Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

More documents

Recommendations

Info

COUNCIL MINUTES TUESDAY 20 DECEMBER 2011 Our property is built within an upon sand dune landscape where severe and dramatic contour changes occur. The area in question has not been contoured and graded to iron out these dramatic changes as would be the case within a new estate in a present day scenario. The size of the lots within this precinct assist in lessening the impact of building form when considering visual bulk and scale, ventilation and sunlight and privacy matters. Neighbour submission Comments were received from owner of the adjoining property to the south and is summarised below:- Submission one (7 Hovea Crescent) I wish to strongly object to the proposed height of the retaining walls as well as to the wall to the top of the eaves because I believe these will completely obliterate any sunshine falling on much of my property during the autumn, winter and spring months. In addition, I am afraid that this proposal will severely diminish the value of my property. Assessment against the performance criteria Excavation or Fill Maximum filling behind street setback line Proposed Maximum of 2.964 metres along rear boundary Acceptable development provision 0.5 metres Performance criteria: Development that retains the visual impression of the natural level of a site, as seen from the street or other public place, or from an adjoining property. The subject property slopes from front to rear and from left side to right side approximately 2.0 metres. The adjoining property to the west has recently been developed and has filled the rear of the property so that there is an existing high retaining wall along the western boundary. The subject property shares a rear boundary with three different properties along both Hesperia Avenue and Hovea Crescent. Due to the slope of the land, the retaining wall abutting the Hesperia Avenue property ranges in height from 0 to 2.964 metres. Two retaining walls are proposed along the section of rear boundary abutting No. 7 Hovea Crescent. The bottom retaining wall (on the boundary) is 1.15 metre high with a second retaining wall being set 1.0 metre in off the boundary to allow for a planter to be provided. This retaining wall is 1.4 metres higher than the first retaining wall and would have the 1.8 metre dividing fence on top of it. The design allows for the bulk of the wall to be broken up as viewed from the adjoining property. The retaining wall to the third adjoining property to the rear is 2.0 metres long and 1.9 metres as viewed from the adjoining property. It is noted that there is a large shed in the rear corner of the adjoining property which will reduce the impact of the proposed retaining wall. The proposed fill to the rear of the site will not impact on the visual impression of the natural level of the site as seen from the street. Whilst there will be obvious fill of the site as viewed from the adjoining properties to the rear, the applicant has attempted to reduce its impact by layering the retaining and using planters. It is considered that the fill and retaining will improve H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\11 MINUTES\DECEMBER 2011\B DV.DOCX 71
COUNCIL MINUTES TUESDAY 20 DECEMBER 2011 the privacy of the adjoining properties who would otherwise be overlooked by the dwelling sitting at the higher ground level. It is considered the proposal meetings relevant performance criteria and can be supported. Building height Proposed Acceptable development provision Maximum overall height 9.4 metres maximum 7.5 metres Performance criteria: Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise the need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including, where appropriate: adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces; adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms; and access to views of significance. The dwelling is a two storey dwelling with an undercroft garage. The garage level is as low as possible below street level and at the maximum driveway gradient. The ground finished floor level therefore sits higher than the natural ground level at any point on the site. The dwelling complies with the maximum height for a flat roof in the front left hand corner of the dwelling but all other parts of the building are overheight with the rear right hand corner being 9.41 metres in lieu of 7.5 metres due to the fall of the land towards the rear of the lot. On the basis that the overheight section of wall is at the rear of the dwelling which has a setback of 12.0 metres from the rear boundary, it does not impact on adjoining properties in terms of access to light and access to views of significance. Overall, it is considered that the height of the dwelling complies with the performance criteria for the following reasons:- allows adequate direct sun to buildings and opens spaces on adjoining properties. does not impact on access to views of significance. POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS: There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessed against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning Scheme No.1, and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no financial implications related to this report. STRATEGIC DIRECTION: Consideration of this application is consistent with the Town's Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for the priority area 'Planning for our Community'. H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\11 MINUTES\DECEMBER 2011\B DV.DOCX 72
Page 1 and 2:
Council Minutes 20 December 2011
Page 3 and 4:
COUNCIL MINUTES TUESDAY 20 DECEMBER
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24: COUNCIL MINUTES TUESDAY 20 DECEMBER
Page 73: COUNCIL MINUTES TUESDAY 20 DECEMBER
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 Best Water
Page 227 and 228:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 STRATEGIC
Page 229 and 230:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 10.3 METRO
Page 231 and 232:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 ADMINISTRA
Page 233 and 234:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 (c) (d) (e
Page 235 and 236:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 Discount P
Page 237 and 238:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 A further
Page 239 and 240:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 Amendment
Page 241 and 242:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 (a) (b) (c
Page 243:
COUNCIL 20 DECEMBER 2011 14. CLOSUR
show all

Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?