Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

More documents

Recommendations

Info

COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 JUNE 2012DV12.65LOT 570 (NO. 67) ESSEX STREET WEMBLEY - TWO STOREY DWELLINGSUMMARY:The Town has received an application for a two storey dwelling at No. 67 Essex Street,Wembley. The plans show a two storey dwelling with a garage located on the southernboundary.The application requires a Council determination as an assessment is required against the sidesetback performance criteria of the Residential Design Codes of WA (R Codes) and anobjection has been received during the consultation period that cannot be resolved through acondition of planning approval.The proposal is considered to have minimal impact on the streetscape and satisfies therelevant performance criteria for the following reasons:-• little impact on the amenity of the adjoining property as it will be abutting a parapet walland a carport; and• minimal impact on sunlight or ventilation to habitable room windows or outdoor livingareas of the adjoining property.Accordingly, the proposal is recommended for approval.BACKGROUND:Application: 0146DA-2012Owner:Applicant: Webb & Brown-Neaves HomesZoning:Residential R20Use class: Dwelling (single) ‘P’ – permittedLand area: 653 m²DETAILS:Development description• The existing site is generally flat with a difference of 1.2 metres between the lowest pointin the south east corner and the highest point (retained garden bed) in the North Westcorner.• The applicant proposes a two storey dwelling with a parapet wall for a garage on thesouthern boundary for a length of 7.13 metres.• The dwelling proposes an alfresco to the rear, and a storage area (unroofed) with a1.8 metre high brick wall to the southern side of the property.Applicant's justificationThe applicant has provided written justification for the variations to the acceptable developmentprovisions relating to nil setback to the garage.H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\12 MINUTES\JUNE 2012\B DV.DOCX 29
COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 JUNE 2012Neighbour submissionThe Town notified the owners of the two properties directly adjoining the northern and southernboundaries of the subject site, being Nos. 65 and 69 Essex Street. One submission wasreceived from the owners of No. 65 Essex Street objecting to the proposed nil setback to thegarage wall.Performance criteria assessmentBuildings on boundarySetback garage fromsouthern (left) boundaryPerformance criteria:ProposedNil.Acceptable development provision1.0 metreBuildings built up to boundaries other than the street boundary where it is desirable to do so inorder to:• make effective use of space; or• enhance privacy; or• otherwise enhance the amenity of the development;• not have any significant adverse effect on the amenity of the adjoining property; and• ensure that direct sun to major openings to habitable rooms and outdoor living areas of adjoiningproperties is not restricted.The applicant proposes a nil setback to the garage on the southern boundary, which will beabutting a carport and a parapet wall of the adjoining property. The proposed parapet wall willhave some added impact on overshadowing to the adjoining property, however, this shadowwill be cast to the carport of the adjoining property, and will have minimal impact on anyhabitable room windows or outdoor living areas, which are located to the rear of the property.The parapet wall does not contain any major openings, so privacy between the adjoiningproperties is not affected. The home theatre and family room are set back in excess of therequired setback so the overall impacts of building bulk are minimised between adjoiningproperties.All other upper floor and ground floor setbacks to the southern boundary comply with theacceptable development provisions of the R-Codes.Overall in view of the above comments, it is considered that the proposed garage wall on thesouthern (left) boundary is acceptable and satisfies the performance criteria for the followingreasons:-• little impact on the amenity of the adjoining property as it will be abutting a parapet walland a carport; and• minimal impact on sunlight or ventilation to habitable room windows or outdoor livingareas of the adjoining property.H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\12 MINUTES\JUNE 2012\B DV.DOCX 30
Page 1: Council Minutes26 JUNE 2012
Page 4 and 5: MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF
Page 6 and 7: COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 JUNE 2012
Page 82 and 83:
COUNCIL MINUTESTUESDAY 26 JUNE 2012
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204:
show all

Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

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

Delete template?

Save as template?