ordinary meeting of council to be held on tuesday, 26 april 2005 at ...

ordinary meeting of council to be held on tuesday, 26 april 2005 at ... ordinary meeting of council to be held on tuesday, 26 april 2005 at ...

kmc.nsw.gov.au
from kmc.nsw.gov.au More from this publisher
23.03.2014 Views

Ordinary Meeting ong>ofong> Council - 26 April 2005 21 / 11 26 ong>toong> 30 Marian Street, Killara Item 21 DA1243/04 18 April 2005 Furthermore, the site adjoining the southern (rear) boundary ong>ofong> the development is zoned for multi unit residential development, as are sites ong>beong>yond. This zoning will result in buildings ong>ofong> a similar scale, bulk and height ong>beong>ing constructed ong>beong>hind and around the proposed development. Five song>toong>rey development is out ong>ofong> character with the existing built environment. Five-song>toong>rey multi-unit residential developments are permissible under the zoning and are therefore anticipated within the area. The development complies with the prescriong>beong>d controls ong>ofong> LEP194, in particular maximum height, numong>beong>r ong>ofong> song>toong>reys and site coverage, and has adequate provision ong>ofong> deep soil landscaping and large tree planting, consistent with the established landscaped character ong>ofong> the area. Adjoining properties ong>toong> the west and south ong>ofong> the development site are also zoned for multi-unit residential development This proposal responds effectively ong>toong> the objectives and development standards ong>ofong> LEP194 and DCP55 and is therefore in accordance with the desired future character ong>ofong> the area. Personal security for residents ong>ofong> Marian Street potentially compromised as a result ong>ofong> the proposed development. The development provides open common spaces, clear definition ong>beong>tween public and private spaces and enhances street level activity through higher density living. Due consideration ong>toong> security has ong>beong>en given through the siting and design ong>ofong> the building and the large terrace and balcony areas provided for each dwelling ong>toong> ensure a high level ong>ofong> informal surveillance ong>ofong> the street. Potential reduction ong>ofong> parking availability along Marian Street The development will provide a ong>toong>tal ong>ofong> 61 car parking spaces within a two level basement car park. This numong>beong>r ong>ofong> parking spaces is well in excess ong>ofong> the requirements under DCP 55 and provides a ong>toong>tal ong>ofong> two spaces per unit with seven visiong>toong>r spaces. Accordingly, there is more than adequate on site parking available for residents and visiong>toong>rs ong>ofong> the development with no dependency for parking on Marian Street itself. Property values The proposal is permissible under the zoning ong>ofong> the site and potential impacts on property values is not a valid planning consideration under s79C ong>ofong> the Environmental Planning and Assessment 1979. Insufficient tree protection and landscaping The development complies with the 50% deep soil landscaping development standard under LEP194 and provides for extensive landscaping throughout the site, including planting ong>ofong> an additional thirteen large canopy trees. The proposal also retains two 24m high Sydney Gum trees along the front boundary ong>ofong> the site which contribute significantly ong>toong> the streetscape. Councils Landscape Officer Mr Geong>ofong>f Bird has reviewed the proposal in relation ong>toong> tree protection and supports the development subject ong>toong> conditions (Refer Condition No’s 43-56, 85-87, 105-108). N:\050426-OMC-PR-03129-26 TO 30 MARIAN STREET KI.doc/pseitz/11

Ordinary Meeting ong>ofong> Council - 26 April 2005 21 / 12 26 ong>toong> 30 Marian Street, Killara Item 21 DA1243/04 18 April 2005 Insufficient geotechnical assessment, pressure on existing infrastructure, depth and stability ong>ofong> excavation Council’s Engineering Assessment Team Leader, Robin Howard, has reviewed the proposal in relation ong>toong> proposed excavation, geotechnical and infrastructural aspects ong>ofong> the development. Based on this assessment, Mr Howard has determined that the geotechnical and excavation aspects ong>ofong> the proposal are satisfacong>toong>ry for development approval on engineering grounds, subject ong>toong> conditions. Such conditions will require geotechnical and hydro geological moniong>toong>ring, and further prong>ofong>essional geotechnical input as warranted. Ongoing investigation by a consulting geotechnical engineer will also ong>beong> required as will dilapidation reports for neighbouring properties and infrastructure. (Refer Condition No’s 57-75, 88-103, 109-125). Traffic and parking implications (vehicle access, traffic flows, parking, driver sight lines, driver and pedestrian safety, traffic generation The application has ong>beong>en reviewed by Council’s Engineering Assessment Team Leader, Robin Howard, in relation ong>toong> traffic generation, vehicle access and parking. Mr Howard concludes that adverse traffic issues in the surrounding road network are not anticipated as a result ong>ofong> this development as sufficient on-site parking is provided along with appropriate access ong>toong> and from the site. (See comments under Consultation with Council). LEP194 requires that the proposal provides a minimum ong>ofong> 34 car parking spaces, including 7 visiong>toong>r car parks. The proposal provides 61 car parking spaces in ong>toong>tal and complies accordingly. Vehicles will enter and exit the development in a forward movement, with adequate driver sightlines for both driver and pedestrian safety. Appropriate on site truck access and manoeuvring areas for waste collection vehicles is provided, preventing potential traffic congestion in Caithness and Marian Streets during waste collection periods. Heritage impacts on surrounding properties Council’s Heritage Advisor, Paul Dignam, has reviewed the application and concludes that the heritage provisions in DCP 55 are satisfied and that the heritage items at No’s 33 & 39 Marian Street will not ong>beong> unduly affected by the proposed development, given their separation distance from the subject site. Mr Dignam further comments that the heritage item at No.1 Caithness Street is separated from the proposed building by 57m, is located on the opposite side ong>ofong> the road and screened by substantial landscape elements. Inappropriate Roong>ofong> structure The low pitch multi-ridge hip roong>ofong> has ong>beong>en designed ong>toong> respond ong>toong> prevailing roong>ofong> forms ong>ofong> surrounding dwellings and ong>toong> contribute ong>toong> the integration ong>ofong> the proposed building within the established streetscape. The upper floor ong>ofong> the building is setback from the building perimeter, which reduces the apparent bulk and scale ong>ofong> the building and the overall size ong>ofong> the roong>ofong> structure. Due ong>toong> the setback ong>ofong> the roong>ofong>, the upper level roong>ofong> element will not ong>beong> prominent when viewed from street level. N:\050426-OMC-PR-03129-26 TO 30 MARIAN STREET KI.doc/pseitz/12

Ordinary Meeting <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> Council - <strong>26</strong> April <strong>2005</strong> 21 / 12<br />

<strong>26</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> 30 Marian Street, Killara<br />

Item 21<br />

DA1243/04<br />

18 April <strong>2005</strong><br />

Insufficient geotechnical assessment, pressure <strong>on</strong> existing infrastructure, depth and stability <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

excav<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong><br />

Council’s Engineering Assessment Team Leader, Robin Howard, has reviewed the proposal in<br />

rel<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> proposed excav<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong>, geotechnical and infrastructural aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the development. Based<br />

<strong>on</strong> this assessment, Mr Howard has determined th<strong>at</strong> the geotechnical and excav<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> aspects <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />

proposal are s<strong>at</strong>isfac<str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g>ry for development approval <strong>on</strong> engineering grounds, subject <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s.<br />

Such c<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong>s will require geotechnical and hydro geological m<strong>on</strong>i<str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g>ring, and further pr<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>essi<strong>on</strong>al<br />

geotechnical input as warranted. Ongoing investig<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> by a c<strong>on</strong>sulting geotechnical engineer will<br />

also <str<strong>on</strong>g>be</str<strong>on</strong>g> required as will dilapid<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> reports for neighbouring properties and infrastructure. (Refer<br />

C<strong>on</strong>diti<strong>on</strong> No’s 57-75, 88-103, 109-125).<br />

Traffic and parking implic<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong>s (vehicle access, traffic flows, parking, driver sight lines, driver<br />

and pedestrian safety, traffic gener<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong><br />

The applic<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> has <str<strong>on</strong>g>be</str<strong>on</strong>g>en reviewed by Council’s Engineering Assessment Team Leader, Robin<br />

Howard, in rel<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> traffic gener<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong>, vehicle access and parking. Mr Howard c<strong>on</strong>cludes th<strong>at</strong><br />

adverse traffic issues in the surrounding road network are not anticip<strong>at</strong>ed as a result <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> this<br />

development as sufficient <strong>on</strong>-site parking is provided al<strong>on</strong>g with appropri<strong>at</strong>e access <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> and from the<br />

site. (See comments under C<strong>on</strong>sult<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> with Council).<br />

LEP194 requires th<strong>at</strong> the proposal provides a minimum <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> 34 car parking spaces, including 7 visi<str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g>r<br />

car parks. The proposal provides 61 car parking spaces in <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g>tal and complies accordingly. Vehicles<br />

will enter and exit the development in a forward movement, with adequ<strong>at</strong>e driver sightlines for both<br />

driver and pedestrian safety. Appropri<strong>at</strong>e <strong>on</strong> site truck access and manoeuvring areas for waste<br />

collecti<strong>on</strong> vehicles is provided, preventing potential traffic c<strong>on</strong>gesti<strong>on</strong> in Caithness and Marian<br />

Streets during waste collecti<strong>on</strong> periods.<br />

Heritage impacts <strong>on</strong> surrounding properties<br />

Council’s Heritage Advisor, Paul Dignam, has reviewed the applic<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> and c<strong>on</strong>cludes th<strong>at</strong> the<br />

heritage provisi<strong>on</strong>s in DCP 55 are s<strong>at</strong>isfied and th<strong>at</strong> the heritage items <strong>at</strong> No’s 33 & 39 Marian<br />

Street will not <str<strong>on</strong>g>be</str<strong>on</strong>g> unduly affected by the proposed development, given their separ<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> distance<br />

from the subject site. Mr Dignam further comments th<strong>at</strong> the heritage item <strong>at</strong> No.1 Caithness Street<br />

is separ<strong>at</strong>ed from the proposed building by 57m, is loc<strong>at</strong>ed <strong>on</strong> the opposite side <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the road and<br />

screened by substantial landscape elements.<br />

Inappropri<strong>at</strong>e Ro<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> structure<br />

The low pitch multi-ridge hip ro<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> has <str<strong>on</strong>g>be</str<strong>on</strong>g>en designed <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> resp<strong>on</strong>d <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> prevailing ro<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> forms <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

surrounding dwellings and <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> c<strong>on</strong>tribute <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> the integr<strong>at</strong>i<strong>on</strong> <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the proposed building within the<br />

established streetscape. The upper floor <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the building is setback from the building perimeter,<br />

which reduces the apparent bulk and scale <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the building and the overall size <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the ro<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> structure.<br />

Due <str<strong>on</strong>g>to</str<strong>on</strong>g> the setback <str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> the ro<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g>, the upper level ro<str<strong>on</strong>g>of</str<strong>on</strong>g> element will not <str<strong>on</strong>g>be</str<strong>on</strong>g> prominent when viewed<br />

from street level.<br />

N:\0504<strong>26</strong>-OMC-PR-03129-<strong>26</strong> TO 30 MARIAN STREET KI.doc/pseitz/12

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!