2017-02-07 Planning and Environment Committee Agenda

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA   7 FEBRUARY 2017




                                                     Page 52 of 125

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA                                                                           7 FEBRUARY 2017

                                                                                                                                       nra

                  REPORT

                    ITEM                                                             NOTES
                                             eventually the front foyer. In contrast those using the stairs are able to travel to the entry foyer
                                             via stair connection directly form the basement to the ground level entrance, without traversing
                                             the driveway or footpath. This could be deemed inequitable and exposes non stair users to
                                             danger as they exit the basement via the vehicle driveway.
                                         b)  It is noted that after parking their vehicles, pedestrians will be required to walk through the
                                             carpark to the western side of the basement in order to reach the access up to ground level. A
                                             pedestrian prioritized pathway is recommended from the stairs at the western side of the
                                             basement across to the access ramp on gridline E and then continuing to the eastern side of the
                                             carpark. The pathway should be differentiated in colour and texture from the vehicle way surface.
                                             It is recommended that similar prioritized pathways be connected out through the existing
                                             driveway on Memorial Avenue and also the proposed driveway onto Doonella Street.
                  “5.3              Pedestrian Safety at Rear Podium Carpark        _               a              ,                   Oo
                                    It is noted that in the applicant's response to the Information Request, they have to some extent addressed
                                    concerns raised over casual surveillance of the rear podium carpark. However we still have concerns over
                                    the safety of the deepest part of the carpark area, i.e. in the areas labelled deliveries and service area.
                                    These areas cannot be casually surveyed from Pelican or Doonella Streets. It is suggested that further
                                    work is required to the podium as described below — possibly through the inclusion of vehicles gates as
                                    shown on the attached sketches.
                    5.4        __| Suggested Design Amendments                            —                      ,
                                         a)  Complete the lift in the stage 4 works to provide safe and equitable access for all building users
                                             from the basement carpark to the ground level foyer. Noting that any lift will require a safe
                                             waiting area at basement level.
                                         b)  Provide prioritized pedestrian pathways in the basement carpark and out through the driveways
                                         c)  Provide vehicle gates to close off the deliveries and service area from public access thus
                                             diminishing the potential for ‘hiding’.

                   6.               OTHER AREAS OF CONCERN
                    6.1             Bin Enclosure
                                         a)  The original Development Application town planning report states that the external bin storage
                                             enclosure is to be screened. This is not shown on the proposal drawings.
                   62            | CarParking                                                                           EEE
                                    Notwithstanding that Council has sought traffic planning advice from a traffic engineer, there is concern
                                    that the number of carparking bays provided may not be sufficient for future patronage of the site. It is
                                    noted that this comment is made from an architectural and urban planning perspective, amidst concerns of
                                    spillage of carparking into the local street network, and the impact that that spillage would have on public
                                    amenity.

                  Page Sof 8
                  Y:\86035C16 Tewantin RSL Extension\2.0 Email - Correspondence\2.1 Architect\2.1.09 Reports\1.09.1 Predesign\PF 16 2nd Peer Review Report - Issue A.doc Noel Robinson Architects Pt Ltd
                  Issue. Created 24 July 2013                                                                                    AB

                                                                                                                                 Page 52 of 125