Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge
Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge
Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge
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