELEVATIONS

HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT1.0 - Site analysis2.0 - Impact on site

BASIX CERTIFICATE1.0 - Basix report and certifacte of sustainability

1.0 - INTRODUCTION

This Statement of Environmental Effects accompanies a Development Application to Sydney City Council. The appli-cation seeks consent for works to the property at 43 Macdonald Street, Erskineville. These works comprise restoration of the existing building, which is a Victorian terrace, alterations and additions to the existing building, the demolition of the existing extension an the construction of an infill building that accommodates a single dwelling, and associated landscaping.

This statement has been prepared by Will Marshall on behalf of the property owners Michael Beckett and Russell Rodrigo. It should be read in conjunction with the following documents also submitted to council: • Development Application Form • Survey Plan • Context Plan • Architectural Plans • Shadow Diagrams • BASIX Certificates

The proposal meets the objectives of Draft Sydney City Local Environment Plan (LEP) 2011 and Draft Sydney City Development Control Plan (DCP) 2010. In addition, the proposal complies with the majority of LEP 2011 and DCP 2010 controls including zone objectives, height of buildings, terrace design guidelines, acoustic and visual privacy, so-lar access, fencing, recycling and waste management, streetscape design, built form and character, building setbacks, site coverage, site facilities, and desired future character.

2.0 – SITE AND CONTEXT

2.1 – Site Location

The site is located and is within the present Sydney City Council area (formally South-Sydney Council area). It is situ-ated on the southern side of Macdonald Street, and opens directly onto the T-intersection of Macdonald and George St. It is approximately 400m east of the King Street commercial strip.

Figure 1: Site Location Map (Source-Google Maps)

2.2 – Real Property Location

The site is described as Lot 43 in DP 1110472 and is known as 43 Macdonald Street, Erskineville.

2.3 – Area and Frontage The site has an area of 244.2m2. It has a northern frontage to Macdonald Street of 10.96m and is 40.8m deep. A re-duced copy of the survey plan is attached (see Figure 2).

2.4 – Topography

Macdonald Street runs west – east off Rochford Street. The site has been terraced and is relatively level. It sits about 0.4m above Macdonald and has a total cross fall of 0.06m from the rear to the front – from AHD 8.17 to AHD 8.23.

2.5 – Access and Car Parking

The site has pedestrian and vehicular access from Macdonald Street. An onsite car spot is provided on the western edge of the site.

2.6 – Existing Built Form and Landscaping

The site accommodates a two-storey Victorian terrace constructed around the late 19th Century with a 1970 brick ex-tension attached to the Western side of the original terrace, towards its rear. It is set back approximately 12m from the front of the site. Along with this extension the terrace has been substantially altered and has lost many of its original features. Original walls and staircases have been removed in order to accommodate for the extension. A new staircase has been constructed towards the rear of the house to connect the two levels and sits mainly within this new extension. Original doors and windows have been replaced, including the doors leading onto the top-level balcony, which have been replaced with sliding doors. The original plaster/render that would have coated the brick façade has since been stripped away. Wall construction is brickwork. The ornament that once sat on the Western buttress has been removed. The ornament that sits on the eastern buttress and the pediment appear to still be in good condition.

The interior is also substantially altered. Openings have been relocated. Timber doors, architraves and skirtings have been removed; cornices and ceilings are modern.

The lower floor accommodates a bedroom, living space and dining room within the main volume of the house. The ex-tension accommodates a bathroom and kitchen, whilst a laundry and workshop and laundry sit in a rear wing detached from the original house. The workshop and laundry can only be accessed through the rear yard. The rear yard is ac-cessed through the vestibule. The upper floor accommodates three bedrooms. The western extension contains another bedroom as well as a bathroom.

To the front of the extension there is currently unoccupied land. This space and the rear yard accommodate a gravel car spot and a paved courtyard. There are no significant trees, shrubs or other plantings and there are no visible remnants of historic landscape elements. The original building is adjoined to house No.45 Macdonald Street on the eastern side of the block.

2.7 – Context

The site is located in an area identified as Erskineville Neighbourhood South (Draft Sydney DCP 2010 - 6.6.3) It is situ-ated on the southern side of Erskineville Road and is predominantly a low scale residential area. The area contains a mix of attached and semi-detached properties, many of which contain contemporary additions or infill buildings. Whilst the area consists of predominately Victorian Style Terraces and weatherboard cottages, there is also a mix of other building styles, including multi-residential 90’s style developments.

Macdonald Street runs west – east off Rochford Street. The footpath is approximately 2.5m wide and does not contain a nature strip. Native eucalyptus trees are dotted along the length of the street.

The development opposite the proposed site is varied:

The development along the length of George St, which runs perpendicular, is also varied:

The development adjacent to the site along Macdonald Street also contains a varied mix of styles:

•Directly opposite the site, on the corners of Macdonald and George Street sit two federation style structures that would have once been corner stores. Both site 228 George St (Figure 3.) and site 64 Macdonald St (Figure 4.) have been recently rendered and painted and both have had their original roofs replaced. Site 64 has had its original south facing windows replaced with glass blocks, whilst 228 Flora St, retains a greater sense of its original character. • Sites 48-62 consist of attached Victorian style terrace housing.• House number 44 is a large detached dwelling of a contemporary style. (Figure 5.)

• Houses 224-216 are predominately old workers style cottage that once would have been weatherboard. Most have since been renovated in a more contemporary style (Figure 6.).• Development 214 George St, contains a contemporary terrace renovation. (Figure 7.)

• House number 45 is a contemporary multi-residential development, modelled in a style to mimic the Victorian terraces it surrounding it. (Figure 8.)• House number 41-35 are attached terraces of a Victorian style. Each has had varying degrees of renovation undertaken to them (Figure 9.)• Houses 19 and 19a are contemporary takes on the traditional terrace style, employing no ornament on its façade (Figure 10.)

Figure 2: 43 Macdonald Street, Erskineville. Site of proposed development.

Figure 3: 228 George Street, Erskineville.

Figure 4. 64 Macdonald, Erskineville.

Figure 5: 44 Macdonald Street, Erskineville

Figure 6: 212 George Street, Erskineville.

Figure 7: 214 George Street, Erskineville.

Figure 8: 45 Macdonald Street, Erskineville.

Figure 9: 41 Macdonald Street, Erskineville

Figure 10: 19 Macdonald Street, Erskineville

3.0 – PROPOSAL

The proposal comprises restoration of the existing building, which is a Victorian terrace, alterations and additions to the existing building, the demolition of the current 1970’s extension that lies western side of the original building, the con-struction of a new two storey addition in its place and associated landscaping.

3.1 – Urban Form

The form of the original terrace building and its appearance when viewed from the street will be restored. A two-storey addition to the western side of the original terrace will take on a contemporary but complimentary façade, and will be set back 7m from the front of the original building.

The original building currently accommodates a bedroom, living space and dining area. The bedroom and living room spaces will be retained, and the original fireplace within it restored. The laundry and workshop that sit detached from the original house at the rear will be removed. The original dining room will be transformed into a bathroom, utilizing the services existing from the previous laundry. The new addition to the western side will contain a large open plan space accommodating a sitting room, kitchen and dining area. This space will open onto the rear courtyard through timber framed roller doors. On the northern edge of the addition, vertical timber louvers are utilised to control sunlight and privacy from the street. A new internal staircase will run north-south, parallel to the new bathroom and open onto a bay window on the top level. The rear-wall of the original house will be extended by 1m to occupy the space once taken by the detached laundry.

Upstairs, the addition accommodates a second and third bedroom, which opens onto an outdoor living area to the north of the addition. The existing first bedroom that opens onto Macdonald Street will be adapted as a studio space. The current space by the existing second bedroom will become a void that opens onto the downstairs living area, in order to allow light to this part of the building. An upstairs bathroom will occupy the space currently used as a third bedroom and will sit directly above the downstairs bathroom.

The new addition will take on a slightly larger footprint than the current extension but will maintain a significant front setback of 7m, so as to maintain the Victorian Streetscape. The addition will now extend to the boundary on the western edge of the site. Height and setbacks relate to adjoining development and protect the amenity of surrounding dwellings.

3.2 – Expression, Materials and Finishes

The street façade of the existing terrace is currently an exposed brick façade, but shows traces of its original plaster rendering. This original finish will be restored, with the addition of light grey painted render. The verandahs, front rooms and traditional ornament are also restored using traditional materials and finishes. These include cast iron columns, balustrade panels, brackets and frieze panels. Doors and windows are exposed timber with a varnish finish. Existing roofing is in good condition and will be retained, with the addition of skylight that is not visible from the streetscape, on the rear of the building. The new western addition to the building uses brick cavity construction as its central structure, with visible vertical tim-ber louvers on each level. It will also be finished with a concrete render painted a slightly darker shade of grey to that of the original house. The character and expression of this structure is contemporary marking the difference between traditional and contemporary. The simple form and subdued light grey colour pallet and exposed timber louvers compli-ment the original terrace and tie in with the render finish of the terrace and timber doors and window frames. Colours are darker mid-tones to provide a tonal contrast with the restored building and its neighbours.

3.3 - Land Use

The existing site area is 244.2m2. The gross floor area (GFA) of the renovated building is 265.1m2 (method of measurement: Sydney LEP 2011). The floor space ratio (FSR) of the renovated building is therefore 1.085:1.

The rear courtyard has an area of approximately 43.9m2 will be landscaped and will accommodate an evergreen tree, planted in the south-west corner of the yard for privacy. The 40.4m2 area to the front of the new addition will be paved to allow for a potential car spot with landscaping on either side in order to tie in with the front garden and streetscape. The proposal therefore contains a total of 101.2m2landscaped space, which is 41% of the site area. Landscaping comprises new trees and shrubs, planting beds, lawn, and paved areas. Low water use plants will be used.

3.4 – Demolition

Demolition of current western extension and detached workshop laundry is proposed. The western extension has an area of 35.1m2 and contains a bedroom, two bathrooms and a kitchen. The workshop and laundry have an area of 30.3m2. Both this structures are largely unoriginal, with the laundry and workshop not visible from the street.

4.0 – DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS

Development of the site is controlled by Sydney Local Environment Plan (Draft LEP) 2011 and Sydney Development Control Plan (DCP) 2010.

4.1 – Sydney Local Environment Plan (Draft LEP) 2011

LEP 2011 provides general objectives and controls for development. The proposal meets these objectives and the ma-jority of controls. The following table provides a summary of MLEP 2011 compliance:

The following table provides a summary of Sydney LEP 2011 compliance:

4.1.1 – Zoning and Zone Objectives

The site is zoned in the R1 General Residential Zone:

As the house is only being used home occupation by my clients it does not require does not require consent as stipu-lated in the Sydney LEP (2011). In relation to the proposal the most relevant objective is:

•Toprovideforthehousingneedsofthecommunity.

The proposal meets this objective. The renovation of the current building provides improved amenity for the occupants. Furthermore, the restoration of the original façade, coupled with the new addition and landscaping makes a positive streetscape contribution.

Figure11:ZoningMap(Source-SydneyDraftLEP).SiteLocatedinAreaR1–GeneralResidential

4.1.2 – Demolition

The Sydney LEP stipulates that ‘the demolition of a building or work may be carried out only with consent.’ The pro-posal involves the demolition of the current western extension to the building as well as some interior walls. Whilst the site is located in a Heritage Conservation area the proposed demolition does not detract from the heritage value of the building and as a result should not conflict with any heritage objectives of the LEP (Please see Heritage Impact State-ment).

4.1.3 – Floor Space Ratio

The site is located in an area where the floor space ration is 1.25:1:The existing site area is 244.2m2.

The gross floor area (GFA) of the renovated building is 265.1m2 (method of measurement: Sydney LEP 2011). The floor space ratio (FSR) of the renovated building is therefore 1.085:1 and as a result is in accordance with the Sydney LEP 2011.

The sections labelled ‘P’ on the below Floor Space Ratio map are those with an FSR of 1.25:1 allowed.

4.1.4 – Height of Buildings

The original terrace sits at a height of 8.8 metres. The new addition adjoining the present terrace sits at only 7.3 me-tres. The areas marked with a ‘J’ on the below Height of Buildings Map correspond with the 9m height restriction.

4.1.5 – Heritage Impact

The site is located in a General Heritage Conservation Area. However it is not a Heritage Item. The restoration of the façade to a state that is reflective of its original appearance adds positively to the streetscape and is in keeping with the second objective set out in the Sydney LEP:

-toconservetheheritagesignificanceofheritageitemsandheritageconservationareasincludingassociatedfabric, settings and views.

Figure12:FloorSpaceRatioMap(Source-SydneyDraftLEP).

 Figure13:HeightofBuildingsMap(Source-SydneyDraftLEP).

including associated fabric, settings and views.

The new western addition is set back 7m from the street front so as not to conflict with the appearance of the original terrace. The character and expression of this structure is contemporary marking the difference between traditional and contemporary. The simple form and subdued light grey colour pallet and exposed timber louvers compliment the original terrace and tie in with the render finish of the terrace and timber doors and window frames. This further assists in adding to the streetscape.As stated in the LEP ‘altering a heritage item that is a building by making structural changes to its interior requires consent. As outlined further in the Heritage impact statement, over its lifetime, many changes have been made to the interior structures and spaces of the building. As a result, changes to the interior layout of the building are of no detri-ment to the heritage value of the site.

One area of the proposal that will require consent is the demolition and extension of the rear-wall of the original house. In removing the additions of a laundry and workshop, the rear wall will be extended by 1m to occupy the space once taken by the detached laundry. This change does not alter the heritage value to the building or area as 1)it is not vis-ible from the street; 2) it has already been altered in its lifetime with the addition of a laundry on its outside surface.Compliance with heritage features is outlined further in the Heritage Impact Statement

4.1 – Sydney Development Control Plan (Draft DCP) 2010

The Draft Sydney DCP 2010 provides generic controls, guidelines and objectives for development in the area. The below table provides a summary of the proposal’s compliance with the Draft Sydney DCP 2010:

Development Standard Control Proposal Compliance2.1.1 Development to ad-dress the street and public domain

Comply with objectives outlined regarding address-ing the street and public domain.

Compliance is as dis-cussed below.

Yes

2.4 Ecologically Sustain-able Development

Comply with BASIX Proposal complies with BASIX as shown in at-tached BASIX Certificate

Yes

2.5 Waste Management Collection and minimisation of waste during occupation

Compliance as discussed below.

Yes

2.10 Safety and design of buildings

Comply with objectives for safe designs of buildings

Compliance as discussed below

Yes

2.1.2 Design in Heritage Conservation areas

Comply with guidelines on heritage

Compliance as discussed in Heritage Impact State-ment

Yes

2.12.1.7 Contributory build-ings

Comply with guidelines regarding contributory buildings

Compliance as discussed in Heritage impact state-ment.

Yes

3.1.3 Skylights Skylight is not to exceed one third of the width of the roof up, to a maximum of 1300mm.

Skylight is 1000mm wide, whilst the roof is 5660mm wide.

Yes

3.1.6 Balconies, Verandahs and Decks

Comply with objectives of balconies.

Compliance as discussed below.

Parital

3.1.7.1 Sun Access Minimum of 2 hours sun-light between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

Compliance as discussed below.

Yes

3.1.7.5 Private Open Space Private open space is to have a minimum area of 16sqm and minimum dimension of 3m.

Rear courtyard has private open space of 41.6m2.

Yes

2.1.1 Development to address the street and public domain

The two objectives for development to address the street and public domain that are most relevant to this proposal are:

‘Ensurethatdevelopmentcontributestotheactivity,safety,amenityandqualityofstreetsandthepublicdomain.’

And:

‘Reinforcestreetedgeconditionsthataresignificantcontributingcharacteristicsofaheritageconservationarea.’

As previously discussed, the restoration of the original terrace building and new western addition to the building will be in keeping with the quality of the street. The use of a light grey render to the original structure combined with the res-toration of ornament on its façade means that the terrace will contribute to the heritage characteristics of the area. The simple form and subdued light grey colour pallet and exposed timber louvers of the addition, compliment the original terrace and tie in with the render finish of the terrace and timber doors and window frames. This further assists in add-ing to the amenity of the streetscape. This is further discussed in the Heritage Impact Statement.

Furthermore, as to be discussed in regards to the control safety and design of buildings, the front room on the second floor of the terrace is to be used as a studio space. This means that the space will be occupied during the majority of the day providing casual surveillance of the street adding to the streets safety.

2.4 Ecologically Sustainable Development

The Sydney DCP 2010 advises that the proposal must meet a set of minimum environmental standards and that the proposal must not go below these standards. The proposal complies with these standards as evidenced in the at-tached BASIX Certificate.

2.5 Waste Management

At the completion of the project, occupants will be provided with one x 240 litre recycling bin, one x 140 litre general waste bin and one x 140 litre green waste bin. These bins will be stored within bin enclosures close to the street front-age. These are located to the front of the western addition (refer to plan).

2.10 Safety and design of buildings

The Sydney Draft DCP 2010 stipulates that:

‘Activespacesincludingwindowsofhabitableroomswithinbuildingsaretobelocatedtomaximisecasualsurveil-lanceofstreets,laneways,parkingareas,publicspacesandcommunalcourtyardspace.’

As per this guideline, the front room on the second floor of the terrace is to be used as a studio space. This studio space has large glazed sliding doors that open onto a balcony. This means that the space will be occupied during the majority of the day providing causal surveillance of the street.

2.1.2 Design in Heritage Conservation Areas

The Sydney Draft DCP 2010 provides guidelines on development in heritage conservation areas as below:

‘Developmentwithinaheritageconservationareaistobecompatiblewiththesurroundingbuiltformandurbanpat-tern.’

Furthermore, in regards to new additions to buildings within a heritage conservation area it advises that:

‘…additionstoexistingbuildingsinaheritageconservationareaarenottobedesignedasacopyorreplicaofotherbuildingsinthearea,butaretocomplementthecharacteroftheheritageconservationarea.’

Compliance with these objectives is outlined in detail in the attached Heritage Impact Statement.

2.12.1.7 Contributory buildings

The proposed site is identified as a contributory building. This is identified in the below map. These are buildings ‘that that make an important and significant contribution to the character of the heritage conservation area.’

3.1.3 Skylights

The guidelines outlined by the Sydney DCP 2010 in regards to skylights outline that:‘Where only one skylight is possible it is not to exceed one third of the width of the roof up, to a maximum of 1300mm.’As the skylight is 1000mm wide, and the roof is 5660mm wide, the skylight is well under one third of the roof space. It therefore complies with the guideline.3.1.6 Balconies, Verandahs and Decks The proposal complies with the majority of objectives outlined in the Draft Sydney DCP 2010 in regards to Balconies and Verandahs. It complies in regards to the below objective:‘Retain and conserve verandahs and balconies of heritage items and buildings within heritage conservation areas.’

As discussed the front verandah will be restored using a traditional cast iron balustrade and features. This will add to the heritage character of the street.

The outdoor balcony of the new addition however partially does not comply with the provision:

‘A front balcony, verandah or deck is not to be enclosed.’

The front balcony of the addition includes a timber privacy screen that runs along its length. However, this does not detract from the design of the building and due to the setback does not contribute negatively to the streetscape. The advantage of having this privacy screen along the length of the front balcony means that a large portion of direct sun-light that would be entering from the north is blocked out from entering the house.

3.1.7.1 Sun Access

The Draft Sydney DCP 2010 advises that development sites and neighbouring dwellings are to achieve a minimum of 2 hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 21 June onto at least 1sqm of living. Due to the streets orientation to the North, it means that neighbouring dwellings do receive the 2 hour minimum light on the June 21 each year.

This is outlined further in the Shadow diagram map.

3.1.7.5 Private Open Space

The guidelines outlined by the Sydney DCP 2010 in regards to Private open space advise that:

‘Private open space is to have a minimum area of 16sqm and minimum dimension of 3m.’

The rear courtyard has private open space of 41.6m2. It also has a minimum depth of 4.4m. The site therefore, is in compliance with the objectives of the Sydney DCP. Another objective outlined in the DCP in regards to private open space is that:

‘Private open space is to be directly accessible from the living area of the dwelling and capable of serving as an exten-sion of the living area…’

The rear dining room opens directly onto this open space through a set of sliding doors. This allows for the living space to extend into this rear courtyard as is advised in the DCP.

Figure14:HeightofBuildingsMap(Source-SydneyDraftLEP).

HERITAGE IMPACT STATEMENT

The site is located in a General Heritage Conservation Area. However it is not a Heritage Item. In assessing the posi-ble impact of construction of the heritage significance, the current site and its heritage qualities will first be described followed by an anaylsis of possible impact.

1.0 - The Site

The current site 43 Macdonald Street, Erskinville, accommodates a two-storey Victorian terrace constructed around the late 19th Century. On its Western edge 1970 brick extension, set back approximately 12m from the front of the site, a 1970 brick extension has been constructed. Along with this extension the terrace has been substantially altered and has lost many of its original features. Original walls and staircases have been removed in order to accommodate for the extension. A new staircase has been constructed towards the rear of the house to connect the two levels and sits mainly within this new extension. Original doors and windows have been replaced, including the doors leading onto the top-level balcony, which have been replaced with sliding doors. Traces of original plaster/render remain on its brick facade, providing evidence of its original rendered appearance. The stripping away of this plasterwork means that damp has become an issue in the house. Wall construction is brickwork. The ornament that once sat on the West-ern buttress has been removed. The ornament that sits on the eastern buttress and the pediment appear to still be in good condition. At present two contemporary iron work columns are proped underneath the front verandah.

The interior is also substantially altered. Openings have been relocated. Timber doors, architraves and skirtings have been removed; cornices and ceilings are modern. Despite these changes, the original terrace has heritage significance and contributes to the streetscape, but could greatly benefit from the restoration of some of its original features.

2.0 - Impact

The proposal includes a restoration to the facade and structure of the original terrace, and the construction of a new western addition where the current 1970’s extension stands. The restoration of the façade to a state that is reflective of its original appearance adds positively to the streetscape and is in keeping with the second objective set out in the Sydney LEP:

-’toconservetheheritagesignificanceofheritageitemsandheritageconservationareasincludingassociatedfabric,settingsandviews.’

As part of the restoration the original render finish will be restored, with the addition of light grey painted render. The verandahs, front rooms and traditional ornament are also restored using traditional materials and finishes. These include cast iron columns, balustrade panels, brackets and frieze panels. Doors and windows are exposed timber with a varnish finish. Existing roofing is in good condition and will be retained.

As stipulated the Draft Sydney DCP 2010, in regards to additions in heritage conservation areas:

-’Newinfillbuildingsandalterationsandadditionstoexistingbuildingsinaheritageconservationareaarenottobedesignedasacopyorreplicaofotherbuildingsinthearea,butaretocomplementthecharacteroftheheritagecon-servationareabysympatheticallyrespondingtothemattersidentifiedin1(a).’

In keeping with this objective, the character and expression of the new addition is contemporary marking the differ-ence between traditional and contemporary, whilst complimenting the original terrace. The simple form and subdued light grey colour pallet and exposed timber louvers compliment the original terrace and tie in with the render finish of the terrace and timber doors and window frames. This further assists in adding to the streetscape. In addition, the new western addition is set back 7m from the street front so as not to conflict with the appearance of the original terrace.

As stated in the LEP ‘alteringaheritageitemthatisabuildingbymakingstructuralchangestoitsinteriorrequiresconsent. As outlined previously, throughout its lifetime, many changes have been undertaken on the new terrace resulting in much of the interior not retaining much of its original significance. In the proposal, some interior walls have been demolished in order to allow for a new layout. However, no original walls, such as that on the eastern side of the building are altered. As a result, changes to the interior layout of the building are of no detriment to the heritage value of the site.

One area of the proposal that will require consent is the demolition and extension of the rear-wall of the original house. In removing the additions of a laundry and workshop, the rear wall will be extended by 1m to occupy the space once taken by the detached laundry. This change does not alter the heritage value to the building or area as 1)it is not vis-ible from the street; 2) it has already been altered in its lifetime with the addition of a laundry on its outside surface.In light of these features it becomes apparent that the heritage value of the site is not impact by the proposed develop-ment but is in some cases enhanced.