MEETING OF COUNCIL - Town of Cambridge

More documents

Recommendations

Info

COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY 2013is set back further from the side boundary, and has been stepped to reduce building bulk andprovide sufficient space for ventilation. In isolation, the proposed setback of the south dwellingfrom the south side boundary is considered acceptable and satisfies the performance criteria.In relation to the variations to the north side boundary, the development will have minimalimpact on access to sun to the adjoining property to the north. There are no major openingsfacing the neighbouring property to the north on both the ground and upper floors. With regardto the upper floor in particular, it has a smaller footprint than the ground floor, is set back furtherfrom the side boundary, and has been stepped to reduce building bulk and provide sufficientspace for ventilation. In isolation, the proposed setback of the north dwelling from the northside boundary is considered acceptable and satisfies the performance criteria.Overall in view of the above comments, it is considered that the proposed setbacks of thedevelopment from the north and south side boundaries are acceptable and satisfy theperformance criteria for the following reasons:-• there is adequate direct sun and ventilation to the building• the development complies with the overshadowing requirements• the stepped setbacks of the upper floor reduces building bulk• there are no major openings facing the adjoining properties and therefore no privacyissues.Notwithstanding the above comments, a reduction in the height of the dwellings would alsoreduce the side setback requirements and improve access to sun and ventilation and reducebuilding bulk for the neighbouring properties.Site worksHeight of a retaining wall andfilling of land within 1.0 metreof a common boundaryPerformance criteria:ProposedMaximum approx 1.0metre on northernboundaryAcceptable development provisionMaximum 0.5 metresDevelopment that retains the visual impression of the natural level of a site, as seen from thestreet or other public place, or from an adjoining property.There is a small section along the north boundary for a length of approximately 8 metres wherethe fill will range in height from 1.0 metre down to 0.5 metres. The applicant has contendedthat as the variation is for a short length it presents very little impact on the northern property,especially since it is the section of boundary abutting the non-habitable dead side of the house.Considering the development as a whole, the variation is minor and could be supported. Thereis a slope up to the rear of the property, but requiring the development to be stepped to followthis slope would be excessive for such a minor variation. A reduction in the height of thebuilding would, however, result in a subsequent reduction in the fill requirements and if 0.5metres or more, likely to result in the development complying with the site works acceptabledevelopment requirements.H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\13 MINUTES\FEBRUARY 2013\B DV.DOCX 39
COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY 2013Building heightProposedAcceptable development provisionWall height5.7 – 7.2 metres on the Maximum 6.0 metresnorthern elevation5.4 – 7.1 metres on thesouthern elevationOverall height:• Flat feature wall 7.7 metres Maximum 7.0 metres• Pitched roof 8.1 – 9.5 metres for the Maximum 9.0 metresnorthern dwelling8.0 – 9.2 metres for thesouthern dwellingPerformance criteria:Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognisethe 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 applicant has provided the following justification for the height of the building:-• the building has been designed to maintain a consistency between buildings in thelocality. Specifically the direct neighbouring properties 39a and 39b;• the proposed development is lower than the neighbouring development (39a and 39b)however maintains streetscape consistency;• there are several developments in Barrett Street (adjoining street with same block sizes)which propose side by side developments which would be consistent with this proposal;• The overshadowing diagram is compliant to southern property;• The southern neighbour has no major openings or habitable spaces that are impacted;• There is no loss of views of significance created by the proposed development.Whilst the proposed development might be similar in design, height and bulk compared withrecent developments in Barrett and Connolly Street, the way these developments are occurringare dominating the streetscape. The proliferation and overall negative impact of thesedevelopments on the streetscape in relation to height and bulk, hard paving in the front setbackarea, garage doors and loss of street parking is resulting in the Town reconsidering itsStreetscape Policy to implement stricter controls on such developments. Whilst the proposedamendments to the Streetscape Policy are yet to be finalised to commence advertising, it isclear that such developments are not the desired form for the locality.The variations to wall and overall height are significant at the front of the dwelling, where thestreetscape impact is greatest. As previously mentioned, the garages are at a similar level tothe kerb and therefore the street appearance on the development is two, three storey dwellings,which is not consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality.H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\13 MINUTES\FEBRUARY 2013\B DV.DOCX 40
Page 1 and 2: Council Minutes26 FEBRUARY 2013
Page 3 and 4: COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY
Page 41: COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY
Page 93 and 94:
COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
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:
show all

MEETING OF COUNCIL - Town of Cambridge

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

Delete template?

Save as template?