MEETING OF COUNCIL - Town of Cambridge

More documents

Recommendations

Info

COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY 2013DV13.16LOT 77 (NO. 22) HIGHBURY STREET, FLOREAT - CARPORTSUMMARY:The Town has received an application for a carport with parapet wall at No. 22 Highbury Street,Floreat.The application requires a Council determination assessment under the performance criteriarelating to the primary street setback.The proposal is considered to satisfy the relevant performance criteria for the following reason:-• there will be no negative impact upon the desired streetscape.The carport is located away from the main frontage of the dwelling with the proposed parapetwall a relatively minor intrusion. Accordingly, the proposal is recommended for approval.PURPOSE:To consider an application for a carport with parapet wall requiring assessment under theperformance criteria of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes) in respect to primary streetsetback.BACKGROUND:Application: 450DA-2012Owner:Mr C & Mrs J LiversageApplicant: Chris LiversageZoning: Residential R12.5Use class: Dwelling (single) ‘P’ – permittedLand area: 708 m²The original application was for a fully enclosed garage with a parapet wall to the boundary.The plans were subsequently amended to a more open-style carport structure. The inclusion ofa parapet wall to the boundary in the new proposal, however, requires that the carport beassessed under garage provisions of the Town's Streetscape Policy.DETAILS:Development description• The application is for a new carport with a parapet wall positioned along the side/southeasternboundary within the primary street setback area.• The 6.2 metre x 5.2 metre carport contains a Colorbond roof with a pitch of 2 degrees,has a primary street setback of between 4.7 and 5.2 metres and a total height of 3metres.• There are mature trees located on the verge and within the front setback of the subjectproperty.• The affected adjoining land owners to the south-east at No. 20 Highbury Street have noobjections to the proposed carport and parapet wall on the boundary.H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\13 MINUTES\FEBRUARY 2013\B DV.DOCX 93
COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY 2013Applicant's justificationThe applicant has provided written justification for the variations to the acceptable developmentprovisions relating to the side setback. A copy of the applicant’s justification is available forviewing by Elected Members and a summary is available as an attachment to this report.Performance criteria assessmentSetback of buildings generallyProposedAcceptable development provisionPrimary Street Setback 4.7 metres - 5.2 metres 9 metresPerformance criteria:Buildings setback from street boundaries an appropriate distance to ensure they:-• contribute to the desired streetscape• provide adequate privacy and open space for dwellings; and• allow safety clearances for easements for essential service corridors.The structure replaces an existing double carport of slightly smaller dimensions. In thisparticular case, it is considered the enclosure of the carport on its south-eastern boundary,within the front setback area, will not be visually intrusive in the streetscape for the followingreasons:• Despite the reduced primary street setback, the carport does not impact upon the amountof landscaping within the front setback area.• The carport is positioned on the side of the dwelling and will not dominate the frontage.• An existing carport on the adjoining corner lot to the east and solid boundary wall to thewest partially screen the proposed solid wall from the street.• The existing streetscape is not typical as there are only four lots, with two being corner lots.Overall in view of the above comments, it is considered that the reduced primary street setbackis acceptable and satisfies the performance criteria for the following reason:-• there will be no negative impact upon the desired streetscape.POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was assessedagainst the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning SchemeNo.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 thepriority area 'Planning for our Community'.H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\13 MINUTES\FEBRUARY 2013\B DV.DOCX 94
Page 1 and 2:
Council Minutes26 FEBRUARY 2013
Page 3 and 4:
COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY
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:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46: COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY
Page 95: COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 FEBRUARY
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?