[200William-EC SP67851] DA View Issues 1666 - 194 William Street, Woolloomooloo

Mon Mar 21 11:37:09 AEDT 2022

Thanks Craig.

Matt

On 21/3/2022 11:22 am, Craig Laforest wrote:
>
> Good morning,
>
> I have been in touch with Natalie Richter regarding the proposed 229 
> apartment building on William Street.
>
> I have been in touch with the Council and will get back to everyone 
> once I have an answer from them on what Natalie has requested.
>
> The IBIS hotel is part of Accor Hotels. I contacted the hotel this 
> morning and am waiting for the General Manager to contact me.
>
> If you have any questions, please let me know asap. Thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Craig
>
> *From:*Natalie @ NRP <natalie at natalierichterplanning.com.au>
> *Sent:* Monday, 21 March 2022 10:52 AM
> *To:* 'Craig Laforest' <cscl at optusnet.com.au>
> *Subject:* DA View Issues
>
> Hi Craig.
>
> Since speaking I have had a look on the tracker and can not see the 
> referenced view assessment. I am a little concerned about this. I have 
> checked twice.
>
> The submitted ‘Statement of Environmental Effects’ says the following:
>
> /5.3.1. View Sharing /
>
> /Richard Lamb and Associates have undertaken an Assessment of 
> Potential Impacts on View Sharing which provides an assessment of 
> potential impacts on private domain views because of the development. 
> This assessment has been informed by a review of architectural plans, 
> field work observations and an analysis of CGIs prepared by FJMT. The 
> built form facing the site on the south side of William Street is 
> predominantly retail and commercial. However, there are a small number 
> of residential properties that could be affected by view loss, 
> predominantly Horizon, Top of the Town, 5 Farrell Avenue, 26 Kirkton 
> Road, 1 Tewkesbury Avenue, Harbourview at 12-20 Rosebank Street and 
> 1-5 Rosebank Street have been considered with regard to potential view 
> loss. The view assessment concludes that: ▪ Overall the proposal would 
> not cause any impacts on view sharing for the majority of residential 
> buildings in the vicinity, including buildings south-east and east of 
> the site such as Top of the Town, Elan, Altair, Zenith and Omnia. ▪ As 
> would be anticipated by implementation of the existing development 
> controls for the site, a complying building envelope would cause view 
> loss for some levels of residential buildings south and south-east of 
> the site such as Horizon, 5 Farrell Avenue the associated buildings at 
> 26 Kirketon Road and 1 Tewkesbury Avenue. These buildings would be 
> likely to retain extensive and unaffected views from the levels 
> affected, ensuring that view sharing would be achieved. URBIS 
> STATEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS - 164-194 WILLIAM STREET, 
> WOOLLOOMOOLOO 41 /
>
> /▪ View loss, as is anticipated by implementation of the development 
> controls, would occur for buildings with views from residential levels 
> that are lower than that of a permissible envelope and as a result 
> there would be some view sharing impacts produced by the proposal. 
> This includes buildings such as Harbourview and 1-5 Rosebank Street, 
> from which it would be unreasonable to expect existing views to be 
> retained, when the controls contemplate a building significantly 
> higher than the existing buildings on the site and adjacent sites, 
> including the Avis car rental building at 200 William Street. ▪ The 
> proposed building envelope complies with the standard for height of 
> buildings and responds to the crossfalls of the site from east to west 
> on William Street and the falls from William Street toward the north. 
> Where there is view loss, this would generally occur up to Level 5 to 
> 7 for the buildings considered. Notwithstanding there would be some 
> view loss caused by the proposed building, the extent of impact is 
> within the reasonable expectations of implementation of the 
> development standards and controls. It is therefore shown that the 
> proposal can be supported on view sharing grounds.///
>
> //
>
> I believe that we should contact the assessment officer and ask where 
> this report is as I believe it would have been appropriate for this to 
> have been included given the potential impacts.  Do you want to make a 
> call to Council?
>
> Normally, a view impact assessment would provide sight lines across 
> from impacted buildings and the 3d diagrams such as the following 
> might be used to show the building in relation to view trajectories.
>
> It may be worthwhile seeking our own professional view analysis. I 
> know of another very good consultant. It really depends on the budget. 
> I could see if she is still working and see what a budget could be for 
> this to feed into mine. I would need to gather information quickly on 
> how many buildings are impacted in terms of view.
>
> I have also noticed that the attached Architectural design study is 
> relatively silent on this issue which it should not be in my view when 
> seeking ‘extras’.
>
> Please let me know how you go with the Council. The contact is *
> Make a submission to Council Officer*Reinah Urqueza 
> <https://online2.cityofsydney.nsw.gov.au/DA/IndividualApplication?tpklapappl=1609096>
>
> I will email later with a fee. However if you could have a think about 
> how many buildings may be impacted this may help. They may be getting 
> their own planners perhaps.
>
> Speak soon and regards, Natalie
>
> Natalie Richter Planning
>
> PO Box 59 Mt Colah NSW 2079
>
> m. 0438 828 972
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and 
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they 
> are addressed.  The contents and attachments are not to be altered or 
> reproduced without our consent or used for any other purpose. If you 
> have received this email in error then please delete the email and 
> inform us of the error by return email.  We are not liable for any 
> loss arising from the receipt or use of this email or attachments. It 
> is the responsibility of the receiver to be satisfied that this email 
> and attachments contain no computer viruses.
>
> *From:*Craig Laforest <cscl at optusnet.com.au>
> *Sent:* Friday, 18 March 2022 4:40 PM
> *To:* info at natalierichterplanning.com.au
> *Subject:* A PROGRAM ON HOW TO HAVE A DA FOUGHT AND WON
>
> Dear Natalie,
>
> Thank you for your text.
>
> I live at 200 William Street, Woolloomooloo in the AVIS building and 
> am a member of the residential Body Corporate.
>
> Last week it was announced that the buildings which make up 166-194 
> William Street would be pulled down and an apartment block would be 
> put up in its place, comprising 220 apartments.
>
> Some of the owners in our building are not in favour of losing 
> sunshine from this building, an increase in the already extremely 
> heavy traffic on William Street surrounding roads/streets and in some 
> cases, the views.
>
> I asked the Potts Pointers group on Facebook if there was anyone who 
> could be recommended to take up the fight against the DA on our 
> behalf.  Your name was given by Drew Wentzel. I mentioned in a post on 
> Facebook “Outlined below are several important points re the DA.  The 
> DA does not show the traffic problems that William Street is going to 
> face for the present owners in this immediate area and any of the new 
> owners of the apartments from this new apartment site. The DA proposes 
> using an outlet such as Corfu Lane in addition to narrow McElhone and 
> Cathedral streets as ways for people to drive onto William Street and 
> to the Eastern Distributor. If you are travelling from the eastern 
> suburbs to get to the site, this is also the major option to get into 
> Forbes Street (where the entry to parking will be for the new build);. 
> The only other option is to go down to busy Crown Street using back 
> roads and turn right onto William Street (to get to Forbes).  My other 
> major concern is that we are going to lose yet more sunshine from a 
> really beautiful area overlooking the disaster of William Street and 
> its constant throng of traffic. To put in 229 apartments is absolutely 
> ridiculous given the traffic situation we have and again yet another 
> way to continually build high and then in a few years’ time look back 
> and say....'why did they decide to take away the sunshine yet again?' 
> I have asked on PPers for a specialist who may help us fight this DA. 
> Any recommendations would be appreciated.”
>
> Below is the article which came out in the Sydney Morning Herald. 
> Click on the picture of the building for full details:
>
> https://m.facebook.com/groups/PottsPointers/permalink/3939889962903059/
>
> If this is an area you are qualified in and if you have the same 
> concerns we have, would you kindly provide me with a quote and details 
> of how you would go about working on our behalf.
>
> My phone number, again, is 0409 323 585.
>
> I look forward to hearing from you as soon as possible. Thank you.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Craig Laforest
>
> s
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EC mailing list
> EC at 200william.com
> http://200william.com/mailman/listinfo/ec

-- 
Matt Perkins
0403571333
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://200william.com/mailman/private/ec/attachments/20220321/6248f0f0/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 120850 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://200william.com/mailman/private/ec/attachments/20220321/6248f0f0/attachment-0001.jpg 