04.01.2015 Views

Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

COUNCIL MINUTES<br />

TUESDAY 28 AUGUST 2012<br />

delegated authority plans for a two storey dwelling on the subdivided block across the road,<br />

on the corner <strong>of</strong> Windarra Drive and Tumut Road (No. 19 Windarra Drive). This dwelling has<br />

a maximum ridge height <strong>of</strong> approximately 8.0 metres. The <strong>Town</strong> has not yet received an<br />

application for the adjoining lot (No. 7 Tumut Road). Due to the site works involved with the<br />

subdivision, it is highly unlikely that variations to the building height acceptable development<br />

provisions would be approved on any <strong>of</strong> the subdivided lots across the road from the subject<br />

site.<br />

It should be noted that in response to concerns raised about a number <strong>of</strong> large, three storey,<br />

recent developments in City Beach, the Building Height Policy was amended in May 2009 to<br />

adopt the more stringent R Codes acceptable development provisions for overall height<br />

(reduction from 10.5 metres to 9.0 metres for ridges longer than 6 metres). The Building<br />

Height Policy was again amended in May 2011 to include size restrictions for dormers.<br />

The intent <strong>of</strong> revising the Building Height Policy to a lower maximum overall height restriction<br />

and to a size restriction on dormers is to effectively limit development to two storeys and<br />

allow ro<strong>of</strong> space for general storage only rather than a usable floor with a habitable room<br />

such as that proposed here.<br />

It is acknowledged that obtaining and keeping views is a significant issue affecting<br />

development in City Beach. Dispensing with the height requirements (performance criteria)<br />

to allow the applicant to get better views is not considered appropriate. The performance<br />

criteria are intended to facilitate alternative design solutions which result in comparable or<br />

better outcomes than what the acceptable development provisions provide. In this particular<br />

case, the proposed third storey is not likely to provide similar or better outcomes for the<br />

streetscape and the neighbouring properties than the acceptable development provisions. It<br />

is considered the proposed third storey does not satisfy the above performance criteria and<br />

is therefore not supported.<br />

Overall, in view <strong>of</strong> the above comments, it is considered that the proposed building height<br />

shown on the plans does not satisfy the performance criteria on the following grounds:-<br />

• the increased height and bulk <strong>of</strong> the dwelling will result in negative impacts on the<br />

streetscape and the amenity <strong>of</strong> the neighbouring properties, particularly access to<br />

views <strong>of</strong> significance.<br />

POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:<br />

There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was<br />

assessed against the provisions <strong>of</strong> the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), <strong>Town</strong> Planning<br />

Scheme No.1, and the <strong>Town</strong> Planning Scheme Policy Manual.<br />

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:<br />

There are no financial implications related to this report.<br />

STRATEGIC DIRECTION:<br />

Consideration <strong>of</strong> this application is consistent with the <strong>Town</strong>'s Strategic Plan 2009-2020 for<br />

the priority area 'Planning for our Community'.<br />

H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\12 MINUTES\AUGUST 2012\B DV.DOCX 14

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!