agenda: urban planning committee...councillors john comino (chair) claudia cullen (deputy chair)...

Agenda: Urban Planning Committee Date: Monday 26 November 2007 Time: 6.00pm

Outline of Meeting Protocol & Procedure: • The Chairperson will call the Meeting to order and ask the Committee/Staff to present

apologies or late correspondence. • The Chairperson will commence the Order of Business as shown in the Index to the Agenda. • At the beginning of each item the Chairperson will ask whether a member(s) of the public

wish to address the Committee. • If person(s) wish to address the Committee, they are allowed four (4) minutes in which to do

so. Please direct comments to the issues at hand. • If there are persons representing both sides of a matter (eg applicant/objector), the person(s)

against the recommendation speak first. • At the conclusion of the allotted four (4) minutes, the speaker resumes his/her seat and takes

no further part in the debate unless specifically called to do so by the Chairperson. • If there is more than one (1) person wishing to address the Committee from the same side of

the debate, the Chairperson will request that where possible a spokesperson be nominated to represent the parties.

• The Chairperson has the discretion whether to continue to accept speakers from the floor. • After considering any submissions the Committee will debate the matter (if necessary), and

arrive at a recommendation (R items which proceed to Full Council) or a resolution (D items for which the Committee has delegated authority).

Delegated Authority (“D” Items): • To require such investigations, reports or actions as considered necessary in respect of matters

contained with the Business Agendas (and as may be limited by specific Council resolutions). • Confirmation of Minutes of its Meeting. • Any other matter falling within the responsibility of the Urban Planning Committee and not

restricted by the Local Government Act or required to be a Recommendation to Full Council as listed below:

Recommendation only to the Full Council (“R” Items): • Such matters as are specified in Section 377 of the Local Government Act and within the

ambit of the Committee considerations. • Broad strategic matters, such as:-

- Town Planning Objectives; and - major planning initiatives.

• Matters not within the specified functions of the Committee. • Matters requiring supplementary votes to Budget. • Urban Design Plans and Guidelines. • Local Environment Plans. • Residential and Commercial Development Control Plans. • Rezoning applications. • Heritage Conservation Controls. • Traffic Management and Planning (Policy) and Approvals. • Commercial Centres Beautification Plans of Management. • Matters requiring the expenditure of moneys and in respect of which no Council vote has been

made. • Matters reserved by individual Councillors, in accordance with any Council policy on

"safeguards" and substantive changes. Committee Membership: 7 Councillors Quorum: The quorum for a committee meeting is 4

Councillors.

WOOLLAHRA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL

Notice of Meeting 22 November 2007 To: His Worship The Mayor, Councillor Geoff Rundle, ex-officio Councillors John Comino (Chair)

Claudia Cullen (Deputy Chair) Christopher Dawson Wilhelmina Gardner Keri Huxley Julian Martin David Shoebridge

Dear Councillors

Urban Planning Committee Meeting – 26 November 2007 In accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 1993, I request your attendance at a Meeting of the Council’s Urban Planning Committee to be held in the Committee Room, 536 New South Head Road, Double Bay, on Monday 26 November 2007 at 6.00pm. Gary James General Manager

H:\Urban Planning Committee\AGENDAS\2007\nov26-07upage.doc

H:\Urban Planning Committee\AGENDAS\2007\nov26-07upage.doc

Additional Information Relating to Committee Matters

Site Inspection

Other Matters

Woollahra Municipal Council Urban Planning Committee 26 November 2007

H:\Urban Planning Committee\AGENDAS\2007\nov26-07upage.doc Page 1 of 1

Meeting Agenda Item

Subject

Pages

1 2 3

Leave of Absence and Apologies Late Correspondence Declarations of Interest

Items to be Decided by this Committee using its Delegated Authority D1 Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting held on 12 November 2007 1

Items to be Submitted to the Council for Decision

with Recommendations from this Committee

R1 The Work of John R Brogan (Architect) in the Woollahra Municipality and 17 Ian Street, Rose Bay – 1080.G [BH]

2

R2 Centre Management – Double Bay – 178 & 1179.G 67

R3 Paddington heritage Conservation Area Development Control Plan – Controls for lofts over garages – 899.G

94



Item No: D1 Delegated to Committee

Subject: Confirmation of Minutes of Meeting held on 12 November 2007

Author: Les Windle, Manager – Governance File No: See Council Minutes Reason for Report: The Minutes of the Meeting of Monday 12 November 2007 were

previously circulated. In accordance with the guidelines for Committees’ operations it is now necessary that those Minutes be formally taken as read and confirmed.

Recommendation: That the Minutes of the Urban Planning Committee Meeting of 12 November 2007 be taken as read and confirmed. Les Windle Manager – Governance



Item No: R1 Recommendation to Council

Subject: The work of John R Brogan (architect) in the Woollahra Municipality and 17 Ian street, Rose Bay

Author: Jodi Ayre, Strategic Heritage Officer File No: 1080.G [BH] Reason for Report: 1. To respond to the Council decision made on 9 October 2006 regarding

the work of John R Brogan in the Municipality. 2. To respond to the Council decision made on 13 December 2004

deferring the consideration of the heritage significance of 17 Ian Street Rose Bay, to allow for further information.

3. To obtain a decision to list 17 Ian Street Rose Bay as a heritage item.

Recommendation A. THAT report on the work of John R Brogan within the Woollahra Municipality be received

and noted. B. THAT a draft local environmental plan be prepared to amend Woollahra Local Environmental

Plan 1995 by including the following property as a heritage item in Schedule 3: Ian Street 17 Rose Bay House and grounds

Background: This report responds to decisions of the Council regarding the work of architect John R Brogan (JRB) in Woollahra and the property 17 Ian Street Rose Bay. Brogan was the architect of 17 Ian Street Rose Bay and numerous other works within the Municipality commissioned during the 1930s and 1940s. We have combined our response to the two decisions of the Council. The following subsections provide a background to the two decisions. John R Brogan – Architect The Urban Planning Committee (UPC) considered a report on the review of potential heritage items in the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) on 25 September 2006. The report provided the findings of the heritage assessments carried out for 16 properties in the HCA. During 2002/3 the Woollahra HCA review process identified a number of properties as contributory items and recommended further investigation to determine heritage significance. Two properties, 402 Edgecliff Road and 16 Fullerton Street, Woollahra, identified by that review, were designed by JRB. The report to the UPC provided an understanding of the significance of the architecture by JRB and the issues related to his work within the Municipality.



John Brogan is a significant early twentieth century architect for his prolific work throughout the Sydney region, becoming a very early exponent of the speculative builder/architect. Brogan’s style of architecture and the type of ‘product’ offered had great appeal for the middle to upper-middle class client.

The work of John Brogan is particularly well represented throughout the Municipality.

However, the degree of protection provided by listing on the Woollahra LEP 1995, is limited, with currently only one building identified on the LEP (of the Stockbroker’s Tudor style). Included in this project is another Brogan building of the Spanish Mission/ Mediterranean style, a style for which he was also well known.

Council should consider undertaking a further report to determine the extent and value of

John Brogan’s work throughout the Municipality. At present there is one known Brogan building which is listed on the Woollahra LEP 1995. This report recommends a second Brogan work, 16 Fullerton Street, Woollahra, for listing. In the vicinity of the subject building there are a number of other potential Brogan building’s which appear highly intact. Their value should be investigated.

The UPC’s recommendation was considered by the Council on 9 October 2006. Part E of the Council’s decision was:

E. That Council undertake a further report which investigates the work of John Brogan throughout the Municipality.

Section 2 of this report provides a response to part E of the Council’s decision. 1.2 17 Ian Street Rose Bay At its meeting on 27 September 2004 the UPC considered a report on the potential heritage items and areas in Bellevue Hill and Rose Bay [North],which were assessed by Colin Brady Architecture and Planning. The potential item at 17 Ian Street Rose Bay was included in that report and, on the basis of the heritage assessment undertaken by Mr Brady, the property was recommended for heritage listing in Woollahra LEP 1995. At its meeting on 13 December 2004, the Council deferred the inclusion of 17 Ian Street and several other properties as heritage items in a draft local environmental plan to allow consideration of objections and reports from property owners. At the Council meeting on 13 December 2004 the following decision was made: Section 3 of this report addresses the listing of 17 Ian Street Rose Bay as a heritage item.

John R Brogan – Architect Biographical notes The RAIA has provided a biography of JRB which contains the following biographical information.

John Richard Brogan was born at 65 Alma Street Darlington Sydney on 27th August 1904 and educated at Fort Street Boys High School in Sydney. He died on 6th April 1987 at the age of 82.

John Brogan attended Darlington Public School, located opposite his home in Alma Street, and gained his secondary education at Fort Street High School in Sydney.



Brogan was indentured initially to the architectural firm of Alfred Potter in 1920 attending lectures at the Sydney Technical College in Architecture and Building. Brogan was awarded the ASTC Arch from the Sydney Technical College in 1927 having subsequently entered the large firm of Ross & Rowe where he worked with Bruce Dellit and others on the Commonwealth Savings Bank Building in Martin Place. He continued working for Ross & Rowe until mid-1926, sitting for the Board of Architects’ exam in the same year, and obtaining his certificate of Registration No. 720 on 9th May 1927. At that time his addresses were Mountain View, Innes Road Gore Hill & c/o E. L. Sodersteen M.I.A. 3 Spring St Sydney. In 1926, he won the “Ideal Home Competition” organized by Grace Bros Department Store and, following this, having established his own practice he received many commissions for new homes. During the depression, he designed many retail stores and associated buildings for Burns Philips and Company in Fiji, Samoa and New Guinea. In 1934, he moved to Killara where he built his own home at 59 McIntosh Street and carried on a private practice which was substantially domestic in character. Florence Taylor commissioned Brogan to undertake the majority of her personal architectural work. His professional relationship with Taylor also provided JBR with Various opportunities for collaboration. In 1935, Brogan published a book “101 Australian Homes”, consisting of pencil and ink renderings of popular designs and plans which he had previously contributed to Building Magazine. The book was freely used by builders to build homes around the Sydney suburbs. In the early 1930s, JRB was to participate in a radio talk-back program broadcast on Macquarie Broadcasting Station, now 2GB. The program was directed at the average homeowner/builder, allowing them to put forward any queries about architectural or building issues concerning them. The “Stockbroker Tudor” style of building for which John Brogan is particularly remembered, was influenced by building restrictions during the depression which limited the number of bricks available for each new dwelling. To overcome this, Brogan designed houses with rooms incorporated into the roof space and utilized timber framed gables with mock tudor detailing. Designs were also carried out in an English Cottage Style incorporating heavy timber detailing and stone mullioned leadlight windows. In the 1940s and 1950s Brogan continued to specialise in residential work, but also designed several factories and warehouses during the Second World War. Edwin Brian Mowbray in “Architects of the Middle Third” states: “He was a great designer of good houses and a very able draughtsman. He became an Associate RAIA in 1943 and retired from practice in 1973.



Apperly, Irving and Reynolds1 identify JRB as a key practitioner of the Old English style of architecture. Professional organisations such as the Royal Australian Institute of Architects (NSW Chapter), DOCOMOMO Australia2, who specialise in the assessment of twentieth century architecture and modern buildings, also consider JRB to be an important Modernist. Wyldefel Gardens and Adelaide Boys High are recognised as two of his most important modernist works. Identification of works by John R Brogan in the Municipality A number of sources were reviewed to collate a list of JRB’s works. No. 17 Ian Street Rose Bay was first identified in the study carried out by Tanner and

Associates titled Preliminary Heritage Investigations for the Residential 2(b) areas of Bellevue Hill, Darling Point and Rose Bay (1997)

The Royal Australian Institute of Architects (NSW Chapter) has provided a list of JRB’s

works in the Municipality. The list identified four buildings in the Municipality which were potentially designed by JRB; 34 Drumalbyn Road Bellevue Hill, Rupertswood Avenue, 517 New South Head Road Double Bay and 22 Albert Street Edgecliff.

The heritage inventory sheet for 402 Edgecliff Road, Woollahra, identified other examples of

JRB’s Stockbroker Tudor style of architecture. They are 26 Vaucluse Road Vaucluse, 20 Albert Street Woollahra and 430 Edgecliff Road Woollahra.

The New South Wales State Library holds the Brogan collection of Buildings in Australia and

South East Asia. The catalogue contains some 556 entries, predominantly plan drawings. The list provides only owner/client and suburb information held with the New South Wales

State Library and contains the following entries of buildings designed by JRB in the Municipality.

Residence for Mrs M. F. Beavis, Bellevue Hill 1936 Residence for Dr W Famsay Beavis, Bellevue Hill, 1936 Additions to residence for Mrs M F Beazley, Vaucluse, 1935 Residence for Mrs M. C. Blackman, Vaucluse, n.d Residence for J. S. Burchall, Vaucluse, 1938 Residence for Cameron Williams Constructions Limited, Bellevue Hill 1929 Residence for Miss Campbell, Rose Bay, 1936 Additions to residence for Miss Campbell, Vaucluse, n.d. Residence for E.B. Carr, Bellevue Hill c. 1925

On 16 March 2007, Ms Ayre visited the State Library of New South Wales and viewed the

collection, with particular interest paid to the above drawings for works in the Municipality. Note: This collection is not definitive.

File notes from Council’s former Strategic Heritage Officer, Libby Maher, also identified a

number of potential buildings by JRB which required further investigation.

1 Apperly, Richard, Irving, Robert and Reynolds, Peter, A pictorial guide to identifying Australian architecture: styles and terms from 1788 to the present Sydney, Angus & Robertson, 1989. 2 DOCOMOMO Australia – documentation and conservation of buildings, sites and neighbourhoods of the modern movement.

http://opac.library.usyd.edu.au/search/aApperly%2C+Richard./aapperly+richard/-2,-1,0,B/browse



Location and condition of John R Brogan works The following table has been compiled from the above sources.

Address Listing status Description Date Photograph/ Condition

17 Ian Street Rose Bay

Deferred for further consideration December 2004.

Inter-war Functionalist single residential dwelling

1941

26 Vaucluse Road, Vaucluse

Listed in Woollahra LEP 1995 Schedule 3 – heritage items.

Inter-war Old English style single residential dwelling

c1930

402 Edgecliff Road, Woollahra

Contributory item in Woollahra HCA DCP.

Inter-war Old English (Stockbroker Tudor) single residential dwelling

1933

16 Fullerton Street, Woollahra

Council decision to prepare draft LEP to list as a heritage item 9 October 2006.

Inter-war Mediterranean style single residential dwelling

1938




20 Albert Street, Woollahra


Inter-war Stockbroker Tudor style single residential dwelling

1936

22 Albert Street, Woollahra


Inter-war flat building, ‘Eynesbury’

1930

34 Drumalbyn Road, Bellevue Hill

No current listing. Identified by the Royal Australian Institute of Architects (NSW), requires more information.

Inter-war Spanish Mission residential flat building. Five flats and garage built for T. Walter. The Woollahra Library Local History building register cites J R Brogan as the architect (BA 62/1940) and gives an estimated cost for the work as 1,200 pounds. The work was approved conditionally.

1940




430 Edgecliff Road, Woollahra

Contributory item in Woollahra HCA DCP

Inter-war Stockbroker Tudor style single residential dwelling

c1934

7 Vaucluse Road Vaucluse

N/A Apartment building. Owner - Campbell

Demolished

Kent Road, Rose Bay

N/A Single storey bungalow cottage

1936 Cannot locate, presumed demolished

Kambala Road, Bellevue Hill

N/A Two storey Spanish Mission style residential dwelling

Cannot locate

Wentworth Road, Vaucluse

N/A Owner - Burchall 1938 Cannot locate

Fairfax Road, Bellevue Hill

N/A Two storey Spanish Mission style residential flat building

1936 Cannot locate

12 Hopetoun Avenue, Vaucluse

N/A Two storey single residential dwelling

1935 Obscured view looking back from Olola Avenue.

Rupertswood Avenue, Bellevue Hill

N/A Residential dwelling Identified by the RAIA, requiring further information. Review of BA/DA files revealed a number of extant houses designed by notable inter-war architects. However, the research did not identify any houses in Rupertswood Avenue that have been designed by Brogan.

517 New South Head Road, Double Bay

N/A Residential flat building

Demolished.




Summary of findings JRB’s extant works in the Municipality demonstrate a high level of architectural design and are important examples of inter-war architecture. The collective works represent a wide range of the various inter-war styles of architecture, such as Inter-war Stockbroker Tudor, Inter-war Mediterranean and Inter-war Functionalist. This collection best demonstrates the important stylistic work of JRB. JRB has a strong association with the locality. His works demonstrate aspects of historical, aesthetic and representative values of heritage significance. These buildings reflect a particular architectural style and aesthetic, along with providing an understanding of local historical development during the inter-war period. No.26 Vaucluse Road, Vaucluse (heritage item), 16 Fullerton Street, Woollahra (decision to prepare draft LEP) and the other examples within the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area (contributory items 402 Edgecliff Road, 20 Albert Street and 22 Albert St Woollahra) provide an excellent representation of a major component of JRB’s architectural work. The group also provides a high quality representation of work carried out by JRB in the Municipality. A level of statutory protection is provided for these buildings through the heritage provisions contained in Woollahra LEP 1995 and the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area Development Control Plan. No.34 Drumalbyn Road, Bellevue Hill should be investigated to determine its potential heritage significance. This is a residential flat building in the Inter-war Spanish Mission style of architecture, built c1940. The building exhibits a high degree of interesting architectural detail, and appears externally to be highly intact. An assessment of heritage significance should be undertaken in a manner consistent with the NSW Heritage Office guidelines. No.17 Ian Street, Rose Bay, is identified as a rare example of JRB’s work in the Inter-war Functionalist style of architecture in the Municipality. 17 Ian Street Rose Bay In December 2004 Council deferred the consideration of 17 Ian Street as a potential heritage item to allow further consideration of objections and reports from property owners. The previous consultation process undertaken in 2004 resulted in a considerable amount of research and documentation for the property. The following documentation was produced: Woollahra heritage inventory sheet, prepared by Colin Brady Architecture + Planning, July

2003, with amendments by Libby Maher, Woollahra Council, July 2004 and November 2004. (Annexure 1)

Report dated January 2005 Review of the Statement of Heritage Significance, Rappoport Heritage Consultants (Annexure 2)

Memo to the Mayor and all Councillors, from Libby Maher, Woollahra Council, 15 November 2004. (Annexure 3)

Letter dated 11 November 2004 Proposed heritage listing of 17 Ian Street Rose Bay Wilshire Webb – Lawyers (Annexure 4)

Letter dated 10 November 2004 Objection to Proposed LEP Listing, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay, Graham Brooks and Associates. (Annexure 5)

Analysis of this material reveals a difference of opinion regarding the heritage significance of the property. By recommencing the investigations the following outstanding issues from the previous consultation process have been addressed:



The degree of extant original fabric of the interior and the impact it may have on assessment of significance.

The surviving integrity of the property and the place the house holds in the professional work of JRB.

The value of the building as an example of the Inter-war Functionalist style of architecture. The accuracy of the content of the heritage inventory sheet.

As stated above, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay is a rare example of the Inter-war Functionalist style by JRB in the Municipality. Further research was undertaken to determine the comparative value of the building within the body of JRB’s work. The research also looked at the comparative value of the building as an example of Inter-war Functionalist style of architecture in the Municipality. An outline of the research and its findings are provided in the following subsections. Statement of significance dated November 2004 The heritage inventory sheet presented to the Urban Planning Committee in November 2004 contained the following statement of significance. The residence at 17 Ian Street Rose Bay is of local significance having historic significance

as a well-preserved example of early modern architecture executed in the Inter-war Functionalist style by architect John D. Brogan. Brogan established a reputation as an exponent of the style beginning with his initial design of Wyldefel Gardens, as an exceptional and early example of the style in Sydney constructed at Potts Point in 1936. The residence has further historical significance as an example of ongoing private construction undertaken after the September 1939 outbreak of War in Europe and prior to the impact of the Pacific War (Dec 1941) on property values and construction in Sydney’s eastern suburbs.3

Objections received to the proposed heritage listing The property owners provided a number of submissions objecting to the listing of 17 Ian Street as a heritage item. Two of those submissions contained further heritage analysis for Council’s consideration. Rappoport Heritage Consultants, January 2005, Review of the Statement of Heritage

Significance (Annexure 2). Graham Brooks and Associates, 10 November 2004, letter titled Objection to Proposed LEP

Listing, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay. (Annexure 5). The two submissions were consistent with one another and provided the following opinions to suggest that the building was not worthy of listing as a heritage item in Woollahra LEP 1995. The submissions argued that the statement of significance is flawed and contains statements which are factually incorrect. The building is not well-preserved, having being extensively altered both internally and

externally. The building is not an early example of modern architecture. The building is not typical of the work .JRB who was primarily known for his work in the Old

English style of architecture. JRB did not establish his reputation as a designer of Inter-war Functionalist style houses.

3 Colin Brady Architecture + Planning Heritage Inventory Sheet, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay July 2003 (Amended July 2004, November 2004)



Additional research undertaken Following the recommencement of the investigation into the heritage significance of 17 Ian Street, additional research has been undertaken. This included: A site inspection by Council’s Strategic Heritage Officer, Jodi Ayre, on Thursday 22

February 2007. Consultation with Anne Higham, Heritage Architect, Royal Australian Institute of Architects

(NSW). Consultation with DOCOMOMO Australia (Scott Robertson). Consultation with the Art Deco Society (NSW) (Jennifer Hill). A review of the thesis on the work of JRB by Anna Kate Brogan, grand daughter of JRB. Phone conversations with John Murray Brogan, son of JRB. Comparative analysis of Inter-war Functionalist/ Modernist style buildings in the

Municipality. Preparation of a report on the work of John R Brogan within the Municipality.

The research has informed the following responses to the primary points of issue which were raised in the objections to the proposed heritage listing. Is 17 Ian Street Rose Bay a well preserved building? During the preparation of the heritage inventory sheet for this property, the building was inspected by Council’s heritage consultant from the street only. Analysis of the external presentation of the building to Ian Street revealed a high level of integrity and intactness. The heritage inventory sheet noted that no inspection of the interior had been carried out. A site inspection was carried out by Council’s Strategic Heritage Officer, Jodi Ayre, on Thursday 22 February 2007. Ms Ayre was accompanied by Mr Gary Wolff who is acting on the owner’s behalf. The original BA drawings and the specification dated 1941 were available for comparison. The findings of the site inspection are outlined below. Front Elevation The front elevation retains a high degree of integrity and intactness. The original design features such as the external scale, form and aesthetic features remain intact. Elements of the original design include the double storey strip glass bricks, the chevron pattern motifs, the steel framed windows with concrete hoods, vents and concrete hood over garage entry, stripped ventilation blocks, balcony balustrades and garden walling. John M Brogan has viewed a photograph of the front elevation of the building and considers the front of the building to be clearly recognisable as JRB’s work in the modernist style, retaining the overall bulk and form, and utilising the typical curved wall and window treatment with concrete hoods.


When concrete became more readily available and cost effective in the 1930s, his style reflected its use in the P&O style [Inter-war Functionalist] of clean lines and curved forms…No. 17 Ian Street Rose Bay (1941) utilises the corner window design in segments of a curve, without the curved glass, thus allowing the windows to be opened. The building is a good example of his design for Wyldefel Gardens (1933) that was so influential in the development of architecture in Sydney.4

Figure 2 Existing elevation February 2007 Source: Woollahra Council

Figure 1 Original BA drawing 1941, front elevation Source: Woollahra Council

Mr Brooks identified a number of alterations to this façade which include the introduction of two fluted columns to the front entry step, replaced entry door, stair and landing materials, and a new garage door. Following the comparison between the original design drawings and the existing condition of the building, the extent of modifications to this façade are not considered to have a detrimental impact on the building’s integrity. The modifications are of a minor nature, are reversible and do not impact on the interpretation of the overall architectural aesthetic. Rear Elevation The rear elevation has undergone a higher degree of modifications in contrast to the front elevation. On the ground floor, the existing condition is consistent with the approved BA/ DA drawings dated 1975. These drawings proposed internal modifications to the kitchen and service areas, and subsequent modifications to the external window and doors to these areas. The alterations have been carried out with different materials. However, they are not considered to have a detrimental impact. Modifications to the first floor rear elevation are restricted to the infill of the verandah. Despite these alterations, the elevation retains a moderate degree of original detail and materials. This includes the bulk and form of the elevation, the ground floor fluted cement columns to the verandah, external door to the ground floor verandah from the dining room and all windows and doors to the first floor. It is important to note that all the modifications to this elevation have essentially been undertaken within the original building footprint, except for the demolition of the minor return off the kitchen wall. 4 John Murray Brogan, Architect, son of John R Brogan. Phone conversation 13 March 2007, email dated 11 April 2007.




Figure 3 Original BA drawing 1941, rear elevation Source: Woollahra Council

Figure 4 Existing rear ele

nterior analysis

Room Original fabric Modified fabric / Integrity and intactness

vation photographs Source: Woollahra Council

I

Ground floor – foyer

a

Layout All fabric of the foyer has been modified. The

stair, while in the original location, is now a marble tiled stair with painted timber stair handrail. The tiles have been laid over the original floor which does not preclude the reinstatement of the original jarrah floor at later date.

Ground floor – Layout, jarrah timber flooring, ramed

ornice, ceiling rose, light fittings, doors and lounge

skirting, window pelmet, steel fwindows and window furniture

Cdoor furniture.

Ground floor – dining ayout, jarrah timber flooring, ,

s

Modifications to the kitchen opening surround

Lexternal doors to open verandahpredominant steel framed window(but with some minor modification).

to match the details of the modified kitchen. Modification to the west window frames – although consistent with the overall aestheticand considered to have a minor impact.

Ground floor – No original fabric remains within the ater kitchen installed c.1975, new appliances, kitchen kitchen.

Land external windows.

Ground floor – living The original maid’s room, laundry ew tiled floor, external doors and windows and W/C have been removed to create the living room.

N

Ground floor – ocation. Completely modified interior and appliances. bathroom

L

First floor – master Steel framed windows and window Carpet, layout – the raised platform has been d bedroom furniture. removed and an en-suite and wardrobe installe

on the east bedroom wall. New cornice, ceiling rose, carpet.

First floor – second Generally intact, including pelmet, arpet. Replacement of original built-in bedroom (formerly nursery)

steel framed windows and window furniture.

Cwardrobe with new.



Room Original fabric Modified fabric / Integrity and intactness

First floor – third bedroom

Generally intact, including pelmet, steel framed windows and window furniture.

New light fitting.

First floor – office Generally intact, including pelmet, steel framed windows and window furniture. Fireplace/ ESSE stove surround intact.

Carpet. Original ESSE Stove removed from opening. Built-in wardrobe installed.

First floor – bathroom

Configuration of original external steel framed windows and window furniture.

The bathroom materials and layout have been completely modified. The character of the bathroom is inconsistent with the Inter-war Functionalist aesthetic.

Comment on the building’s overall integrity and intactness The exterior of the building retains, overall, a high degree of integrity and intactness. Comparative analysis between the original BA drawings and the extant building has been informative. The front elevation retains a high degree of integrity and intactness. While the rear elevation has undergone a degree of alteration, the extent has not had a detrimental impact on the ability to interpret the original form and character. There is a higher degree of original evidence remaining than is given credit for in the reports prepared by Mr Rappoport and Mr Brooks. This opinion was informed by the site inspection, the original BA drawings and the original works specification. Mr Brooks argues These changes, especially internally, have removed much of the capacity of the house to

demonstrate the careful planning and functional layout of the original house. This was the aspect of the design that was the professional focus of Brogan as an architect, and on which his reputation was based. The current owners advised that the house had been left vacant for some time prior to their purchase in 1974. The property was apparently the subject of a proposed redevelopment and had been left to deteriorate. As a result, extensive internal alterations and repairs were required.5

Internally, the introduction of the owner’s decoration has had an impact on the overall interpretation of the original interior aesthetic. However, the modifications do not impede an understanding of the careful planning and functional layout of the house, where the relationship of the principal rooms and circulation spaces have not been impacted upon. Major internal modifications carried out by the owner are limited to the kitchen/ living and bathroom areas, and involve major material changes to these rooms. Minor modifications throughout the rest of the house include alterations and modifications to the master bedroom, changes to light fittings, some floor coverings and the finishes to a number of rooms. The main staircase remains in the original location, but has also been altered.

5 Brooks, Graham, Objection to Proposed LEP Listing, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay, letter dated 10 November 2004, p. 4.



Is 17 Ian Street Rose Bay an early example of modern architecture in the Municipality? The Inter-war Functionalist style is defined6 as a style of architecture expressed by clean lines, simple geometric shapes, flat roofs, with fenestration often expressed in horizontal bands, giving a ‘streamlined’ effect. The materials included plain surfaces of light-toned cement or face brick, steel and reinforced concrete, rounded corners, metal framed windows, and extensive use of glass in various formats, predominantly to emphasise curved configurations. The time period for this style of architecture is identified as c.1915 – c.1940. The original design drawings are dated 1941, placing the subject property towards the end of this period of architecture. The building clearly identifies with the design characteristics of the Inter-war Functionalist style, and the subject property, as it presents to Ian Street, is a very good example of this style of architecture in the Municipality. The Inter-War Functionalist style is considered as the fore-runner of modern architecture in Australia, where a new set of architectural styles were developed. Graham Jahn in Sydney Architecture comments: The work and publications of the mid-1930s show a growing acceptance towards European

Modernism. While numerous examples from the 1930s exist, Modernism remained very much a minority movement until after World War II, when it became widely accepted, and Modernism or International Style dominated the architectural scenes until the 1960s.7

DOCOMOMO Australia has been consulted regarding the importance of the building in terms of the early modern architecture in Australia. Scott Robertson8, DOCOMOMO Chair, has provided preliminary comments based on the external presentation of the building. Mr Robinson considers the building as a representative example of the cross over period from inter-war architecture to the modern style. This is demonstrated by the combination of the curved parapet wall, rendered facades, married with the pitched roof behind. Anna Brogan in her thesis on the work of JRB considers further: I felt it also necessary to place the work of John R. Brogan within the architectural climate of

the time such that his work is not viewed in isolation but in the context of the changing architectural ideologies of the 1920s, 30s and 40s. At this time there was a developing interest within the architectural profession regarding the stylistic and theoretical changes being noted in America and Europe. These events and ideas were disseminated in Australia through various Australian and overseas journals whilst also being brought back by travelling students and professionals.9

Does John R Brogan have a reputation as an exponent of the Inter-war Functionalist style? The submissions contained an objection to the following sentence contained within the statement of significance:

6 Apperly, Richard, Irving, Robert and Reynolds, Peter, A pictorial guide to identifying Australian architecture: styles and terms from 1788 to the present Sydney, Angus & Robertson, 1989, pp.184-187. 7 Jahn, Graham Sydney Architecture The Watermark Press, Sydney, 1997, p.111. 8 Telephone conversation with Scott Robertson 11 April 2007. 9 Brogan, Anna Kate John R Brogan A career in practice, Dissertation for the Degree of Bachelor of Architecture, University of New South Wales, 1994, p. xx.





Brogan established a reputation as an exponent of the style beginning with his initial design of Wyldefel Gardens, an exceptional and early example of the style in Sydney constructed at Potts Point.

The submissions object to the proposed heritage listing claim that JRB was essentially known for his work in the Old English style of architecture. The house is not a good or central example of the architectural work of John R Brogan and

has little historic, aesthetic, social or scientific significance within Woollahra. Given that the building is a marginal example of his stylistic output, a comparison to another of Brogan’s buildings, even the State listed Wyldefel Gardens is absolutely irrelevant to the significance of this subject house.10

In researching the response to these submissions, the Royal Australian Institute of Architects (NSW Chapter) and John M Brogan were consulted. Additionally, the thesis by Anna Brogan on the work of JRB was examined. The ‘typical’ work of JRB, such as the heritage listed example 26 Vaucluse Road, Vaucluse, the recent properties considered by the Urban Planning Committee, 402 Edgecliff Road and 16 Fullerton Street, Woollahra, demonstrate the important work of JRB as a speculative architect with highly stylised design skills. These buildings have a direct correlation to JRB’s 1935 publication 101 Australian Homes and are considered significant to the Municipality for this reason. When a client approached JRB they did so through recommendation. This was either from a

previous client, a house they had seen and liked, his competition wins (with associated exposure to a wider public) or from the influence of his book ‘101 Australian Homes’.11

However, the Royal Australian Institute of Architects and DOCOMOMO Australia consider JRB’s most important work to be the apartments at Wyldefel Gardens (1935), and the Adelaide Boys High School (1940). This is consistent with a review of the body of JRB’s work which is held by the State Library of New South Wales and comments made by John M Brogan. It demonstrates that, when given the opportunity, JRB’s work took on a more individual path. Graham Jahn in Sydney Architecture also considers that “at the time of its completion in 1936, ‘Wyldefel Gardens’ was arguably the most modern striking example of residential architecture in Australia”12. Mr Brooks considers that the style of architecture demonstrated at 17 Ian Street is not a central example of JRB’s body of work as illustrated in 101 Australian Homes (Stockbroker Tudor, Spanish Mission, Mediterranean). It is important to note that 101 Australian Homes was published around the same period as the design and construction of Wyldefel Gardens, and before the design of Adelaide Boys High School in 1940 and 17 Ian Street 1941. The supposition that the style of architecture expressed in these buildings is not central to JRB’s work because it is not included in 101 Australian Homes is not supported. Such an opinion completely disregards the latter half of JRB’s work which, as demonstrated below, shows a strong exploration of the modernist style.

10 Brooks, Graham, Objection to Proposed LEP Listing, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay, letter dated 10 November 2004. 11 John Murray Brogan, Architect, son of John R Brogan. Phone conversation 13 March 2007, email dated 11 April 2007. 12 Jahn, op. cit., p.128.



The State Library of NSW holds a collection of JRB’s work, including original design drawings and specifications. In his report Mr Rappoport states that “a list of Brogan’s architectural work was obtained from the State Library of New South Wales”13. From this list Mr Rappoport states he was able to “glean whether his [JRB’S] use of the Modernist Functionalist style was typical of his [JRB’s] work or whether it represents an aberration”14. While there is no clear analysis in Mr Rappoport’s report which deals directly with the contents of the collection, he reaches a conclusion that “Brogan was not so much an exponent of the Modernist style as he was a half-hearted participator.”15 The building typologies of JRB’s work cannot be determined from a review only of the list of his work held by the State Library of NSW. On 16 March 2007, Ms Ayre visited the State Library of NSW and viewed the entire collection. The purpose of viewing the files was not to ascertain the extent of his domestic architecture in the Stock-broker Tudor or Mediterranean style, but rather to assess the scope of Inter-war Functionalist and modernist work within the collection. As a result of viewing the collection, the following has been determined: JRB’s domestic work continued throughout his career. However, as stated by John M Brogan,

and documented in a thesis prepared by Anna Brogan in 1994, when the opportunity was provided, Brogan’s work from 1935 onwards took a very different direction, heavily influenced by the architectural ideas developing in Australia and abroad.

Up to the point that Wyldfel Gardens appears in the collection of work, JRBs designs

demonstrate the typical designs as featured in 101 Australian Homes. This style of domestic architecture continued, into the latter half of his career. However, the architectural interest was no longer solely on these typical designs, but also included a strong interest in the emerging modernist style.

After Wyldefel Gardens in 1935, JRB further developed the modern architectural aesthetic in

commercial, educational and recreational style buildings. This is demonstrated by such extant and proposed examples such as the Adelaide Boys High School (1941) (extant), a businessman’s club at Hurstville (1949) (demolished), a commercial building in Arcadia (1966) (drawings), Armidale Technical College (1961) (drawings).

While JRB’s modernist work is predominantly commercial, there are also a number of

dwelling-houses in this style. There are a number of dwelling-houses within the collection which date post 1940, and which present a similar modernist aesthetic as the commercial examples and Wyldefel Gardens. The buildings are consistent with the changing architectural tastes of the 1950s and 60s and clearly reflect modern European and Australian design influences, incorporating terracing roof forms, modern materials, curved walls and horizontal forms. The designs were primarily developed for clients on Sydney’s North Shore and upper northern Sydney suburbs.

No.17 Ian Street is the first residential example of this changing architectural style developed

by JRB in his work throughout the 1940s, 50s and 60s. One other example, in Warrane Road Roseville Chase, 16 dated 1947, demonstrates all of the design features of 17 Ian Street, including the architectural scale and massing, curved prominent wall with a parapet,

13 Rappoport p 4 14 Rappoport p 5 15 Rappoport p 22 16 PXD 525/1-477 Brogan collection of buildings in Australia, item number 137 – 139


a hipped roof set back, double storey strip window feature, chevron wall pattern, steel framed windows, and concrete hood over openings. There are other drawings within the collection for residences which display design features similar to those of 17 Ian Street17.

The building at Warrane Road, Roseville Chase, is of a later construction date than 17 Ian

Street. From available information it appears that where alterations have been undertaken to interior rooms, such as the kitchen and bathroom, they have been done in a manner which is sympathetic to the architectural style of the building. The building is not identified as a heritage item in Schedule 7 of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance.

Figure 5 Warrane Road, Roseville Chase Figure 6 Main kitchen

Source: realestate.com.au. Accessed 19 March 2007. Source: realestate.com.au. Accessed 19 March 2007.

Figure 7 Living room Figure 8 Master bedroom

Source: realestate.com.au. Accessed 19 March 2007. Source: realestate.com.au. Accessed 19 March 2007. A review of the collection reveals that JRB was not a half-hearted participator, but repeatedly

explored the work in the Inter-war Functionalist and modernist style throughout the latter half of his career. This is consistent with the opinion provided by the Royal Australian Institute of Architects which considers that JRB’s most important works are his modernist works at Wyldefel Gardens and Adelaide Boys High School.

Later dwelling-house design drawings, such as those for various works in Castlecrag,

demonstrate a more resolved modernist aesthetic, moving away from the hipped roof form and exploring further terraced and parapet forms, curved wall and glass elements, and streamlined elements such as balustrades.

The review of the collection also indicated that 17 Ian Street is the earliest example of a

dwelling-house which explores elements of the emerging modernist style, and also the most substantial in terms of bulk and form.

17 ibid., item #194 Proposed residence at Mosman, # 411Residence at Cronulla



Further examples of JRB’s modernist style are provided below.

Figure 9 Wyldefel Gardens, Potts Point Source: Brogan, Anna Kate John R Brogan A career in practice University of New South Wales, 1994.

Figure 10 Detail view of Wyldefel Gardens Source: Brogan, Anna Kate John R Brogan A career in practice University of New South Wales, 1994.

Figure 12 Adelaide Boys High School. Source: Heritage South Australia Newsletter January 2002, Number 20, cover image.

Figure 11 Adelaide Boys High School , 1935 Source: Brogan, Anna Kate John R Brogan A career in practice University of New South Wales, 1994.



Figure 14 Building 1952, Hurstville (now demolished) Source: Building and Engineering Magazine, 25 February 1952, pg 33.

Figure 13 Perspective drawing of the businessman’s club, Hurstville, 1949 Source: Building and Engineering Magazine,24 October 1949, page 26

Figure 15 Perspective of proposed flats at Kirribilli (not dated) Source: Brogan, Anna Kate John R Brogan A career in practice University of New South Wales, 1994.

Figure 16 Block of flats, not dated Source: Brogan, Anna Kate John R Brogan A career in practice University of New South Wales, 1994.

The Inter-war Functionalist style of architecture, as demonstrated by the work at 17 Ian Street, is a style of architecture which JRB did persist with and refined into the modernist era aesthetic in the latter half of his career. The works of JRB within the Municipality are representative of the styles within 101 Australian Homes. No.17 Ian Street represents a distinctively different style of design of the Inter-war Functionalist style. This building is the earliest known example of a dwelling-house by JRB in this style and is considered important for this reason. Comparative analysis The above subsection has provided an understanding of the work of JRB in the Inter-war Functionalist style as well as work in the modernist style. It has been demonstrated that this aspect of JRB’s work formed an important part of his architectural career. Further comparative analysis is provided below to determine comparative significance of JRB’s work in the Municipality, and comparative analysis of other similar extent examples of similar architectural style also within the Municipality.



Examples of JRB’s work in the Municipality Section 2.0 of this report provides analysis of the work of JRB within the Municipality. The findings of this report demonstrate that JRB had a strong association with the Municipality, having worked on a large number of commissions. The ‘typical’ interwar JRB buildings are well represented and afforded a degree of statutory protection, either through listing in Woollahra LEP 1995 as heritage items or through their location within the Woollahra Heritage Conservation Area. However, 17 Ian Street is the only Inter-war Functionalist style of JRB’s work within the Municipality and is therefore considered a rare example of his work in the style in the Municipality. Examples of Inter-war Functionalist style in the Municipality There are a number of examples of the Inter-war Functionalist style apartment blocks within the Municipality, such as the examples below located in Bellevue Hill and Darling Point. No. 206A Victoria Road and other examples in Birriga Road are listed as heritage items in Woollahra LEP 1995.

Figure 18 Apartment building, New Beach Road, Darling Point Source: Woollahra Council

Figure 17 206A Victoria Road, Bellevue Hill

Source: Woollahra Council

There are two earlier dwelling-houses in the Municipality, the Roberts’ House in Vaucluse and the Provost House in Bellevue Hill, which demonstrate a similar exploration of the emerging modern aesthetic demonstrated by 17 Ian Street. Both of these houses are listed as heritage items in Woollahra LEP 1995. They are also listed in the RAIA’s 20th Century Register of Significant Buildings. Roberts’ House, at 11A Gilliver Avenue, designed by Guy Crick in 1935, is considered by Graham Jahn as one of the first houses to reflect the curvilinear and streamlined forms of Art Deco18. Prevost House, at 65 Kambala Road, designed by Sydney Ancher 1937, is, according to Graham Jahn, openly claimed to be the first functionally designed house in Australia19. Of the buildings listed in Woollahra LEP 1995 which represent the various architectural styles of the Inter-war period of architecture, the Inter-war Functionalist style is the least well represented. These buildings are therefore considered rare within the Municipality and of high local significance.

18 Jahn, op. cit, p. 132 19 ibid., p. 133.



Figure 20 Prevost House, 1937 Source: Woollahra Council

Figure 19 Roberts House, 1935

Source: Woollahra Council Changes to heritage inventory sheet Several changes have been made to the heritage inventory sheet as a result of the additional research and internal inspection of the building. These changes are shown in the amended heritage inventory sheet (annexure 6) and occur within the sections for physical description, physical condition, modification and dates, further comments, recommendations and information sources. Conclusion The further analysis and comparative research undertaken within this report has supported the original recommendation to list 17 Ian Street Rose Bay as a heritage item in Woollahra LEP 1995. The building is an important example of the Inter-war Functionalist style of architecture within the Municipality and within the body of work of JRB. The building demonstrates a high degree of external integrity and intactness, and the degree of modifications to the interior of the building are not considered to have had a detrimental impact. Expert opinions gained during this investigation confirm the position that this is an important example of modern architecture. JRB’s works in the Municipality demonstrate a high level of aesthetic design and are important examples of inter-war architecture. The collective works represent a wide range of the various inter-war styles of architecture, such as Inter-war Stockbroker Tudor, Inter-war Mediterranean, and Inter-war Functionalist. JRB has a strong association with the locality and his works are historically significant and remain a testament to a significant architectural period. It is considered that together with 26 Vaucluse Road, Vaucluse (heritage item), 16 Fullerton Street, Woollahra (decision to prepare draft LEP) and 17 Ian Street Rose Bay (proposed heritage item) this group provides a high quality representation of the important work carried out by JRB in the Municipality. Some modifications have been made to the heritage inventory sheet, last modified in November 2004, to reflect the further research and internal inspection of the building (Annexure 6). Jodi Ayre Strategic Heritage Officer

Chris Bluett Manager Strategic Planning




Annexures: 1. Woollahra heritage inventory sheet for 17 Ian Street Rose Bay, prepared by Colin Brady

Architecture + Planning, July 2003, with amendments by Libby Maher, Woollahra Council, July 2004 and November 2004.

2. Rappoport Heritage Consultants, January 2005, Review of the Statement of Heritage Significance.

3. Memo to the Mayor and all Councillors, from Libby Maher, Woollahra Council, 15 November 2004.

4. Wilshire Webb – Lawyers, 11 November 2004, letter titled Proposed heritage listing of 17 Ian Street Rose Bay.

5. Graham Brooks and Associates, 10 November 2004, letter titled Objection to Proposed LEP Listing, 17 Ian Street Rose Bay.

6. Woollahra heritage inventory sheet, prepared by Colin Brady Architecture + Planning, July 2003, with amendments by Libby Maher, Woollahra Council, July 2004 and November 2004, and amendments by Jodi Ayre, Woollahra Council March 2007.




Subject: Centre Management - double bay

Author: Allan Coker, Director Planning and Development File No: 1178 & 1179.G Reason for Report: To update Council on the current position in relation to centre management

for Double Bay and to make recommendations on how the matter should be progressed.

Recommendations: 1. That Council support the establishment of a Double Bay Centre Management Working Party

with a specific charter to oversight the preparation of the documentation required for centre management, including:

• the rules for the Incorporated Association • the Memorandum of Understanding between Council and the persons who will form the

Association • the proposed service agreement for maintenance • the business plan • committee membership of the Association for its first year.

2. That Council appoint two Councillors and the Director of Planning to the working party. 3. That the working party be wound up immediately following the commencement of operation

of the Incorporated Association. 4. That the documents required for incorporation be ‘signed off’ by Council prior to lodgement

with the Department of Fair Trading. 5. That following commencement of the operation of the Incorporated Association, Council

agree to release its funds, up to $200,000 to the Incorporated Association on a $ for $ basis as those funds are contributed by the business community of Double Bay.

7. That Council defer the request for a further year’s funding and the issue of a rates levy

commencing 1 July 2009 until the Incorporated Association has been established and has operated for a period of 6 months.

1.0 Background: The Council is considering how it might play a more active role in improving business function and success in the Double Bay and Oxford Street, Paddington commercial centres. To more fully understand how the centres are currently trading and, if required, what strategies should be implemented to improve business activity it commissioned UrbisJHD and Hill PDA to undertake a study for each centre. Hill PDA examined Double Bay and URBIS JHD, Oxford Street. The purpose of the studies was to better understand the retail needs, market trends, market demands and local issues facing the centres. Both studies made a number of specific recommendations for each centre.



These studies were presented to the Urban Planning Committee on 14 May 2007. Council’s resolution of 28 May 2007 for the Double Bay Commercial Centre Retail Study was: “1. That Council endorse the actions identified in Annexure 3 of the report to the Urban

Planning Committee of 14 May 2007 on the findings of the Double Bay Commercial Centre Development Study.

2. That the Double Bay Commercial Centre Development Study by HillPDA be made publicly

accessible on the Council’s website. 3. That a report be submitted to the Urban Planning Committee outlining what steps are

required to facilitate:

a. the appointment of centre managers for the Double Bay and Oxford Street Commercial Centres for a suggested period of 3 years with a review after 12 months.

b. consideration of reallocating funding from the public domain improvement works to fund the centre managers.

c. consideration of co-funding models from retailers and land owners. d. consideration of the appropriate authorities and management structures required to

allow the centre managers to effectively operate”.

On 9 July 2007 the committee considered a progress report which discussed the work being undertaken by Council staff in exploring centre management. At that meeting we presented a Powerpoint presentation on possible centre management models. The committee recommended:

“1. That the Urban Panning Committee note the content of this report in relation to centre

management for the Double Bay and Oxford Street, Paddington town centres. 2. That a further report be presented to the Committee to allow a detailed proposal to be put to

landowners with a view to having a meeting with the landowners before the end of August”. The above recommendation was presented and adopted by Council, as a matter of urgency, on the same evening. On 13 August 2007, in response to the 9 July 2007 resolution, we presented a preferred centre management model. A copy of this report is attached as annexure 1. The recommended model is described in section 5, Fig 2 of that report. Following consideration of the report the committee made the following recommendation which was adopted by Council on 27 August 2007. “1. That the Council endorse for discussion, with the Double Bay business community, the model

for centre management set out in section 5 of the report on Centre Management to the Urban Planning Committee on 13 August 2007.

2. That the Council engage in dialogue with the Council of the City of Sydney regarding a centre

management model for Oxford Street, Paddington and its financing. 3. That Council agrees in principle to match funds raised by the business community (up to

$200,000) as seed funding for centre management in Double Bay for year 1 only.



4. That a special rates levy to fund centre management in Double Bay be further considered following discussions with the Double Bay business community.

5. That Council develop a draft service agreement for maintenance in Double Bay to be used as a basis for discussion with the Double Bay business community.

6. That Council write to the Double Bay business community, via the Chamber of Commerce,

suggesting that a business plan to address the marketing requirements of the centre is prepared.”

This report addresses parts 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the above resolution. 2. Response from the Double Bay Chamber of Commerce On 28 August 2007 I communicated Council’s decision to the Chamber. I indicated to the chamber that, “the genuine commitment of Council to this process and this model is demonstrated by its commitment to match funds on a dollar for dollar basis up to $200,000 as seed funding for year one.” I also indicated that we needed to find out: 1. Do the landlords and business community of Double Bay support the concept of centre

management? 2. Do the landlords and business community of Double Bay support the proposed model for

centre management? If not would they support an alternative model? 3. Would the landlords and business community of Double Bay be prepared to make voluntary

contributions on a $ for $ basis to set up centre management and operate in year one? 4. Do the landlords and business community of Double Bay support a special rates levy to fund

centre management? Following Council’s decision various members of the Chamber met with key landowners and business operators to canvas support for centre management. The Chamber considered it preferable to commence these discussions with key landowners to gain their support before consulting more broadly with the business community. The following are the summary points from the chamber’s initial meeting held on 10 October 2007: • All participants were supportive and excited by the prospects of centre management but

nervous about a rates levy • Owners need to be involved in the preparation of the proposed business plan • Important issues such as membership of the board need to be resolved • The title of the incorporated centre management body needs to be determined • A $200,000 contribution from the business community is achievable • The contribution should be spread among as many people as possible to get broad

‘ownership’ of the process At the Double Bay breakfast meeting held on 26 October 2007 the Chamber provided the following further feedback:



• It is very pleased about the Council’s decision • Jo Kelly, from People Place and Partnership has been commissioned to prepare a business

plan • There has been a very good and positive response from the business community • People are happy with the centre management model that has been proposed • There is a recognition that centre management needs to be collaborative effort between

Council and the business community. The Chamber, by letter of 16 November 2007, formally responded to Council’s resolution of 27 August and offer of $ for $ funding. A copy of the Chamber’s letter is attached as annexure 2. In summary, the Chamber advises that it: • will accept the Council’s offer of achieving a $200,000 contribution to match the Council’s

pledge of the same amount • understands that an incorporated association will have the ongoing responsibility for the

decisions to implement the long term business plan for Double Bay • has appointed Jo Kelly from People Place and Partnership to assist the business community

to understand the process • would like Council to formally consider the actions outlined in an attachment to the letter. The attachment to the letter outlines the suggested next steps for establishing centre management in Double Bay in partnership with Council. See annexure 3. 3. The next steps The Chamber has identified ten (10) steps that are required to implement centre management. These are discussed below: Step 1 – Centre Management Model The Chamber asks that we proceed with the establishment of centre management for Double Bay. Comment Since the proposal has received a favourable response and since the Chamber has indicated that it is prepared to match the Council’s offer of $200,000 (providing combined funding of $400,000) we should proceed with the establishment of centre management. Step 2 – Joint Venture The Chamber advises that it will work with Council to establish centre management. It aims to have an incorporated body operative by 1st March 2008. Comment The timetable for the commencement of operation is ambitious and will be determined by the time it takes to put in place the necessary administrative and legal documentation.



Step 3 – Council Funds The Chamber asks that Council agree to release its funds ($200,000) to the incorporated body, effective 1 March 2008. Comment The release of funds will need to align with the commencement of operation of the incorporated body in a manner that is satisfactory to both parties. Step 4 – Business Funds The Chamber advises that the business community will make its contribution to the incorporated body on 1 March 2008. Comment The release of funds from both sources will need to align with the commencement of operation of the incorporated body in a manner that is satisfactory to both parties. Step 5 – Extended Financial Commitment The Chamber requests that the Council and the business community extend its financial support from 1 to 2 years contributing annually $200,000 per group. Comment It has become apparent that there will not be sufficient time to do everything that needs to be done to secure a special rates levy commencing 1 July 2008. There is also the possibility, even with the support of the business community, that the Minister will not support a special rates levy on top of our approved environment and infrastructure levy. Therefore, it is appropriate that we consider alternative longer term financing. If a rates levy is not forthcoming there are other financing options available, including: • continuation of contributions from Council and the business community • generation of funds by the incorporated association from business activities, grants and

sponsorships • a mix of the above. However, at this early stage it is not essential that Council make such a commitment. Once the incorporated association becomes operational and its success can be more accurately measured Council will be in a better position to determine whether or not a continuation of financial assistance will be necessary. Step 6 – Special Rate Levy The Chamber asks that a special rates levy be investigated for commencement in 2009. Comment This is a reasonable request consistent with Council’s decision of 27 August 2007.



Step 7 – Formal Requirements The Chamber supports the Council preparing a service level agreement, a memorandum of understanding and establishing the incorporated body. Comment The Council has already resolved to draft a service level agreement for maintenance services. This agreement will need to be discussed with the incorporated association once it is operational. Before we proceed with the formal creation of an incorporated association Council should enter into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between it and the five or more persons who will form the first committee of the association. The MOU should broadly set out: • the purpose and common objectives of the association • the membership of the association • the Council’s expectations in terms of outcomes • arrangements for the release of funds • requirements for the accounting of funds. Once these matters have been agreed upon we should proceed with the incorporation. The process involves three (3) steps as follows: 1. – Five or more persons authorise a person to apply to the Department of Fair Trading for incorporation. It is expected that these persons will be the persons who will form the board or committee for the first year of operation. This application must be accompanied by a set of objectives and rules and the names of the persons who will be the first committee members of the proposed incorporated association. The rules may be the same as or based on the Model Rules for Incorporated Associations as published by the Department of Fair Trading. In either case the rules will need to be reviewed by Council and the persons making up the association to ensure that will serve the reasonable needs of both parties. 2. – the persons who seek incorporation must reserve a name by lodging an Application for Reservation of Name, with the prescribed fee, to the Office of Fair Trading. 3. – The persons who seek incorporation apply for incorporation by lodging an Application for Incorporation, together with the prescribed fees and documents. We should now proceed with the production of the MOU and the rules of the association but these should come back for Council’s endorsement before an Application for Incorporation is made. Step 8 – Preparation of Business Plan The Chamber advises that Jo Kelly has been appointed to work closely with the business community to prepare a 3 year business/operational plan for the incorporated association.



Comment It is pleasing that the Chamber has proceeded with this essential step, as suggested by part 6 of Council’s resolution of 27 August 2007. The plan will provide a sound basis for decision making by the incorporated association. Since it is a partnership approach the business plan should be approved by both parties before implementation. Step 9 - Establish a small working party The Chamber suggests that a small working party be established to meet as soon as possible to assist in establishing the Incorporated Association. It suggests that this working party begin in November and be active until the end of February 2008. The proposed membership of the working party provides an appropriate mix and is appropriate. It is recommended that Council appoint two (2) councillors and one staff member to the working party. Members of the Chamber have requested that the Director of Planning be nominated as the appropriate staff member. Step 10 – Operational aspects of the working party The working party is to be established to set up the necessary documentation for the commencement of centre management. It will: • assist in establishing the rules for the Incorporated Association • review the MOU before ‘sign up’ by the parties • review the proposed service agreement for maintenance • review the business plan • determine the committee members for the Association for its first year. This process will ensure that the documentation is prepared in a manner acceptable to both parties prior to formal presentation to Council. It is recommended that Council proceed with the establishment of the working party. 4. Conclusion The Double Bay Chamber of commerce has consulted its constituency and has advised that it will match Council’s offer of $200,000 as seed funding for centre management. We should now proceed to put in place the necessary documentation so that an incorporated centre management body can be operational in Double Bay as soon as possible. This documentation will need to come back to Council for ‘sign off’ prior to lodgement with the Department of Fair Trading. Allan Coker Director Planning and Development



ANNEXURES: 1. Report to Urban Planning Committee on 13 August 2007 2. Letter dated 16 November 2007 from the Double Bay Chamber of Commerce 3. Double Bay Chamber of Commerce, Suggested next Steps for Establishing Centre

Management.




Subject: Paddington Heritage Conservation Area Development Control Plan - controls for lofts over garages

Author: Chris Bluett - Manager Strategic Planning File No: 899.G Reason for Report: To respond to a decision of Council on 29 October 2007

To obtain Council's agreement to new controls for the Paddington Heritage Conservation Area DCP

Recommendation That a further report on controls for lofts over garages be submitted to the Urban Planning Committee once the Paddington Heritage Conservation Area DCP has been approved and comes into effect. Background: The Urban Planning Committee considered a report on the Draft Paddington Heritage Conservation Area Development Control Plan on 29 October 2007. The Committee’s recommendation was considered by the Council on the same night and the following decision was made: A. THAT Draft Paddington Heritage Conservation Area Development Control Plan 2007, as

contained in annexure 10 of the report to the Urban Planning Committee meeting on 29 October 2007, be exhibited for public comment in accordance with clauses 18 to 20 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

B. That the Draft DCP exhibition be completed before 24 December 2007. C. That the Council limit submissions to those aspects of the plan that deal with internal changes

and excavation – i.e clauses 4.1.1 and 4.1.6. D. THAT a draft development control plan be prepared to amend the Paddington Heritage

Conservation Area DCP 2007 by including provisions for loft structures over garages. The draft DCP is to be submitted to the Urban Planning Committee by 26 November 2007

This report responds to item D of the Council’s decision. Proposed controls for loft structures over garages Controls for loft structures over garages have been prepared with assistance from the Peer and Community Panel, particularly through the Paddington Society representative. The Panel had been established by the Council to review the Draft Paddington HCA. The controls shown below follow the format set out in the Draft Paddington HCA DCP and would need to be incorporated within clause 4.2.6 On-site vehicle parking, garages, carports, driveway access and servicing facilities. A copy of the exhibited version of clause 4.2.6 is provided in annexure 1. The controls for lofts will be supplemented with diagrams to help with the interpretation.



Explanation There is a demand in Paddington for loft structures over garages. Lofts provide certain

benefits such as added accommodation, surveillance to laneways, increased public and private security and safety, and in some instances improvements to a laneway appearance. However, there are some parts of Paddington where loft structures are considered inappropriate. To determine whether a loft structure over a garage is permissible, consideration must be given to the significance of the existing rear building form and allotment size, the subject property’s relationship with adjoining properties, laneway characteristics, and impacts on privacy.

Objectives O1 To ensure that loft structures over garages are sympathetic in their location, massing,

form and scale to the traditional rear elevations, yards, and laneways. O2 To ensure that loft structures over garages do not detract from the significance of

unaltered groups of buildings. O3 To ensure that loft structures over garages do not impact on the privacy of adjoining

properties. O4 To minimise the visual impact of loft structures when viewed from public areas and

private land. Controls Loft structures over garages C1 Loft structures may be permitted where:

a) the structure will not adversely impact on the traditional character of the rear elevations, yards, and laneways,

b) the structure will not adversely impact on the amenity, visual privacy and overshadowing of the property (see clause 4.1.8 Building height, bulk, form and scale), neighbouring properties and public open space,

c) the structure does not require the garage footprint to be extended so that the private open space requirements (see clause 4.1.7 Open space, swimming pools, lightwell courtyards and landscaping) cannot be satisfied,

d) habitable room windows and glazed French doors within the loft with a direct sightline to the habitable room windows in the existing building on the site and neighbouring buildings have a separation distance of at least 9 metres,

e) the structure extends over only a single space garage or over the area of a single space within a double space garage,

f) the roof structure is gable ended with a 36° equal pitch along the axis of the allotment,

g) fenestration is located only in the gable ends and is of the following types:

a single double hung sash window or inward opening window of traditional proportions, centrally located, in the laneway facing gable end, and

a maximum of two symmetrical double hung sash windows or inward opening windows of traditional proportions in the yard facing gable end, or

a maximum of two inward opening French doors, centrally located in the yard facing gable end, with external safety rail of maximum 100mm projection.



h) no balconies, decks, or other similar cantilevered structures are proposed, i) a maximum of two skylights per roof plane, provided they comply with controls

C27, C28 and C29 in clause 4.2.1 Dormers and skylights, and j) the structure complies with the dimensions, settings, form and materials shown in

Tables 1 and 2.

C2 Loft structures on adjoining properties should be grouped to form pairs. C3 Loft structures will not be permitted:

a) over garages in the street front zone, b) if the subject property is part of an original row of houses, comprising an

unaltered group, and the proposal demonstrates an adverse impact on this group. Refer 4.1.3.

Table 1 Dimensions for garages and carports Garage with loft All dimensions in millimetres

Width Height Door Piers Planter box

Max Max to top of parapet

Max wall height below eve1

Max height

Max width

Min width2

Min width

Max width

Min internal width

Single space

4340 N/A 3900 55003 3400 2400 350 470 N/A

Double space4

6000 N/A 3900 55003 5000 N/A 470 600 N/A

Notes:

1. This is the maximum height of the side boundary walls at their intersection with the gable end to the laneway or street boundary. The measurement is taken at the laneway or street gable end. Where no eve occurs, the maximum height is measured to the springing point.

2. Doorway width will vary depending on road or lane width. Refer to C6 in 4.2.6. The minimum acceptable doorway width is 2400mm.

3. This is the maximum height of the ridgeline at the laneway or street gable end, measured from the laneway or street boundary.

4. Only a single loft structure may be permitted over a double space garage. The maximum width of the loft is 4340mm. The figure of 6000mm is the maximum width of the double garage component.

Table 2 Setting, form and materials for garages and carports Rear lane and rear street garage with loft



Setting Form Materials

Build on rear boundary. Minimise ramp up to

garage. Provide an acceptable

interface on laneway or street (refer to C11)

Gable ended to rear laneway, rear street and rear yard along allotment axis.

Single loft only. For double garages only

single loft over one car space and built to side boundary. Parapet for remaining area.

Abut loft to adjoining loft. Traditionally proportioned

double hung sash windows, inward opening windows and inward opening French doors.

Skylights to be flat version.

Rendered and painted masonry walls.

Corrugated steel roof. Garage doors to be timber

or metal bi-fold, timber sliding, panel-lift or roller shutters.

Roller shutter and panel-lift doors for garage only if set within masonry surrounds.

Paint finish to all laneway and street doors (dark colour recommended).

Timber windows and French doors to loft.

Identification of income and expenditure Preparation of the amending DCP will be undertaken with in-house resources. All costs, including advertising, will be met by funds within the 2007-2008 budget. Next steps Preparation and exhibition of an amending DCP can occur when the Paddington HCA DCP is approved and in force. Council will need to make a further decision to amend the Paddington HCA DCP after the plan comes in effect. This action is needed to satisfy requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. Conclusion The controls for loft structures over garages have been prepared in response to submissions on the Draft Paddington HCA DCP and comments provided by the Peer and Community Panel. The controls have been based on provisions within the Paddington DCP 1999 and a submission by the Paddington Society. Reference has also been made to past and current development applications. In order to meet statutory requirements under the Act a new decision to amend the Paddington HCA DCP will be needed once that plan is approved and in force. Chris Bluett Manager Strategic Planning

Allan Coker Director Planning and Development

Annexure

1. Clause 4.2.6 On-site vehicle parking, garages, carports, driveway access and servicing facilities – as contained in the Draft Paddington HCA DCP.

agenda: urban planning committee...councillors john comino (chair) claudia cullen (deputy chair)...

Documents