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 />

The proposed addition <strong>of</strong> the upper ro<strong>of</strong> deck is clearly over the wall height acceptable<br />

development requirement, protruding out <strong>of</strong> the ro<strong>of</strong> space. The ro<strong>of</strong> deck will add bulk to<br />

the dwelling, particularly on the Tumut Road and northern elevations. The proposed<br />

additional height and bulk would be out <strong>of</strong> keeping with the existing streetscape and may set<br />

an undesirable precedent for surrounding properties that would like to increase their height<br />

to reclaim ocean views that may be lost by this addition.<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 upper ro<strong>of</strong> deck 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 upper ro<strong>of</strong> deck does not satisfy the above performance criteria<br />

and is therefore not supported.<br />

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

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 />

Buildings setback from the boundary<br />

Proposed Acceptable development<br />

provision<br />

Rear setback (north) 2.0 metres for upper ro<strong>of</strong> Min 6.0 metres<br />

deck<br />

Nil for shed<br />

Min 1.0 metre<br />

Side setback (east) Nil for shed Min 1.0 metre<br />

Performance criteria (for buildings setback from the boundary):-<br />

Buildings setback from boundaries other than street boundaries so as to:-<br />

provide adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building;<br />

ensure adequate direct sun and ventilation being available to adjoining properties;<br />

provide adequate direct sun to the building and appurtenant open spaces;<br />

assist with protection <strong>of</strong> access to direct sun for adjoining properties;<br />

assist in ameliorating the impacts <strong>of</strong> building bulk on adjoining properties; and<br />

assist in protecting privacy between adjoining properties.<br />

Performance criteria (for buildings on the boundary):<br />

Buildings built up to boundaries other than the street boundary where it is desirable to do so<br />

in order to:-<br />

make effective use <strong>of</strong> space; or<br />

enhance privacy; or<br />

otherwise enhance the amenity <strong>of</strong> the development;<br />

not have any significant adverse effect on the amenity <strong>of</strong> the adjoining property; and<br />

ensure that direct sun to major openings to habitable rooms and outdoor living areas <strong>of</strong><br />

adjoining properties is not restricted.<br />

H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\12 MINUTES\AUGUST 2012\B DV.DOCX 51

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!