|
|
Harbour Trust: PlanningManagement PlansManagement Plan, Mosman No. 3, Markham Close, 9 December 2003IntroductionThe Trust's Comprehensive Plan sets out its vision for the harbour sites under its control and includes a process for the preparation of more detailed management plans for specific precincts, places or buildings. The Comprehensive Plan proposes the creation of a Headland Park that integrates Middle Head, Georges Heights and Chowder Bay. The vision for the park is a place where the area's rich natural and cultural heritage, including its early aboriginal and military occupation will be protected and interpreted and where access will be provided to areas that have long been inaccessible to most people. The Trust has identified the creation of the Headland Park as one of its highest priorities. Its goals are to ensure that:
Markham Close is a residential precinct adjacent to the proposed park. The Trust's Comprehensive Plan identified the need to formulate detailed planning controls to:
The purpose of this Management Plan is to illustrate the way in which these objectives can be achieved and to detail specific planning controls to achieve these outcomes. Commencement DateThis plan was adopted by the Trust on 9 December 2003 and came into force on that date. Land to which the Management Plan AppliesThe land covered by the Management Plan is shown by broken black edging
on the plan at Figure
1 (PDF, 61kb The plan includes some land that forms the edge of the proposed Headland Park - comprising the edge of Georges Heights Oval and One Commando Company HQ. These lands are also in the ownership of the Trust. The plan applies to all development to be carried out on the site. Aims of this PlanThe aim of this Management Plan is to:
In doing this it aims to:
Relationship with the Trust's Comprehensive PlanThis Management Plan is the middle level of a three tiered comprehensive planning system developed to guide the future of the Trust's lands. The other levels are:
This Management Plan describes specific outcomes for the Markham Close Precinct. It interprets the Trust's Comprehensive Plan and guides its implementation by providing more explicit detail about the way the precinct is developed, adaptively reused or conserved. The Management Plan must be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In particular it must be consistent with the Outcomes identified in Part 7 of the Comprehensive Plan and must address the Objectives and Policies in Part 3. The Outcomes identified in Part 7 of the Comprehensive Plan for Middle
Head, Georges Heights and Chowder Bay are reproduced at Figure
2 (PDF, 449kb Relationship with other Trust Management PlansThis Management Plan is the third to be prepared by the Trust for land within the Mosman Local Government Area. All of the Management Plans must be consistent with each other as well as any plans for neighbouring lands. Relationship with the Headland Park Design FrameworkThe Design Framework for the Headland Park is shown at Figure
3 (PDF, 452kb The parkland will form a succession of spaces from open hill tops with a sense of openness and height above all the surrounding land - such as at the cairn at Rawson Park, through more enclosed areas in the saddles and valleys, to places on the cusp - along escarpment edges. The housing in Markham Close is intended to be unobtrusive and form an attractive edge between the suburban areas of Mosman and the Headland Park. The extent of bushland around the edge of the housing is to be increased and this will help to knit together the precinct with the Headland Park and provide a cohesive sequence of spaces for public enjoyment. Statutory Planning ContextThe Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Act, 2001 specifically excludes any land owned by the Trust from the operations of state planning law. This includes Local Environmental Plans prepared by councils and State Policies and Regional Environmental Plans prepared by the State Government. This exclusion does not apply to land once it is sold by the Trust. Notwithstanding this the Trust has prepared this plan so that it is consistent with both state and local plans. The relevant statutory plans are: Mosman Local Environmental Plan No.1The Trust lands at Middle Head and Georges Heights are identified as a deferred matter in Mosman Council's current plan - Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1998. This means that the previous plan - Mosman LEP No.1, applies to the land. Under LEP No.1 all but one of the existing houses in Markham Close is zoned Residential 2(a1). The exception is Lot 1 DP 831153, which is zoned Special Uses Military Reserve. Similarly the interface with the park and One Commando HQ is zoned Special Uses Military Reserve. Mosman Residential Development Control Plan (DCP), 1999Development Control Plans provide more detailed controls than those found in an LEP. Mosman Council's Residential DCP 1999 provides comprehensive planning and urban design guidelines to control residential development. The DCP applies to all land zoned residential. This Management Plan adopts Mosman Residential DCP 1999. However, to achieve the Trust's objectives for the Markham Close Precinct, site-specific planning controls relating to building height, floor space ratio (FSR) and setbacks are necessary. Wherever there is a difference between the DCP and this Management Plan the planning controls in this Management Plan will prevail. A list of the Mosman Residential DCP 1999 clauses that are overridden is detailed in Appendix 1. This list is based on the current Mosman DCP dated September 1999 (as amended September 2002). Should the Mosman DCP be amended in the future and clause numbers changed, the same DCP controls will still be overridden and the site-specific planning controls shall prevail.
|
| 1.1.a |
1/13 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.0m. |
| 1.1.b |
15 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.5m. |
| 1.1.c |
12 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.0m. |
1.2 View down Kahibah Road from Georges Heights Oval
Viewing point
The northern edge of Georges Height Oval at approximately AHD 84.5m to
the left of the existing fig tree.
View description
Although partially obscured by the tree in the front yard of 1099 Middle
Head Road, the vista down Kahibah Road offers the most complete view of
Middle Harbour, extending from the ridgetop, to shoreline, to water to
the foreground of a light canopy of street trees at the end of Kahibah
Road. To the right, between Kahibah Road and the existing fig tree, the
view extends from the ridgetop, to shoreline to the foreground of existing
roofs of houses fronting Kahibah Road.
This view offers the only opportunity from the Oval to see down a street to the water immediately beyond in Middle Harbour.
Objectives
Preserve all of the water view along the Kahibah Road vista by restricting
buildings to appear below the existing road barrier at the north end of
Kahibah Road. Between Kahibah Road and the existing fig tree, preserve
the view of the shoreline by restricting building to appear within the
existing outline of the Kahibah Road roofscape.
Controls
| 1.2.a |
1099 Middle Head Road - On the western portion of the lot in the foreground of the Kahibah Road vista, development has a maximum height of AHD 81.5m and a front setback of 9m to ensure building bulk does not obstruct views. The "western portion of the lot" is defined by a line projected from the eastern boundary of the Kahibah Road street reserve to the rear of the lot; |
| 1.2.b |
1099 Middle Head Road - On the eastern portion of the lot in the foreground of the remainder of the view, development has a maximum height of AHD 83.5m and a front setback of 6m. The "eastern portion of the lot" is defined by a line projected from the eastern boundary of the Kahibah Road street reserve to the rear of the lot; |
| 1.2.c |
1098 Middle Head Road - On the eastern portion of the lot in the foreground of the Kahibah Road vista, development has a maximum height of AHD 81.5m and a front setback of 9m to ensure building bulk does not obstruct views. The "eastern portion of the lot" is defined by a line projected from the western boundary of the Kahibah Road street reserve to the rear of the lot; |
| 1.2.d |
1 Markham Close - Development has a rear setback of 8m to 1099 Middle Head Road and a side setback of 5m to the park. |
1.3 View to Dobroyd Head and Manly from One Commando Company Headquarters area of ridge top park
Viewing point
In the future ridge top park, on the path at approximately AHD 86.0m.
In the interim when the Commando Company Site is still occupied, from
the new park area near Markham Close at approximately AHD 85.0m.
View description
The central view looks between 2 and 4 Markham Close over an outline of
trees to the Sydney Harbour National Park ridge extending down to Dobroyd
Head and the shoreline, water and the Manly skyline with the bushland
ridge of Middle Head framing the view to the right. Dwellings at 2 and
4 Markham Close form a significant part of the foreground and future development
on these lots present the greatest threat to this view. The left part
of the view, towards the north looking back on the developed slopes of
Balmoral and the distant ridgeline is partially obscured by trees and
is less dramatic.
Objectives
Preserve the central view including the elements of the National Park
ridge and shoreline, Dobroyd Point, water and the Manly skyline by restricting
buildings to appear below the existing tree outline and the Middle Head
ridgeline.
Controls
| 1.3.a |
4 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 87.5m with an eastern side setback of 4m. |
| 1.3.b |
2 Markham Close - development has a west boundary side setback of 6m and maximum height of AHD 87.0m to ensure building appears below Middle Head ridge. |
1.4 View from the eastern edge of Georges Heights Oval looking west
Viewing point
The south eastern area of Georges Heights Oval at approximately AHD 83.0m
at approximately the location of the proposed ridgetop walk.
View description
The view is mostly grassed foreground with existing development and vegetation
forming a visually dark band in the middle ground to distant views of
the Mosman/Military Road ridge. Currently houses at 1, 5 and 7 Markham
Close are below the tree canopy outline - see Figure
11 (PDF, 181kb
).
Objectives
To maintain the treed skyline and not have buildings dominating or intruding
upon the skyline.
Controls
| 1.4.a |
1 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 86.0m; |
| 1.4.b |
9 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 91.0m; |
| 1.4.c |
11/13 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.0m; |
| 1.4.d |
15 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.5m; |
1.5 View of the Georges Heights ridgeline from afar.
Viewing points
From various places in the Sydney Harbour region, but particularly from
Middle Harbour looking south towards the Balmoral slopes.
View Description
A mix of house roofs, trees and bush with a natural, tree lined ridge
outlined against the sky.
In the vicinity of Markham Close, the ridgeline varies from approximately AHD 91.0 at the eastern edge of Rawson Park, to 86.0m in the middle of the Commandos site through to 84.0m in the middle of the Georges Heights Oval. Tree heights varying from 3m in the Rawson Oval heath area to 6m around Georges Heights Oval create the vegetation outline.
The residential lots on the highest ground, 9, 11/13, 15 and 12 Markham Close potentially affect the treelined ridge view.
Objective
To maintain the view of varying house roofs amongst tree canopies. To
maintain the visual integrity of the Georges Height ridgeline as a treelined
ridge when viewed from afar.
Controls
| 1.5.a |
Setbacks, maximum heights, FSRs, landscape area controls across all lots create a precinct of landscaped areas, supporting existing and new trees interspersed with visually unobtrusive single dwelling houses. |
2. Minimise visual impact of housing from Georges Heights Oval
and Rawson Park
2.1 Georges Heights Oval
Objectives
To minimise the visual impact of housing from Georges Heights Oval;
To have a scale of development which is not excessive, particularly in
lots that are immediately adjacent to parkland; and
To have suitable side and rear setbacks to allow for deep root planting
that will assist in the screening of dwellings and privacy for the occupants.
Controls
| 2.1.a |
1 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 86.0m, a maximum FSR of 0.4:1 and side and rear minimum setbacks of 5m. |
| 2.1.b |
1099 Middle Head Road - development has maximum heights of AHD 81.5m and 83.5m, a minimum rear setback of 5m and a side setback of 3m. |
| 2.1.c |
1099 Middle Head Road and 1 Markham Close - rear and side fences on the boundary with parkland shall be constructed as a masonry or brick low wall (eg 300mm high) and piers with infill panels to an overall maximum height of 1.8m. |
2.2 Rawson Park and the Commandos Site Park Link
Objectives
To minimise the visual impact of housing from Rawson Park and the Commandos'
site park link; and to have suitable side and rear setbacks to allow for
deep root planting that will assist in the screening of dwellings and
privacy for the occupants.
Controls
| 2.2.a |
9 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 91.0m, maximum FSR of 0.4:1 and minimum rear setback of 5m and side setback of 3m; |
| 2.2.b |
11/13 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.0m, maximum FSR of 0.4:1 and minimum rear setback of 5m; |
| 2.2.c |
15 Markham Close - development has a maximum height of AHD 92.5m, and minimum rear and side setbacks of 5m; |
| 2.2.d |
1/13, 15 Markham Close - rear and side fences on the boundary with parkland shall be constructed as a masonry or brick low wall (eg 300mm high) and piers with infill panels to an overall maximum height of 1.8m. |
3. Create a precinct similar in character to the surrounding neighbourhood
of single family houses in garden settings.
3.1 Middle Head Road Streetscape
Objectives
To create an attractive Middle Head Road streetscape in keeping with the
prevailing character and to reduce the visual impact of garages on the
streetscape.
Controls
| 3.1.a |
Development fronting Middle Head Road has a minimum front setback of 6m; |
| 3.1.b |
1097, 1098 and 1099 Middle Head Road are prominent corner sites and therefore shall present a front façade presentation to both the primary frontage and continuing around the corner to at least 50% of the length of the secondary boundary; |
| 3.1.c |
Lots fronting Middle Head Road shall have front fences constructed as a masonry, brick or stone low wall (to a maximum height of 300mm) and piers with picket infills (or similar) to an overall maximum height of 1.2m; |
| 3.1.d |
Fences on side boundaries in front gardens, that is between the front boundary and 1.0m behind the front building line, shall be a maximum height of 1.2m; |
| 3.1.e |
Front fences at 1097 and 1098 Middle Head Road shall extend
for a minimum distance of 50% of the Markham Close boundary from
the corner - see Figure
7 (PDF, 166kb |
3.2 Markham Close Streetscape
Objectives
To create an attractive Markham Close streetscape of single detached houses
in garden settings with street trees and landscaping maturing to achieve
a native landscape ambience befitting the plateau location.
Controls
| 3.2.a |
Lots fronting Markham Close to have front setbacks as shown
on Figure
7 (PDF, 166kb |
| 3.2.b |
Garages erected on lots fronting Markham Close, to have a minimum front setback of 6m; |
| 3.2.c |
As prominent corner sites 1 and 9 Markham Close shall have a
front façade presentation to both the primary frontage and
continuing around the corners to at least 50% of the length of the
secondary boundary/ies as shown on Figure
7 (PDF, 166kb |
| 3.2.d |
Lots fronting Markham Close shall have front fences to a maximum height of 1.2m; |
| 3.2.e |
Fences on side boundaries in front gardens, that is between the front boundary and 1.0m behind the front building line, shall be a maximum height of 1.2m; |
| 3.2.f |
Front fences on 1 and 9 Markham Close shall extend for a minimum
distance of 50% of the nominated side boundaries from the corner
as shown on Figure
7 (PDF, 166kb |
3.3 Tree preservation and creating garden settings
Objectives
To protect the existing canopied and vegetated landscape character of
the precinct, to protect existing mature trees and to have adequate side
setbacks to provide spatial relief between buildings and to maintain public
and private views.
Controls
| 3.3.a |
Existing trees shown on Figure 5 are to be retained and incorporated into the proposed landscape design; |
| 3.3.b |
New building footings and/or ground level disturbance shall be setback from the dripline of existing retained trees; |
| 3.3.c |
In the front garden (the area between the front boundary and front façade) of all lots, a minimum of 50% of this area shall be "landscaped area". "Landscaped area" is defined in the Mosman RDCP 1999 (page 34, Section 4.4 Landscaping), with the additional condition that natural rock outcrops preserved in a garden may be included as "landscaped area"; |
| 3.3.d |
Lots will have side setbacks as shown in Figure 7. Generally, each lot has one 3.0m side setback to create a minimum space between buildings of 4.5m, therefore avoiding the "chasm" effect when adjacent two storey buildings both use a 1.5m side setback; |
| 3.3.e |
Native eucalyptus species are encouraged for new tree plantings to integrate the visual quality of the housing area with the ridgetop vegetation. The eucalyptus trees have a light canopy that allows views from within the site. |
3.4 Rock outcrops
Objective
To preserve rock outcrops shown on Figure
5 (PDF, 80kb
).
Controls
| 3.4.a |
Building on 1093-1097 Middle Head Road should be sited so as to preserve the rock outcrops and be setback a minimum of 1.5m from the base of the rock outcrop. The rock outcrop should be incorporated into the proposed landscape design. |
3.5 Residential Amenity and Overshadowing
Objectives
To minimise overshadowing of neighbouring properties so as to ensure sunlight
to habitable rooms and private open spaces.
Controls
3.5.a |
0 and 12 Markham Close have stepped setback and height limit
controls on the southern boundary, shown in Figure 7, to ensure
that at the winter solstice, buildings do not overshadow the north
facing windows to living areas and the main ground level private
open space of neighbouring southern dwellings. Refer to Figure
8 (PDF, 115kb |
3.6 Roofscape
Objectives
To create an attractive roofscape in the precinct, particularly when viewed
from the higher ground and ridgetop parks.
Controls
| 3.6.a |
All roofs shall be within the maximum AHD height control. |
| 3.6.b |
Roof designs shall be visually attractive and consider the visual impact when viewed from higher ground. |
| 3.6.c |
Exposed roof plant machinery/equipment are not permitted. |
| 3.6.d |
Roofs should be pitched where possible to approximate the neighbourhood character's typical tiled, pitched roofs. |
4. Promote view sharing within Markham Close
View sharing means designing development to minimise view loss to nearby and adjacent properties while still providing opportunities for views within the development itself.
Objective
To promote view sharing within the Markham Close precinct, particularly
to views towards Middle Harbour.
Controls
| 4.1.a |
1093b, 1093a, 1093-1097 Middle Head Road - developments have
maximum heights as shown in Figure
7 (PDF, 166kb |
| 4.1.b |
1098 and 1099 Middle Head Road - developments have maximum heights
as shown in Figure
7 (PDF, 166kb |
| 4.1.c |
6 Markham Close has a maximum height of AHD 88.0m to allow for view sharing, particularly from 9 Markham Close; |
| 4.1.d |
8 Markham Close has a maximum height of AHD 89.5m to allow for view sharing, particularly from 15 Markham Close; |
| 4.1.e |
10 Markham Close has a maximum height of AHD 88.0m over the eastern half of the site to allow for view sharing, particularly from 12 Markham Close. |
The Trust's Comprehensive Plan proposes that the two Markham Close cottages adjacent to One Commando Company HQ - numbers 11 and 13, are demolished and that the rear portion of these allotments is integrated into the park.
It also proposes that the rest of the precinct, including the scout hall site, is sold and the revenue from the sale is used to fund the implementation of the plan.
To facilitate these outcomes and to ensure that the controls described in this Management Plan are implemented the Trust will need to:
Section 24(1) of the Trust's Act specifically restricts the Trust from selling or otherwise transferring the freehold interest in any land identified in Schedule 1 of the Act. These provisions do not apply to land identified in Schedule 2 of the Act.
All of the land in Markham Close, other than the scout hall site, is identified in Schedule 2. The scout hall site is listed in Schedule 1. This Management Plan proposes that all of lot 1 DP831153 and lot 19 DP 233157 and the rear portion of lots 15, 16 and 17 DP 233157 are removed from Schedule 2 and swapped for the scout hall site - lot 1 DP 233157, see Figure 4. It is proposed that the scout hall site is included in Schedule 2.
To effect this land swap it will be necessary to amend the SHFT Act. Action to achieve this amendment will be a high priority for the Trust.
Once land is sold by the Trust the exemption from State planning laws ceases to have effect. As discussed earlier the prevailing state planning control is SEPP 56. In the event that there is any inconsistency between SEPP 56 and any other state environmental planning instruments the State policy prevails to the extent of that inconsistency.
SEPP 56 makes the NSW Minister for Planning the consent authority for any development within the Markham Close precinct. It also requires that a Master Plan is prepared for the whole of a strategic foreshore site before any development is considered. Markham Close is part of a strategic foreshore site that includes all of the Commonwealth land at Middle Head, Georges Heights and Chowder Bay - all of the Trust land and HMAS Penguin. The policy does not provide for the preparation of a Master Plan for part of a site other than by Ministerial direction.
The Trust believes that it is critical that the site-specific development controls described in this Management Plan are enforceable once the land is sold. It also believes that it is important that prospective purchasers have a high degree of certainty in respect of the planning controls that apply to the land.
SEPP 56 empowers the NSW Minister to waive the need for a Master Plan where development applies to only part of a strategic foreshore site and the Minister is satisfied that other planning controls that apply to the proposed development are adequate.
It is proposed to request the Minister to waive the need for a Master Plan conditional upon development complying with the Trust's Management Plan.
The Trust proposes to reinforce the application of the site-specific development controls contained in this Management Plan by registering covenants on the title of any land to be sold.
It is proposed that covenants will be registered requiring development to comply with the maximum building heights, setbacks and FSRs set out in this Management Plan. It is also proposed that covenants address matters such as:
The implementation of the public domain landscaping will be the responsibility of the Trust and has a high priority.
Similarly improved public access particularly from Rawson Park to Georges Heights Oval has a high priority and to facilitate this the Trust will negotiate to achieve early access around the edge of the One Commandos' Company HQ site.
The following table lists the main clauses of the Mosman DCP that are over-ridden by the controls in the Markham Close Management Plan. This list is not exclusive; there may be other clauses that are affected by the Management Plan. In the event of a conflict between the DCP and the Management Plan, the Management Plan will prevail.
| Mosman Residential DCP 1999 |
Markham Close Management Plan |
4.2 Siting and Scale |
|
| P1 Maximum building height and wall height controls |
Each lot has a maximum height of any part of the building expressed as an AHD |
| P3 Pitched roof forms extending beyond maximum building height |
|
| P5 Setbacks from the street to be similar to established pattern |
Front setbacks are nominated for each lot |
| P11 Maximum FSR |
Nominated lots adjoining parkland have a lower FSR. Refer to Figure 7 "Planning Controls". |
(a) increasing public access to, and use of, land on the foreshore,
Under SEPP 56, foreshore land is defined as including ' land with a water frontage and land that is separated from the waterfront by a public reserve, road or open space.' In the case of Markham Close, the site is located at the top of a ridge between Clifton Gardens and Balmoral beach, approximately 500 metres from the harbour foreshore. Public access to the foreshore from Markham Close would be through Trust land at Georges Head, or through Rawson Park, along local roads to Clifton Gardens (pedestrian access from Markham Close to the harbour foreshore is over 1 kilometre).
Under the Trust's Comprehensive Plan the Plan for Middle Head - Georges Heights and Chowder Bay proposes the creation of a Headland Park which will unify all the elements of the Middle Head peninsula both natural and cultural, bringing to the fore the connecting ridgeline of the peninsula running from Rawson Park and Georges Heights to the headland itself. Markham Close will be developed within this context.
(b) the fundamental importance of the need for land made available for public access or use, on the foreshore to be in public ownership wherever possible
(b1) if public ownership of foreshore land is not possible, the use of appropriate tenure mechanisms to safeguard public access to, and public use of, that land and to ensure the rights of public authorities to determine design of, use of, and amenities on, the land over time,
As previously identified, Markham Close has been a residential area for around 50 years, however the redevelopment of the site will increase the amount of land made available for public access and use. Access through Markham Close and connecting surrounding parklands is a fundamental objective of the development controls.
The proposed design controls will ensure that the housing does not detract from the Headland Park concept.
(c) the retention and enhancement of public access links between existing foreshore open space areas,
As previously identified, under the Trust's Comprehensive Plan, the Plan for Middle Head - Georges Heights and Chowder Bay proposes the creation of a Headland Park which will unify all the elements of the Middle Head peninsula both natural and cultural, bringing to the fore the connecting ridgeline of the peninsula running from Rawson Park and Georges Heights to the headland itself. Markham Close will be developed within this context.
(d) the conservation of significant bushland and other natural features along the foreshore, where consistent with conservation principles, and their availability for public use and enjoyment,
Under the Trust's Comprehensive Plan, the Plan for Middle Head-Georges Heights and Chowder Bay proposes the regeneration and expansion of the bushland slopes of the peninsula to reinforce the strong sense of a 'green' gateway to Sydney Harbour. The Plan proposes the creation of a viable bushland park, a place in which natural features such as rock ledges, knolls and open spaces are protected, augmented and defined by new plantings and regeneration. The Plan proposes to more than double the area of bushland on Trust land. Bush regeneration will be extended up onto the plateau.
For Markham Close the Plan identifies the importance of a landscape curtilage around Georges Heights Oval and Rawson Park to improve the landscape character of the parkland along the plateau. The redevelopment of houses in Markham Close will allow pedestrian linkages through the street to the Headland Park and to the Bradley Bushland Reserve, thus enhancing public enjoyment and appreciation of the area.
(e) the suitability of the site or part of the site for significant open space that will enhance the open space network existing along the harbour foreshores,
As identified above, the Plan for Markham Close identifies the importance of a landscape curtilage around Georges Heights Oval and Rawson Oval in order to enhance the existing open space network. This landscape will help to define the edges of the parklands and improve the visual amenity of the Markham Close houses as viewed from public areas. This in turn will enhance the visitor experience when moving through the unified parkland areas.
(f) the protection of significant natural and cultural heritage values, including marine ecological values,
(g) the protection and improvement of unique visual qualities of the Harbour, its foreshores and tributaries.
The heritage value of the houses was reviewed as part of the 1998 Godden Mackay Logan Heritage Assessment. It described them as a group of buildings 'which are unexceptional architecturally but they are a consistent group of single storey brick bungalows of low scale and low visual impact.' The relative heritage value of the cottages was assessed as 4 - the lowest ranking. The Scout Hall was also assessed by Godden Mackay Logan and was given a low heritage value.
Similarly, the precinct has no known biodiversity value nor does it contribute to the biodiversity values of adjoining areas such as the Bradley Bushland or surrounding Sydney Harbour National Park.
(h) the relationship between the use of water and foreshore activities.
As previously identified the Markham Close site is approximately 500 metres from the harbour foreshore area where water activities take place. The Trust's Comprehensive Plan does identify the objective of improving pedestrian links between the site to paths which have direct access the harbour foreshore.
(i) the conservation of items of heritage significance identified in an environmental planning instrument or subject to an order under the Heritage Act 1977,
The Defence land and National Park land at Middle Head and Georges Heights has been listed on the Register of the National Estate (No. 101087) as an 'Indicative Place'. This listing does not specifically make mention of the houses at Markham Close having any particular heritage significance.
As identified above, the heritage value of the houses was reviewed as part of the 1998 Godden Mackay Logan Heritage Assessment. It described them as a group of buildings 'which are unexceptional architecturally but they are a consistent group of single storey brick bungalows of low scale and low visual impact.' The relative heritage value of the cottages was assessed as 4 - the lowest ranking. The Scout Hall was also assessed by Godden Mackay Logan and was given a low heritage value.
The Bradley Bushland Reserve which adjoins Markham Close is identified as a heritage item under Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998, as is Clifton Gardens Reserve which adjoins the harbour foreshore.
(j) the scale and character of any development, derived from an analysis of the context of the site.
The Urban Design Advisory Service has analysed the context of the site and the specific site development controls have been developed to address these matters. The scale of the redevelopment of Markham Close will be in keeping with the surrounding residential area. In some instances the built form controls are more stringent than those found in the existing Mosman Residential DCP 1999.
(k) the character of any development as viewed from the water and its compatibility and sympathy with the character of the surrounding foreshores,
The Urban Design Advisory Service has analysed the context of the site and the specific site development controls have been developed to address these matters.
(l) the application of ecologically sustainable development.
The Trust's Comprehensive Plan adopts the principles of ESD for all of its activities and has also been adopted as one of the aims of the Management Plan for this precinct.
(m) the maintenance of a working-harbour character and functions
This guiding principle does not apply as the development site is located more than 500 metres from the harbour foreshore, which is comprised of parkland and bushland areas.
(n) the feasibility and compatibility of uses and, if necessary, appropriate measures to ensure coexistence of different land uses,
Markham Close is located within a residential area and has been used for residential purposes for over fifty years. It is proposed that it remain as a single-family residential area. The proposed design controls will ensure that the housing does not detract from the Headland Park concept.
(o) increasing opportunities for water-based public transport
Markham Close is located over one kilometre from Clifton Gardens Reserve. From this Reserve the closest water-based public transport facility is the Taronga Zoo wharf, which can be accessed via a walking track through the National Park (approximately 45 minutes walk). An alternate route from Markham Close to Taronga Zoo wharf is via the local road network, by bus or private vehicle this would be approximately 3 kilometres. These facilities are currently provided and the redevelopment of Markham Close will not have an impact.
Australian Museum Business Services, 2003, Aboriginal Heritage Survey of Middle Head, Georges Heights and Chowder Bay.
Geospatial Integrity, 2002, Interim Review of Fire Risk and Mitigation Works for Harbour Trust Land at Chowder Bay, Georges Heights and Middle Head.
Godden Mackay Logan, 1998, Heritage Assessment Georges Heights and Middle Head Defence Site Volume One - Main Report.
Mosman Local Environmental Plan No. 1
Mosman Local Environmental Plan 1998.
Mosman Residential Development Control Plan 1999, Mosman Municipal Council.
Urban Design Advisory Service of the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, 2003, Markham Close Site-Specific Planning Controls.
Sydney Harbour Federation Trust · PO Box 607 · Mosman NSW 2088 Australia · Tel 02 8969 2100 · Fax 02 8969 2120 · TTY 02 8969 2152 Business Hours: Mon to Fri, 9am to 5pm This page last modified 8 December, 2006 |
|
© Copyright 2001 Commonwealth of Australia. All rights reserved. |
Home | Site Map | Privacy | Disclaimer | Copyright |