development assessment panel meeting agenda · development assessment panel agenda 04 november 2014...

Development Assessment Panel Meeting Agenda

Tuesday 04 November 2014 at 6pm

Council Chambers, 401 Greenhill Road, Tusmore

Members: Bill Chandler (Presiding Member)

Grant Piggott (Deputy Presiding Member), Ross Bateup, Alison Brookman, Robert Hasenohr, Stephanie Johnston and Leni Palk

1 APOLOGIES

Nil

2 KAURNA ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The Presiding Member will take the opportunity to acknowledge the Kuarna people.

3 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Recommendation: That the minutes of the meeting held on Tuesday 07 October 2014 be taken as read and confirmed.

4 APPLICATIONS WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA

Nil

5 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION – PERSONS WISH TO BE HEARD (A) NON-COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (HEARING)

Nil (B) CATEGORY 3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (HEARING)

Nil (C) CATEGORY 2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (HEARING) Recommendation: As the opportunity to make a verbal presentation for Category 2 applications is at the Panel’s discretion, that the Panel provide an opportunity to be heard.

Report Number: 5689.1

Page: 1

Application Number: 180\0384\14

Applicant: Genworth Homes

Location: 32 The Common, Beaumont

Proposal: Two-storey detached dwelling with double garage, swimming pool, retaining walls and masonry pillar and plinth front fence

Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be granted

Representors: 1A Short Crescent, Beaumont

Applicant: Level 1, 232 Melbourne Street, North Adelaide

Development Assessment Panel Agenda 04 November 2014


Page: 15


Applicant: Dechellis Homes Pty Ltd

Location: 32 Dulwich Avenue, Dulwich

Proposal: Single storey dwelling including garage, porch and alfresco


Representors: 30 Dulwich Avenue, Dulwich

Applicant: 170 Payneham Road, Evandale


Page: 29


Applicant: Tek Building & Design

Location: 55B Hallett Road, Burnside

Proposal: Two-storey detached dwelling including garage, porch, retaining walls and alfresco


Representors: 57 Hallett Road, Burnside

Applicant: PO Box 907, St Agnes


Page: 45


Applicant: Chasecrown

Location: 55 Hay Road, Linden Park

Proposal: Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a pair of two-storey detached dwellings including garages, alfresco, front fence (masonry, pillar and plinth) and side retaining wall (concrete) with fence on top (colorbond)


Representors: Name suppressed

Applicant: 109a Archer Street, North Adelaide

6 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION – NO PERSONS TO BE HEARD

(A) NON-COMPLYING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (NO HEARING)


Page: 59


Applicant: Progetto Design

Location: 81 Glen Osmond Road, Eastwood

Proposal: Non-complying – alterations and additions to existing bakery/coffee shop to include upper level ancillary office space

Recommendation: Subject to concurrence from the Development Assessment Commission, that Development Plan Consent be granted

Development Assessment Panel Agenda 04 November 2014


Page: 67




Proposal: Non-complying – addition to existing bakery/coffee shop to include ancillary garage



Page: 75


Applicant: Passivhaus Australia

C/- Bernward Bucheler

Location: 27 Mount Osmond Road, Mount Osmond

Proposal: Non-complying – alterations and additions to existing dwelling involving internal alterations and enclosure of terrace


(B) CATEGORY 3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (NO HEARING)

Nil (C) CATEGORY 2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS (NO HEARING)

Nil

7 CATEGORY 1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION – NO PERSONS TO BE HEARD

Nil

8 OTHER BUSINESS

Nil

9 ORDER FOR EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC FROM THE MEETING TO DEBATE CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS That, pursuant to Section 56A(12) of the Development Act, 1993, the public be excluded from this part of the meeting of the City of Burnside Development Assessment Panel dated Tuesday 04 November 2014 (with the exception of members of Council staff who are hereby permitted to remain), to enable the Panel to receive, discuss or consider legal advice, or advice from a person who is providing specialist professional advice.

10 CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS

Nil

this page is left intentionally blank

Development Assessment Panel Agenda

NOTES FOR THE READER

Purpose

The purpose of each report prepared for the Development Assessment Panel is to assist the applicant, those assessing the application and members of the public alike, to understand all of the relevant factors and considerations involved in the assessment of each particular development application.

Development Plan Assessment

Development in South Australia is regulated under the Development Act, 1993 and the Development Regulations, 2008.

This legislation requires Council, which is a relevant planning authority under this legislation, to assess most applications for development against the provisions of Council’s “Development Plan”.

The Development Plan is a policy document. The policy is formulated by the Council. It uses some “planning language” but is intended to form a useful and practical guide for the public and those responsible for the assessment of development. It is a practical policy document which the planning authority must apply to development assessment in a practical way.

When assessing development, the relevant provisions within the Development Plan are identified. The planning authority will then usually be required to consider whether those provisions speak for or against a proposed development. Quite often the assessment task will require the planning authority to weigh the “pros and cons” of a proposed development by reference to the relevant policies within the Development Plan.

The process involved in the assessment of each development application is contained within the above legislation. Depending on a variety of factors, including the nature of the development and the Zone within which it is proposed, applications may be classified as “complying”, “non-complying” or “merit” development. The classification of the application will determine the procedure to be followed under the legislation. Classification will also determine the public notification protocol, that is, whether the planning authority is able to provide public notification and if so, the extent of the public notification.

Representations

Representors will usually be provided with an opportunity to address the planning authority at its relevant meeting if they wish to be heard. In this case the relevant planning authority will hear and consider the representations prior to making its decision. It is the role of the planning authority to act as a mediator or arbitrator between representor(s) and applicant.

The reports prepared by the Council’s staff will not separately address the content of each representation, but rather will deal with relevant town planning issues raised in any representation, together with all other relevant considerations involved in the assessment of a proposed development.


04 November 2014

Report Number: PR 5689.1

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION


Applicant: Genworth Homes

Location: 32 The Common, Beaumont

Proposal: Two-storey detached dwelling with double garage, swimming pool, retaining walls and masonry pillar and plinth front fence

Zone/Policy Area: Residential Zone

Residential Policy Area 22

Development Plan consolidated 30 January 2014

Kind of Assessment: Merit

Public Notification: Category 2

Two (2) representations received

Appeal Opportunity Applicant only, no third party appeal rights

Referrals – Statutory: N/A

Referrals – Non Statutory: Engineering Services / Tree Management Officer

Delegations Policy: Unresolved representations


Recommending Officer: James Moss

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:

- Appendix 1 – Aerial Locality Map

- Appendix 2 – Detailed Planning Assessment

- Appendix 3 – Development Data Table

Please note that due to Federal Copyright Law restrictions, attachments associated with the proposed development are not made available to the public.

Documentation provided as attachments to the report to members of the Development Assessment Panel to facilitate decision making:

Plans and supporting documents

Internal agency referral reports

Representations received

Applicant’s response to representations

Photographs

1


04 November 2014


1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling, together with associated residential structures on an existing vacant corner allotment at 32 The Common, Beaumont. The proposed dwelling will feature four bedrooms, two bathrooms, an upstairs retreat, downstairs study and open plan living areas to the rear. It will also include a double width garage, in-ground swimming pool, masonry front fence and retaining wall structures. The dwelling exhibits a boxy two storey presentation towards the front and a flat roofed single storey form to the rear, and will be finished in a combination of face brickwork and selected render, with Colorbond roofing materials and painted timber door and window frames.

2. BACKGROUND

The properties now known as 30 and 32 The Common were created by the sub-division of a large single allotment in 2011 (DA 180\0374\11), with demolition approval to clear the site that same year (DA 180\1003\11). Council records show other dwelling applications registered against the subject land since sub-division, however, none have been acted upon and none bear relevance to this assessment. The current proposal, Development Application 180\0384\14, was lodged with Council on 17 April 2014 by Genworth Homes on behalf of the registered owners. The proposal was determined to be a Category 2 development for the purposes of public notification, to be assessed on merit against the provisions of the Burnside (City) Development Plan. During the notification period Council received two (2) written submissions from the owners of adjoining land to the south (30 The Common) and east (1A Short Crescent), the former in support of the proposal but with concerns, and the latter opposed. One of the two parties expressed a desire to address the Development Assessment Panel (the Panel) in person. As part of Council’s internal assessment process, the proposal was also referred to the Senior Engineer to assess the impact of development on local infrastructure, and to the Tree Management Officer to assess the impacts of the access location and driveway across the verge. The proposal has undergone two separate amendments throughout the course of the assessment, both of which aimed to appease Council’s concerns with respect to the bulk and scale of the dwelling by lowering the finished floor level and increasing the northern side set-back to East Terrace. The most recent changes were made after the period of public notification, however, these were not deemed substantial enough to warrant a repeat of the consultation process. Pursuant to Council’s Delegation Policy, the application is now presented to the Panel for consideration as a Category 2 development with unresolved representations. Should the Panel determine to grant consent to the development, the applicant will be required to obtain Building Rules Consent prior to Council issuing Development Approval.

3. SUBJECT LAND AND LOCALITY ATTRIBUTES

2


04 November 2014


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is an irregular shaped allotment at the intersection of The Common and East Terrace, in the suburb of Beaumont. The land has an overall area of approximately 603m2, a width of 19m, a depth ranging between 26m and 36m and a corner cut-off. The topography slopes up from the northwest corner to the southeast corner with a difference in levels of approximately 3m overall. The land has been cleared of all buildings and vegetation, with the exception of a single remaining (non-regulated) pine tree located in the northeast corner adjacent the boundary with the eastern neighbour. Recently constructed retaining walls and fencing structures can be observed along the rear and southern side boundaries.

3.2. Locality

The subject land is located within the Residential Zone of the City of Burnside, towards the southeast corner of Residential Policy Area 22 – Beaumont Common (RPA 22). The locality comprises those allotments with a direct frontage to The Common and East Terrace, and to a lesser extent those of surrounding streets. Allotments within this locality are generally irregular in shape and range in size between 500m2 and 1000m2. The local streetscape character is comprised mainly of detached dwellings on individual allotments, with widely varying architectural styles, heights and set-backs. The locality is strongly influenced by the proximity of Beaumont Common reserve and a large number of significant trees scattered throughout. Local amenity is enhanced by wide grassed verges and well-landscaped front gardens.

4. KIND OF ASSESSMENT

Kind: Merit

Reason: Development Act 1993, Section 35(5)

Applicant Appeal Opportunity: Yes

5. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Category: Category 2

Reason: Residential Policy Area 22 Principle of Development Control 9(a) and (c)

Representations Received: 1A Short Crescent, Beaumont (wish to be heard)

30 The Common, Beaumont (do not wish to be heard)

Third Party Appeal Opportunity: No

Representations received are provided as an attachment to the Panel.

Applicant’s response(s) to representations are provided as an attachment to the Panel.

6. AGENCY REFERRALS

Internal agency referrals are provided as an attachment to the Panel.

7. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

3


04 November 2014


7.1. Land Use

The site of development is an existing Torrens title allotment within the Residential Zone that satisfies the relevant land size criteria prescribed in RPA 22 for the accommodation of a single self-contained detached dwelling. The development maintains and continues the established residential use of the site and is not considered to be fundamentally at variance with the policies of the Burnside (City) Development Plan.

7.2. Character and Amenity

The Development Plan seeks to maintain and enhance a residential character derived from both one and two storey detached dwellings in a variety of styles, with streetscapes enhanced by open, well-established, front gardens, grassed verges, and views of public open space. The proposed development is generally compatible with these characteristics, despite shortfalls in primary and secondary road set-backs and its bold and boxy appearance. In terms of architectural style, the proposed building bears strong resemblance to at least two existing dwellings along the southern edge of Beaumont Common (24 and 26 The Common), and is somewhat complementary to the eclectic character of a streetscape that features a number of large and stately homes. In terms of siting, the proposed building will sit forward of the 8m front set-back guideline with external walls set-back half the guideline distance. This is a considerable departure in quantitative terms, but aligns well with the recently constructed dwelling to the south (30 The Common), which has a minimum set-back of 1.5m. The visual presence of the building is also somewhat mitigated by the open design of the front fence, the depth of the Council verge and the presence of several street trees in front of the subject land. From the secondary road, the two-storey portion of the dwelling will be set-back 3m, while the single storey section to the rear will have a reduced set-back of 2.1m, presumably as a result of efforts to bring the building further from the rear boundary. The departure is acceptable given that the rear section of the dwelling is comparatively smaller in height and scale, and the adjacent dwelling to the east also encroaches within the 3m guideline. Furthermore the applicant proposes to plant a row of pear trees inside the northern boundary to soften the appearance of the two-storey portion and additional windows have been introduced across the northern façade to provide greater visual interest. In terms of amenity impacts on neighbouring properties, it is noted that the development either meets or exceeds set-back guidelines to the southern side and to the rear, and will have a finished ground floor level lower than each of the neighbouring properties. This aids in reducing the height and visual bulk of the first floor and provides ample separation between buildings for sunlight access. Appropriate landscaping is also proposed at strategic locations around the dwelling curtilage to soften the impact to the neighbours. Given the absence of east-facing windows across the rear façade, the only overlooking opportunities arise from two south-facing windows on the southern side of the building, corresponding with the first floor bathroom and Bedroom 4. In both cases views will be restricted by compelling the use of fixed and obscured glazing to a minimum height of 1.6m as per Condition 2 accompanying this recommendation.

7.3. Site Functionality

The extent of the building footprint meets Council guidelines, but the combined area of both ground and first floors exceeds the 50% guideline to some degree.

4


04 November 2014


Despite this departure, the building envelope is generally acceptable in the context of its relationship with the streetscape and adjoining buildings. The excess in total floor area does not impose unreasonable visual impacts on adjoining residents, and the extent and configuration of private open space allocated to the rear of the building exceeds the relevant guidelines for a dwelling of such size. The development also retains sufficient off-street vehicle parking provisions in excess of Table Bur/5 guidelines for residential development, which assists in minimising parking congestion along nearby Council roads.

7.4. Public Notification

During the notification period Council received two (2) written submissions from the owners of adjoining land to the south (30 The Common) and east (1A Short Crescent). The neighbour to the south sought assurances that overlooking from the first floor windows would be restricted by opaque glass. This can be achieved by acceptance of Condition 2 accompanying this recommendation, which requires these windows to be fixed and obscured to a minimum height of 1.6m above the finished floor level in accordance with Development Plan standards. The neighbour to the east voiced concerns regarding the set-back of the proposed dwelling in relation to the rear boundary, as well as concerns for sunlight access and the visual appearance of the first floor as viewed from their land. In response the applicant has amended the floor plan to increase the rear set-back to meet and exceed Development Plan guidelines. Despite the representor’s concerns of sunlight access and visual impacts, Council is satisfied with the proposal in each of these respects. Whilst the dwelling sits above the adjacent verge, it will remain sunken below the level of each of the neighbouring properties. This, combined with the generous side and rear set-backs to the first floor, will prevent obstruction of natural sunlight and offer greater visual relief for the occupants of adjoining land. The proposal also includes a row of pear trees along the rear boundary to obstruct views of the building and soften the impact of development on the locality.

7.5. Agency Referrals

As part of Council’s internal assessment process, the proposal was referred to the Senior Engineer to assess the impact of development on local infrastructure, and to the Tree Management Officer for an assessment of the impacts of the driveway across the verge. Initially, concerns were raised by Council’s Tree Management Officer about impacts to a nearby regulated Chinese Elm tree. Through negotiations between the applicant and staff a suitable arrangement has been agreed upon whereby Section 221 authorisation can be obtained should the Panel see fit to approve the development.

7.6. Conclusion

Having regard to all of the relevant Objectives and Principles of Development Control of the Burnside (City) Development Plan, the proposed development is not considered seriously at variance with, and is generally in accordance with, the policies of the Development Plan.

5


04 November 2014


8. RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that the Development Assessment Panel resolve that:

1. The proposed development is not seriously at variance with the policies in the Development Plan; and

2. Development Application 180\0384\14, by Genworth Homes, is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1 The development granted Development Plan Consent shall be undertaken in accordance with the stamped approved plans, drawings, specifications and other documents submitted to the Council that are relevant to the consent to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council, except where varied by conditions below. Reason: To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with the plans and details submitted.

2 All south-facing upper level windows as depicted on the stamped and approved plans granted Development Plan Consent shall be fitted with fixed and obscured glazing to a minimum height of 1.6m above the finished floor level. The fixed and obscured glazing shall be installed prior to the occupation or use of the building herein granted Development Plan Consent and thereafter shall be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council at all times. Reason: To ensure the new development does not unreasonably diminish the privacy of residents in adjoining properties.

3 The approved works may not commence until such time as the applicant has secured written authorisation for the construction of the new driveway crossover from the Council pursuant to Section 221 of the Local Government Act 1999. Reason: To ensure the applicant has secured all relevant consents/authorisations required prior to the commencement of development.

4 The driveway depicted on the stamped and approved plans granted Development Plan Consent shall be tapered to a maximum width of 4.5m at the property boundary. Reason: To ensure minimal impacts to Council verge.

5 The landscaping delineated on the stamped and approved plans shall be planted within three (3) months of the substantial completion of the development, and thereafter maintained in good health and condition at all times to the reasonable satisfaction of Council. Any dead or diseased plants shall be replaced immediately.

6


04 November 2014


Reason: To provide amenity for the occupants of buildings and those of adjacent buildings through the provision of landscaping as part of the development.

RECOMMENDING OFFICER

James Moss Development Officer – Planning

7


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

Representor’s Land

8


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2

DETAILED PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Summary of Policy Area Objectives and Principles

Primary Residential Policy Area 22 Objectives:

Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of the low scale, low density residential character that is derived particularly from: (a) one-storeyed, detached dwellings, predominantly from the post-war period, in a variety of styles, with more

recently built dwellings, of one or two-storeys, on rising ground towards the south-eastern corner; (b) streetscapes enhanced by open, well-established, front gardens, grassed verges, and views of public open

space; (c) the existence of Beaumont Common and stands of indigenous trees throughout much of the eastern part of

the Policy Area.

Acknowledged, significant variations from the desired character, or the prevailing character or environmental conditions, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are to be found: (a) on Beaumont Common, a large open space significant as a landscape feature and for its remnant

indigenous vegetation; (b) on the site of Beaumont House, State heritage place; and (c) on land with frontage to Greenhill Road.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Desired Land Use O 1

Satisfied. The development facilitates continued use of the land for residential purposes.

Local Compatibility PDC 1-2

The development is consistent with Objective 1(a) in that it comprises the construction of a detached dwelling of two storeys on rising ground towards the south-eastern corner of the policy area.

The dwelling style is consistent with at least two other established dwellings within the south-eastern corner of The Common, and contributes to an eclectic overall character that is comprised of a variety of dwelling styles.

The development is consistent with the desired scale of development, insofar as two-storey dwellings are an acknowledged feature of the desired character, and the height and form of the proposed building is generally reflective of that of several existing buildings within the locality which form part of that character.

The development is relatively compatible with Objective 1(b) despite shortfalls in primary and secondary set-backs, in that sufficient space exists for landscaping within the front and northern side open spaces and that the generous grassed verge of The Common and East Terrace contribute to the illusion of a deeper built form set-back.

The open pillar and plinth front fence also contributes to an open streetscape character by permitting views to and from the subject land.

The development is consistent with Objective 1(c) insofar as development of the subject land has no bearing on the undeveloped nature of the adjacent reserve and stands of indigenous trees throughout much of the eastern part of the Policy Area.

Site Areas and Frontages PDC 3–6

Satisfied. The subject land is an existing Torrens title allotment of sufficient size and frontage width.

9


04 November 2014


Building Set-backs PDC 7

Departure. The dwelling has been sited forward of the 8m guideline at a minimum distance of 3.4m with external walls set-back 4m. This is a considerable departure in quantitative terms, but aligns well with the recently constructed dwelling immediately south of the subject land (30 The Common), which has a minimum set-back of 1.5m.

10


04 November 2014


Summary of Residential Zone Objectives and Principles

Primary Residential Zone Objectives:

Objective 1: A zone primarily for residential use with a range of dwelling types in appropriate policy areas to accommodate varied socio-economic needs.

Objective 2: Protection and enhancement of the amenity of residential areas, with particular reference to the objectives for the relevant policy area.

Objective 3: Residential densities varied having regard to topography, the objectives for the relevant policy area, and proximity to centres and major transport routes.

Objective 5: Enhancement of the attractive qualities of streetscapes and particularly areas of cohesive character or visual sensitivity, through good design.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 1–8 PDC 1

Satisfied. See policy area comments for further detail.

Building Appearance PDC 2–4

The subject land was cleared as part of a demolition application approved by Council in September 2011. Any mature vegetation and/or other attractive site features have since been removed from the land. The application documents show an existing (non-regulated) pine tree is to be removed from the northeast corner. This tree is not considered to contribute to the overall character and amenity of the locality.

The development is sited to permit long-term landscaping on all four sides of the proposed building. Through appropriate selection it is possible to establish vegetation that complements the scale and proportions of that building.

The dwelling will be finished in a combination of face brickwork and selected render, with Colorbond roofing materials and painted timber door and window frames. These are not viewed as highly reflective surfaces and therefore, in themselves, are not anticipated to cause unreasonable nuisance to residents in the locality.

The design steps down from two-storey form to single storey at the rear and at the garage, which assists with the visual transition to the single storey dwellings to the south and east.

The ground floor of the proposed dwelling has been sited above the nearby verge, but below that of the neighbouring dwellings to the south and east. This is a satisfactory outcome and avoids extensive earthworks around the dwelling curtilage.

The proposed roof design is compatible with other hip roofs within the locality, and assumes a similar pitch to that of existing dwellings that share a direct visual relationship.

Design for Topography PDC 5–6

Satisfied.

11


04 November 2014


Summary of Council Wide Objectives and Principles

Primary Residential Development Objectives:

Objective 11: Development of a high design standard and appearance that responds to and reinforces positive aspects of the local environment and built form.

Objective 20: The amenity of localities not impaired by the appearance of land, buildings and objects, or by noise, light, emissions, traffic or any other quality, condition or factor.

Objective 21: Protection and enhancement of visual amenity by ensuring a high standard of design in respect of the appearance of development, and by the conservation and establishment of vegetation, including trees.

Objective 50: A compact metropolitan area.

Objective 51: A variety and choice of dwelling types to meet the needs and preferences of all sections of the community.

Objective 52: Containment of housing costs through the encouragement of a full range of design and development techniques.

Objective 53: Safe, pleasant, accessible and convenient residential areas.

Objective 54: Residential development which moderates adverse climatic conditions, takes advantage of solar energy, does not unreasonably overshadow adjacent development, and protects the natural environment.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 8–9, 11, 20, 50–54 PDC 1, 3

Satisfied. See zone and policy area comments for further detail.

Building Set-backs PDC 161-162

Side Set-backs

Departure. The two storey component will be set back 3m from the secondary road (East Terrace), which accords with PDC 161(b), however, the single storey section to the rear will have a reduced set-back of 2.1m. The departure is acceptable in this instance given that the rear section of the dwelling is comparatively smaller in height and scale, and the adjacent dwelling to the east also encroaches within the 3m guideline.

With the exception of the garage, the dwelling exceeds both ground floor and first floor set-back guidelines with regard to the southern side boundary.

Rear Set-backs

Satisfied.

Building Height PDC 164

Departure. The development accords with the maximum building height of two storeys, but departs from the 9m guideline by approximately 0.8m.

Site Coverage PDC 165

Departure. The development accords with PDC 165(a) and (b), but exceeds the 50% guideline prescribed by (c) with 59.3% total floor area.

Private Open Space / Satisfied.

12


04 November 2014


Landscaping PDC 166-169

Amenity O15–17 PDC 22–33, 14-16, 170-171

Satisfied.

Access / Street Trees / On-site Car Parking PDC 177–182

Satisfied.

Privacy O15 PDC 22, 174–182

Satisfied.

Access to Sunlight PDC 21, 183–186

Satisfied.

Fences / Retaining Walls PDC 190–194

Satisfied.

Safety / Security PDC 195–198

Satisfied.

Environmental / Water Conservation O 11–14 PDC 14–21, 200–201

Environmental performance and water conservation are largely addressed at the Building Rules Consent stage of the assessment process.

The performance provisions in the Building Code of Australia require all new dwellings to achieve a six star energy rating, control the flow of stormwater run-off from the site of development and must incorporate an additional water supply other than the mains reticulated supply, plumbed to at least a water closet, or a water heater or all of the cold water laundry outlets.

The proposed floor plan features sufficient northern sunlight access to primary living areas.

13


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 3

DEVELOPMENT DATA TABLE

Site Characteristics Proposed Guideline

Street Frontage 19.29m 15m

Site Area 603.9m2 550m2

Design Characteristics Proposed Guideline

Site Coverage

- Buildings only 41.2% 40%

- Buildings and driveways 44.4% 50%

Total Floor Area 59.3% 50%

Building Height

- storeys 2 storeys 2 storeys

- metres 9.8m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 3.4m 8m

- side boundary 2.1m – 3m (north) 0.6m - 4.6m (south)

2m

- rear boundary 4.2m 4m

Upper Level


- side boundary 3m (north), 7.6m (south) 4m

- rear boundary 12m 8m

Private Open Space

- percentage 56.6% of TFA 50% of TFA*

- dimensions 4.7m x 19.29m 5m x 8m

Car Parking and Access

- number of parks 4 2

- width of driveway 5.3m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 27.47% of frontage 33% of frontage

*Total Floor Area (TFA) is measured from the external faces of the walls of the building or buildings, including balconies, carports and garages.

14


04 November 2014




Applicant: Dechellis Homes Pty Ltd

Location: 32 Dulwich Avenue, Dulwich

Proposal: Single storey dwelling including garage and porch



Development Plan 30 January 2014



One (1) representation received



Referrals – Non Statutory: Traffic Management Engineer / Tree Management Officer / Arborist Consultant



Recommending Officer: Troy Fountain

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:










Photographs

15


04 November 2014



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the following:

Construction of a single-storey detached dwelling including double garage and porch.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0684\14 was lodged on 07 July 2014, by Dechellis Homes Pty Ltd, on behalf of Richard Dechellis the owner of the subject land, seeking Development Plan Consent for the construction of a single-storey detached dwelling, on an allotment which currently contains a single storey detached dwelling. Demolition of the existing dwelling has been granted Development Approval (DA 180\0853\14). The current proposal was determined to be neither a complying nor non-complying form of development, prompting an assessment on merit pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993. The development was also determined to be a Category 2 development pursuant to Residential Policy Area 13 Principle of Development Control 9(b) of the Burnside (City) Development Plan, due to the development including a boundary wall with a height greater than 2m above the natural ground level. During the public notification period one (1) written representation was received in relation to the proposal; which was in opposition to the development. The representor has the following concerns with the proposal: Local compatibility; Set-backs; Loss of amenity; Loss of value; Regulated tree impacts; Dwelling appearance; and Proposed landscaping species. During the course of assessment the proposal was also referred to Council’s Traffic Engineer and Tree Management Officer to assess the suitability of access arrangements across the Council verge and impact to existing street trees. No objections were raised in principle, as the existing crossover is to be maintained. The current set-back to the existing stobie pole, although not in accordance with the required 1m, is an existing situation and a matter for the applicant to resolve with the Technical Regulator should consent be granted. As part of the application documents, the applicant supplied Council with an arborist report compiled by Daniel Tuckwell from Arborman Tree Solutions. The ensuing recommendation included the removal of Tree 1 and the possible retention of Tree 2. Tree 2 is an unregulated tree which is afforded no protection under the Development Act 1993. Given that the applicant detailed the possibility of removing the regulated tree (Tree 1), Council commissioned an independent report from Sam Cassar of Symatree. Sam Cassar also supported the removal of Tree 1, the SA Blue Gum, given its poor state of health and its risk to the occupiers of the subject land and the neighbouring properties. Given that both Tree 1 and Tree 2 are located on the western abutting property, the applicant advised that they may pursue the removal of Tree 1, which requires Development Approval, as a separate matter in the future.

16


04 November 2014


In order for this application to be processed further and to abate the concerns of the representor, the applicant amended the proposal by deleting the rear alfresco area which was sited in proximity to Tree 2 (not a regulated tree). The applicant has advised that they will address the removal of both trees with the abutting property owner in the near future. Pursuant to Council’s Delegation policy, the application is now presented to the Development Assessment Panel (the Panel) for consideration as a Category 2 development with an unresolved representation.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is located on the southern side of Dulwich Avenue approximately 50m east of the intersection of Dulwich Avenue and Kitchener Avenue. The subject land is a regular shaped allotment with an area of 627.9m2 and a frontage to Dulwich Avenue of 15.85m. The subject land currently contains a single-storey detached Bungalow circa 1926. The subject land is wholly contained within Residential Policy Area 13 – Dulwich, an area with low scale and low to medium density residential character.

3.2. Locality

The locality comprises the section of Dulwich Avenue between Kitchener Avenue to the west, and Cleland Avenue to the east. Some properties located to the northern side of Dulwich Avenue are located within the Historic Conservation Zone, along with the property at the intersection of Kitchener Avenue and Dulwich Avenue. The surrounding locality is predominantly comprised of low density, single-storeyed dwellings mostly built during or after the interwar period. There are some examples of newly constructed dwellings evident, particularly within that part of the locality contained within Residential Policy Area 13 where contemporary styled dwellings can be found. Dwellings generally have front boundary set-backs in the order of 4-5m, and a variety of fencing styles which all contribute to the character of the locality. A small row of shops is located directly north-east of the subject land servicing the needs of the local community.


Kind: Merit

Reason: Section 35(5) the Development Act (1993)




Reason: Residential Policy Area 13 Principle of Development Control 9(b)

Cut / Fill: Although a degree of cut and fill is to be introduced to the site, incidental to the construction of the dwelling, it is not considered excessive in light of the slope of the land. The building footprint requires both cut and fill and a stepped design to respond to topography.

The overall cut and fill is considered minor, does not require retaining walls and is not considered to unreasonably impact on the occupiers of adjoining land.

17


04 November 2014


Representations Received: 30 Dulwich Avenue, Dulwich (wish to be heard)




6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use

In relation to the current proposal, the following comments are made: The development involves the construction of a detached dwelling on an existing

residential allotment within the Residential Zone;

The existing allotment is of sufficient size and dimensions to accommodate the proposed dwelling in accordance with the Policy Area and Council Wide guidelines;

The proposed development is not identified as a non-complying kind of development in the Burnside (City) Development Plan; and

If it can be demonstrated that the proposed development has minimal or no unreasonable external impacts, then consent could reasonably be expected.

The proposed development is therefore not considered to be seriously at variance to the Burnside (City) Development Plan.

7.2. Character

The proposed development involves the construction of a single-storey detached dwelling to replace an existing single-storey detached dwelling. Council is satisfied that the proposal has been designed to contribute to and be consistent with the primary objectives of Residential Policy Area 13 - Dulwich. This position is based on the following: The proposed development is consistent with the desired low scale, low density

residential character prescribed by Residential Policy Area 13 - Objective 1. The dwelling is single storey and modest in form and appearance;

The proposed dwelling maintains an appropriate set-back to the primary street in accordance with relevant Development Plan guidelines and the average of the two the adjacent properties which have a similar front set back;

The contemporary style of the proposed dwelling is not considered to be in conflict with the varied styles of dwellings throughout the locality;

With the exception of the garage, the building will be sited away from all side and rear boundaries in a manner that maintains the patterns of space between buildings within this part of the locality; and

Areas for landscaping have been provided with the development offering generous private open space to the rear which meets the expectations of the Development Plan.

7.3. Amenity

The proposal is not expected to have an unreasonable impact upon the amenity of the locality and adjoining properties. This position is based on the following considerations: The use of appropriate building set-backs on all sides provides sufficient separation

between buildings. This softens the visual impact of the built form when viewed from adjoining properties;

18


04 November 2014


The applicant has provided arboricultural advice that includes recommendations ensuring the protection of Tree 1 (regulated) and Tree 2 (not regulated) which are located on the adjoining property;

The recommendation to remove Tree 1 was supported by Council’s arborist however the applicant has deleted the removal of Tree 1 from this application;

Whilst the proposed 1.8m high ‘Crème’ Colorbond fence above a 200mm high plinth is not development, it provides a solid barrier between adjoining properties to ensure the privacy of rear yard areas is achieved ;

The proposal does not interfere with any Council street trees, as the development does not propose to alter the existing crossover; and

The proposal achieves a suitable finished floor level that largely conforms to the existing land contours so as to avoid the need for large amounts of cut/fill or retaining walls.


The development fits upon the land as a workable site-planning outcome. This determination has been based on the following: The subject land is an existing residential allotment, with sufficient site area to

accommodate the proposed dwelling; The total floor area of the dwelling exceeds the ground floor site coverage guideline

however the low scale of the dwelling, appropriate set-backs and ample provision of private open space confirms that the dwelling does not represent an overdevelopment of the site;

The finished floor level of the proposed dwelling is sited close to the natural ground contours, and as such large degrees of cut and/or fill are not required to accommodate the dwelling;

The deletion of the rear alfresco area results in no adverse impacts to the existing trees located in the rear yard of the neighbouring western property;

The proposed development has been deemed to be acceptable by both Council’s Tree Management Officer and Senior Traffic Engineer; and

The proposed residence features two (2) off-street parking spaces housed within the double garage in accordance with Table/Bur 5.


The proposal was determined to be a Category 2 type of development pursuant to Residential Policy Area 13 Principle of Development Control 9(b) as the proposal dwelling includes a boundary wall greater than 2m high above natural ground level as part of the development. During the notification period Council received one (1) written submission from the owners of the adjoining land to the west of the subject land. The primary issues raised during public notification are as follows: Local compatibility; Set-backs; Loss of amenity; Loss of value; Regulated tree impacts; Dwelling appearance; and Proposed landscaping species. The Applicant responded to the representors concerns in a detailed response (see attached).

19


04 November 2014


Council is satisfied that the proposed development will not significantly impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties or the locality as a whole. The proposed dwelling fits appropriately within the existing character of the locality and does not change the current density of the subject land. The dwelling matches the natural ground level and is not expected to impact on the privacy of occupiers of adjoining land. Matters raised through the public notification process are considered to be satisfied through the overall design of the development, insofar as they are to be determined under the Development Act 1993.


The application was referred to Sam Cassar of Symatree, seeking an independent arboricultural view given that the applicant’s arborist, Daniel Tuckwell of Arborman Tree Solutions, suggested the removal of Tree 1 which is a regulated tree. Sam Cassar concurred with Daniel Tuckwell in that Tree 2 is not a regulated tree and Tree 1 is in a diseased state and poses a threat to the safety of occupants on the subject land and abutting property. Both arborists support the case for tree removal. Tree 1, the regulated tree, is located wholly within the western neighbouring property. Separate to any consents granted by Council, permission would also be required from the abutting land owner prior to the removal of Tree 1. Instead of pursuing the removal of Tree 1 in this application, the applicant deleted any reference to the removal of Tree 1 from this application and amended their plans to delete the rear alfresco area. Sam Cassar has stated that with the alfresco now being removed from the application, there will be no adverse impacts upon the health and stability of either Tree 1 or Tree 2 given that encroachments within the Tree Protection Zone is minimal. To ensure the protection of both trees during all phases of the proposed development Council has conditioned works to be undertaken in accordance with Sam Cassar’s Tree Protection Plan.

7.7. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\0684\14, by Dechellis Homes Pty Ltd, is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1 The development granted Development Plan Consent shall be undertaken in accordance with the stamped approved plans, drawings, specifications and other documents submitted to the Council that are relevant to the consent to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council, except where varied by conditions below.

20


04 November 2014


Reason: To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with the plans and details submitted.

2 All works shall be undertaken in accordance with the Tree Protection Plan report from Sam Cassar, received by Council on 14 October 2014. Reason: To ensure that no adverse impacts result to Tree 1 and Tree 2.

3 The establishment of all landscaping shall be undertaken within 3 months of the substantial completion of development and in any event prior to the occupation or use of the development. Such landscaping shall be maintained in good health and condition to the satisfaction of the Council at all times and any dead or diseased plants or trees shall be immediately replaced to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council. Reason: To provide amenity for the occupants of buildings and those of adjacent buildings through the provision of landscaping as part of the development.

Engineering Requirements

The width of the proposed driveway access within the road verge is to be limited to a maximum of 4.5m and is to be constructed per Council standards.

Existing footpath levels, grades etc should not be altered as a result of new development works.

Stormwater pipe across the road verge should terminate at an approved galvanised steel kerb adaptor.

If the cover to the stormwater pipe across the Council verge is less than 50mm, then steel pipe housing to be used per Council standard.

Excess surface stormwater runoff within the development is to be managed within the development with a sump and pump or similar arrangement.

Excess stormwater runoff from the roof catchment to be discharged to the street water table through sealed system to the satisfaction of the Council.

For stormwater management purposes, it is desirable that: an additional detention storage of 1000ltrs to be provided in addition to the standard

1000ltrs retention tank provided. the development utilise permeable paving for the proposed external paving work

within the development.


Troy Fountain Development Officer – Planning

21


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land


22


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2




Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of the low scale, low-to-medium density residential character derived particularly from: (a) low-to-medium density dwellings of the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century; and (b) single-storeyed cottages, villas and bungalows of relatively consistent scale and sited well to the front of

their allotments, with ornate facades, well-established, open, front gardens and street trees that create attractive, intimate and cohesive streetscapes.

Acknowledged, significant variations from the desired character, or the prevailing character or environmental conditions, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are found: (a) on land with frontage to Dulwich Avenue and to Stuart Road, busy local roads carrying relatively high

volumes of traffic, where further low intensity, home-based business activities compatible with a predominantly residential character may be appropriate;

(b) on the sites of churches adjacent to the Local Centre Zone at the intersection of Dulwich Avenue, Stuart Road and Grandview Grove;

(c) in Tudor Street and the adjacent part of Kitchener Avenue, where built-form character has been substantially modified by two-storeyed residential buildings or (in the latter street) by carports in front of original dwellings;

(d) on land with frontage to Greenhill Road; and (e) adjacent to the Local Business Zone, the Local Centre Zone, the Office Zone and the Historic

(Conservation) Zone.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

The Policy Area seeks the enhancement of the low-scale residential character derived primarily from single storey detached dwellings. The proposed dwelling is of low scale and meets the average set back of the two abutting properties.

Local Compatibility PDC 1

Satisfied.

The proposed single storey dwelling is compatible with the bulk and scale of other dwellings within the locality.


Satisfied.

The subject land is an existing residential allotment of sufficient width and area to accommodate a detached dwelling.

23


04 November 2014







Objective 4: Provision of residential and community facilities and services for the aged community.


Objective 6: A zone accommodating non-residential activities which are small in scale, benign in external impact, and serve the needs of the local community.

Objective 7: Reduction of the impact of established non-residential uses on the amenity of residential areas.

Objective 8: Use of design, management and other techniques to improve all aspects of the environmental performance of development.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

The proposal does not alter the existing and long established residential use of the land.


Council is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the primary objectives of Residential Policy Area 13 and Council Wide provisions, having due regard to siting, mass and proportion, built form features, materials and finished floor levels.


Satisfied.

Due to the relatively even topography of the land, excessive earthworks are not proposed.

24


04 November 2014









Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 8–9, 50–54 PDC 1, 3

Satisfied.

Building Set-backs PDC 123–125 Front Set-backs

The proposed dwelling does not achieve the required 6m front boundary set-back. Given that the two abutting properties are set-back 4m and 5m, the proposed 4m set-back is considered to be consistent with the existing character of the locality.

Side Set-backs

Although the proposed side boundary set-backs do not comply with the requirements of the Development Plan, the locality includes a number of dwellings with side set backs of 1m, which together forms a consistent streetscape pattern.

Rear Set-backs Satisfied.


Satisfied.


The building footprint exceeds the 40% guideline (50%), but does not create an overly dominant dwelling when viewed from the streetscape or adjoining private land.

The extent of the departure is considered to be modest and acceptable, given that the proposal achieves appropriate set-backs to property boundaries with ample provision of private open space.

Private Open Space / Landscaping PDC 128, 129

Landscaping plan has been submitted and conditioned as part of this recommendation.

Amenity O15–17 PDC 22–33

Satisfied.


Satisfied.

25


04 November 2014



Satisfied.

Access to Sunlight PDC143–146

Satisfied.

Domestic Outbuildings PDC 147–149

Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.



The performance provisions in the Building Code of Australia require all new dwellings to achieve a six star energy rating, control the flow of stormwater run-off from the site of development, and must incorporate an additional water supply other than the mains reticulated supply, plumbed to at least a water closet, or a water heater or all of the cold water laundry outlets.

26


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 3




Site Area 627.9m2 450m2


Site Coverage

- Buildings only 50% 40%

- Buildings and driveways 56% 50%

Building Height

- storeys 1 storey 2 storeys

- metres 6.5m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 4m 8m

- side boundary 1.07m (west), 1m (east) 2m

- rear boundary 10m 4m

Boundary Wall

- length 7.2m 8m

- height 3m 3m

- location N/A

Private Open Space

- percentage 54% of TFA 50% of TFA*

- dimensions 10m x 15m 5m x 8m


- number of parks 4 (2 undercover) 2

- width of driveway 3m (existing) 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 30% of frontage 33% of frontage


27


28


04 November 2014




Applicant: Tek Building & Design

Location: 55B Hallett Road, Burnside

Proposal: Two-storey detached dwelling including garage, porch, retaining walls and alfresco

Zone/Policy Area: Watercourse Zone








Referrals – Non Statutory: Traffic Management Engineer, Local Heritage Consultant



Recommending Officer: Troy Fountain

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:










Photographs

29


04 November 2014




Construction of a conventional two-storey detached dwelling including garage, alfresco, outbuilding and swimming pool; and

Retaining walls surrounding the southern and western portion of the dwelling.

2. BACKGROUND

Two previous applications have been lodged and approved on the subject land:

Development Application 180\0747\05 – Tree removal one (Poplar); and

Development Application 180\0489\04 – Land division application, resulting in the creation of the subject land from the rear of 19 Nilpinna Street.

Development Application 180\0843\14 was lodged on 13 August 2014 by Tek Building and Design on behalf of the owner of the subject land. The application was considered a merit form of development pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993. As the application involved the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling, the application was placed on Category 2 notification pursuant to Watercourse Zone Principle of Development Control 9(a) of the Burnside (City) Development Plan. In October 2014 the Applicant made the following amendments to the dwelling:

Inclusion of fixed obscured glazing to a height of 1700mm to both bedroom 2 and bedroom 3 windows at the upper level facing south;

Clarification on the proposed driveway which will not exceed 1:5 at any point; and

Details on the proposed retaining wall to be located to the rear western area of the subject land.

The changes were in response to matter raised during the Category 2 notification period and a request from Council for further information. During the public notification period one (1) representation was received in relation to the proposal. The representation was in objection to the proposal with a request to be heard before the Development Assessment Panel (the Panel). The representor has the following concerns with the proposal:

Loss of privacy;

Loss of trees; and

Potential flood impact. During the course of assessment the proposal was referred to Council’s Traffic Management Engineer to assess the suitability of access arrangements to the subject land. The proposal requests the creation of a new crossover to the subject land, including the relocation of an existing street sign which is to be undertaken in consultation with Council. Pursuant to Council’s Delegation Policy, the application is presented to the Panel for consideration as a Category 2 development with unresolved representations. Should the Panel determine to grant consent to the development, the Applicant will be required to obtain Building Rules Consent prior to Council issuing Development Approval.

30


04 November 2014



3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is an irregular shaped allotment located on the western side of Hallett Road and is located wholly within the Watercourse Zone, more specifically Residential Policy Area 27 - Southern Foothills. The subject land is currently vacant and was created through a land division separating the subject land from 19 Nilpinna Street. The allotment faces Hallett Road, with no existing providing access to the subject land. The subject land also includes a stormwater easement to the City of Burnside which isn’t compromised as part of the proposal.

The subject land has an approximate area of 662m2 and a frontage to Hallett Road of 24.5m. The land includes a fall of approximately 2.5m downwards from the southern boundary to the northern boundary. No regulated or significant trees are located on the subject land or abutting properties. The subject land is located within Residential Policy Area 17 pursuant to Principle of Development 7 (b), where if the site of the proposed development is located in the suburb of Stonyfell or in the suburb of Burnside, adjacent to Second Creek.

3.2. Locality

The locality is defined as all properties with a frontage to the section of Hallett Road, between Fernbank Terrace to the north and High Street to the south of the subject land. The locality includes other properties within the Watercourse Zone including a number within Residential Policy Area 17

Allotments are generally irregular in shape due to the natural land contours formed by drainage to Second Creek located directly north of the subject land. The primary building form is derived from single and two-storey detached dwellings constructed in mainly post-war conventional styles. Examples of large two-storey dwellings are also evident throughout the locality. The dwelling located at 19 Nilpinna Street abutting the subject land directly to the west is listed as a Local Heritage Place.


Kind: Merit


Applicant Appeal Opportunity: No



Reason: Residential Policy Area 17 Principle of Development Control 9(a)

Cut / Fill: Although a degree of fill is to be introduced to the site, it is incidental to the construction of the dwelling and is not considered excessive in light of the slope of the land. The floor plan includes both cut and fill and a stepped design to respond to topography.

The overall cut and fill is considered minor and is not considered to unreasonably impact on the occupiers of adjoining land.

Representations Received: 57 Hallett Road, Burnside (wish to be heard)


31


04 November 2014




6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use

In relation to the current proposal, the following comments are made:

The development involves the construction of a single dwelling on an existing residential allotment within the Watercourse Zone;

The nature of the proposed built form (detached dwelling) is consistent with the low density residential character envisaged for the policy area;

The existing allotment is of sufficient size and dimensions to accommodate a detached dwelling in accordance with the Policy Area and Council Wide guidelines;




7.2. Character

The proposed development involves the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling on an allotment which is currently vacant. Council is satisfied that the proposal has been designed to contribute to and be consistent with the primary objectives of the Watercourse Zone and Residential Policy Area 17. This position is based on the following considerations:

The proposed building is a detached dwelling as envisaged by the policy area and reflective of the dominant dwelling type of recently built dwellings within the locality;

Two-storey development forms part of the character of Residential Policy Area 17;

The proposed dwelling maintains appropriate set-backs to property boundaries;

Although the proposal does not strictly meet the 8m set-back guideline for Residential Policy Area 17, the front set-back comfortably fits into the streetscape in a locality which exhibits dwellings closer to road boundaries. The proposed dwelling is set-back slightly forward of the neighbouring property at 57 Hallett Road;

The dwelling will be sited towards the southern boundary to minimise impacts to Second Creek and ensuring minimal cut/fill and an appropriate access point and turning circle;

The contemporary style of the proposed dwelling is not considered to be in conflict with the varied styles of dwellings throughout the locality; and

The proposal is consistent with recently built two-storey development throughout the locality and greater policy area.

The dwelling is considered to be of a high architectural standard which will not impair the amenity of the locality by the construction of a large dwelling within the locality. The dwelling is not dissimilar in scale to other recently constructed two-storey dwellings within Residential Policy Area 17.

32


04 November 2014


7.3. Amenity

The proposal has been designed in a manner that will minimise its impact upon the amenity of the locality and adjoining properties. This position is based on the following considerations:

The use of appropriate building set-backs on all sides of the dwelling provides sufficient separation between buildings, which softens the visual impact of the built form when viewed from adjoining properties;

The dwelling has been designed to a high standard with respect to its overall appearance and functionality;

The proposal includes appropriate privacy treatments to the upper level to ensure adjoining properties are not adversely impacted by the development;

The dwelling appears as single-storey when viewed from the neighbouring property to the south, given the difference in land contours. A 2m upper level set-back to the southern boundary is therefore considered acceptable and will have no unreasonable impacts to the amenity of the neighbouring property;

The dwelling has been sited with acceptable side and rear set-backs in assessment against the relevant guidelines;

The proposal does not interfere with any Council street trees;

No boundary development is proposed as part of the development; and

Access to sunlight for adjoining dwellings is maintained within Development Plan guidelines given the natural land contours, dwelling siting and height.


The development is consistent with the relevant quantitative guidelines of the Development Plan. The land retains an excess of private open space above the amount envisaged for residential properties, and comfortably sits within site coverage guidelines for both the building footprint and total floor area. The design is not reliant on extensive earthworks or large scale boundary retaining walls to achieve the proposed site levels, and achieves a finished floor level that creates a balance between the natural land contours and that of the neighbouring dwelling to the south. The development fits upon the land as a workable site-planning outcome. This determination has been based on the following:

The overall footprint of the dwelling is below the guidelines of the Development Plan for site coverage and is not anticipated to generate negative stormwater impacts as a direct result;

The proposed boundary fencing is considered appropriate for a site with varied topography. The retaining walls and fencing are expected to protect the privacy of the occupiers of the land and adjoining properties whilst not being too large and overbearing;

The subject land is an existing residential allotment with sufficient site area and street frontage to accommodate a detached dwelling in accordance with the Zoning and Policy Area guidelines;

The proposal requires the creation of a new crossover from Hallett Road which is supported by Councils Senior Traffic Engineer. The crossover width will comply with Council crossover guidelines and as such the proposal will require minimal works to the Council verge thus reducing any potential impact to the public footpath;

Council’s engineers have reviewed all aspects of the proposal, and are satisfied and supportive of the proposal including driveway alteration, off-street parking, turning

33


04 November 2014


circles and stormwater disposal. An engineering advisory note has been included that is reflective of the comments received from Council’s Senior Engineer; and

The proposed residence features four (4) off-street parking spaces, two (2) undercover, and a turning area to minimise on-street parking and provide safe access.


The proposal was determined to be a Category 2 form of development pursuant to Watercourse Zone Principle of Development Control 9(a) as the proposed dwelling is two-storey in nature. The Category 2 notification period ran between 02/06/14 and 16/06/14 during which two (2) representations were received from owners of adjoining land. The primary issues raised during the public notification period are as follows:

Loss of privacy;

Loss of trees; and

Potential flood impact. The Applicant has supplied Council with amended plans in response to the concerns raised during the notification period. Council is satisfied that the proposed fencing and retaining walls are suitable to protect the privacy of both parties, whilst not creating visually dominant structures which may negatively impact upon the amenity of adjoining land. The introduction of fixed obscured glazing to the two upper level bedroom windows protects the privacy of the southern abutting property from upper level overlooking opportunities. The subject land does not include any trees which are protected under the Development Act 1993. The subject land does not experience any flooding during the 1:100 or 1:20 year flood events in accordance with Council’s flood mapping data. Council’s Senior Engineer is supportive of the proposal and has no issues in regard to potential flooding on the subject land. Council is satisfied that the planning matters raised through the public notification process are sufficiently addressed through the overall design of the development, insofar as they are to be determined under the Development Act 1993.


No external referrals were required under Section 37 of the Development Act 1993, however, input was sought from Council’s Senior Engineer with regard to matters of traffic, access, manoeuvrability and stormwater management.

Planning staff have been advised that the driveway should be limited to a width of no more than 4.5m at the property boundary. The Applicant is still required to obtain Section 221 clearance in accordance with the Local Government Act 1999 to create the proposed crossover. This recommendation includes a condition to that effect. No issues with the proposal were raised by Council’s Heritage Advisor.

34


04 November 2014


7.7. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\0843\14, by Tek Building & Design , is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions


2 The fixed osbcured glazing as depicted on the stamped and approved plans granted Development Plan Consent, described as south elevation, shall be installed prior to the occupation or use of the building herein granted Development Plan Consent and thereafter shall be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council at all times. Reason: To ensure the new development does not unreasonably diminish the privacy of residents in adjoining properties.

3 The establishment of all landscaping shall be undertaken within 3 months of the substantial completion of development and in any event prior to the occupation or use of the development. Such landscaping shall be maintained in good health and condition to the satisfaction of the Council at all times and any dead or diseased plants or trees shall be immediately replaced to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council. Reason: To provide amenity for the occupants of buildings and those of adjacent buildings through the provision of landscaping as part of the development.

4 The approved works may not commence until such time as the applicant has secured written authorisation for the construction of the new driveway crossover from the Council pursuant to Section 221 of the Local Government Act 1999.

35


04 November 2014


Reason: To ensure the applicant has secured all relevant consents/authorisations required prior to the commencement of development.


Troy Fountain Development Officer – Planning

36


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land


37


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2




Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of a low density, well-vegetated residential character that is derived particularly from: (a) detached, post-war dwellings, in a variety of architectural styles; the topographic and other natural features

of the foothills location, including stands of indigenous and other taller trees covering a large part of the Policy Area;

(b) moderate to deep building set-backs from streets; (c) open, well-vegetated, front gardens; (d) in some localities, predominantly split-level or two-storeyed dwellings which, by retaining open space of

sufficient size and location, promote the conservation of trees (as well as being visually compatible with their height).

Acknowledged, significant variations from the desired character, or the prevailing character or environmental conditions, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are found: (a) in the natural vegetation and features of Ferguson Conservation Park and local reserves; (b) in the vicinity of Stonyfell/Greenhill Quarry and the Stonyfell winery complex, where residential amenity may,

respectively, be affected by the existing extractive industries and adjacent activities; (c) in the area generally to the south of Heatherbank Terrace and east of Hallett Road, where various

encumbrance or land management agreement provisions apply; (d) on land adjacent to the Hills Face Zone, where there may be significant risk of bushfire; (e) on land with frontage to Greenhill Road; and (f) adjacent to the Local Centre Zone.

Objective 2: Protection and enhancement of trees, and the natural features and open character of creeks, Ferguson Conservation Park, and local reserves

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


The proposal maintains the existing density of the locality;

Two-storey dwellings feature throughout the Policy Area;

The majority of the lower level is to be located below road level therefore creating a perception that the dwelling is single-storey in nature;

The proposed dwelling complements the form and scale of existing single storey buildings within the streetscape through appropriate siting of the first floor component in a central location below road level;

The building design incorporates an appropriate degree of articulation to break up the visual massing of the two-storey form, as well as a diverse range of external building materials to provide visual interest across the façade;

The proposed dwelling will be set back from the street well sufficiently to be consistent with the abutting property; and

The dwelling enables an open, well vegetated front garden area.

38


04 November 2014



Satisfied.

The proposed dwelling conserves and enhances the character of the Policy Area.


Existing allotment.

Site Coverage PDC 8

The dwelling satisfies the maximum ground level site coverage calculation of 40%.

Building Set-backs PDC 9

Although the dwelling does not achieve the required 8m front boundary set-back, the ground level of the dwelling is located below street level and is not considered to be dominant in its presentation to the streetscape. The proposed set-back contrasts well with the abutting southern property.

39


04 November 2014


Summary of Watercourse Zone Objectives and Principles

Primary Watercourse Zone Objectives:

Objective 1: A zone comprising residential, open space, brewery and local shopping areas encompassing the floodplain of a 1-in-100-year return period flood from First Creek or Second Creek.

Objective 2: A zone where structures are located and designed in such a way as to minimise the potential for personal or property damage as a result of a flood.

Objective 3: Maintenance and enhancement of a character that is derived particularly from: (a) low-density, well-vegetated residential areas, public open space, and open, meandering creek channels

with earth and grassed embankments; and (b) the well-vegetated, relatively undeveloped or natural, open condition of the creek channels, banks and

immediate environs, historic gardens, and stands of significant indigenous and introduced vegetation.

Acknowledged, significant variations from the Desired Character, or the prevailing character or environmental conditions, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are found: (a) in Policy Areas 1 and 2, with their existing brewery and local shopping uses and buildings; and (b) in Hazelwood Park, Tusmore Park, and other reserves, which collectively or individually provide for a range

of active and passive recreation in natural or landscaped creekline settings.

Primary Watercourse Zone Principles:

Principle 1: Development should: (a) be primarily for residential use or open space, except in Policy Areas 1 and 2 where a continuation of non-

residential use is acceptable; (b) conserve and enhance the character of the zone, described in Objective 1, and the significant trees

therein; (c) avoid covering, damaging or encroaching upon the channel and banks of the watercourse unless for

essential access, maintenance, or flood or water quality management; and (d) protect and, where appropriate, rehabilitate, the natural character and environmental values of the

watercourse environs.

Principle 7: Residential development should generally accord with the relevant principles of development control for the Residential Zone, including those for the adjacent Residential Policy Area, more particularly: (a) Policy Area 10, if the site of the proposed development is in the suburb of Leabrook; (b) Policy Area 17, if the site of the proposed development is in the suburb of Stonyfell, or in the suburb of

Burnside, adjacent to Second Creek; (c) Policy Area 15 or Historic Conservation Policy Area 5, if the site of the proposed development is in the

suburb of Hazelwood Park or the suburb of Tusmore; (d) Policy Area 27, if the site of the proposed development is in the suburb of Beaumont, or in the suburb of

Burnside, adjacent to First Creek.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

Building Siting PDC 2–5

Council is satisfied that the development has been designed to be consistent with, and contribute to, achievement of the primary objectives for Residential Policy Area 17 and the Watercourse Zone, having due regard to siting, mass and proportion, materials, finished floor levels, roof form and pitch, façade articulation and built form features.

40


04 November 2014


The development is a detached dwelling that has been sited on an existing appropriately sized allotment and in accordance with prevailing patterns of space observed throughout the locality. The dwelling is to be located below street level with minimal cut/ fill to enable a consistent finished floor level for the ground level.

Both the dwelling and the allotment do not encroach into within the 1:20 or 1:100 return period flood plain areas as identified on Council’s mapping system.

Residential Development PDC 7

The dwelling complies with both the requirements of the Watercourse Zone and Residential Policy Area 17.

41


04 November 2014









Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

Building Set-backs PDC 123–125

Side Set-backs The upper level is proposed with a minimum set back of 2m to the southern boundary. The upper level is small in size and is not considered to adversely impact upon the amenity of the southern abutting property. The ground level of the neighbouring property directly south of the subject land is consistent with the upper level height of the proposed dwelling. The upper level of the dwelling will therefore present as a single-storey dwelling to the neighbouring property’s ground level.



Satisfied. 8.5m.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Council’s Traffic Management Engineer supports the proposal but has requested that the driveway width be restricted to no more than 4.5m at the front boundary to minimise impacts to street infrastructure.


All upper level windows located on the dwelling, face either Hallett Road or Second Creek with the exception of the southern elevation which includes two windows to bedrooms 2 and 3. These two windows are to include fixed obscured glazing to a height of 1700mm above the finished floor level of the upper level. These privacy treatments negate any direct overlooking.


Satisfied.

42


04 November 2014



Satisfied.

The proposed fencing and retaining walls are considered to meet a suitable medium between protecting privacy and avoiding visual dominance. The proposed retaining wall to the western rear corner of the dwelling is to have a maximum height of 1600mm and, given the location, will only be visible to the subject land,


Satisfied.




43


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 3




Site Area 662m2 750m2


Site Coverage

- Buildings only 20% 40%

- Buildings and driveways 23% 50%

Total Floor Area 38% 50%

Building Height

- storeys 2 storeys 2 storeys

- metres 8.5m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level


- side boundary 2m (south), 12m (north) 2m


Upper Level


- side boundary 2m (south), 12m (north) 4m


Boundary Wall

- length N/A - height

- location

Private Open Space

- percentage 60% of TFA 50% of TFA*

- dimensions 12m x 8m 5m x 8m


- number of parks 4 (2 undercover) 2

- width of driveway 4m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 19% of frontage 33% of frontage


44


04 November 2014




Applicant: Chasecrown

Location: 55 Hay Road, Linden Park

Proposal: Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a pair of two-storey detached dwellings including garages, alfresco, front fence (masonry, pillar and plinth) and side retaining wall (concrete) with fence on top (colorbond)


Residential Policy Area 21 – Linden Park






Referrals – Non Statutory: Traffic Management Engineer / Tree Management Officer



Recommending Officer: James Booker

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:










Photographs

45


04 November 2014




Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a pair of two-storey detached dwellings including garages, alfresco, front fence (masonry, pillar and plinth) and side retaining wall (concrete) with fence on top (colorbond).

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0887\14 was lodged on 26 August 2014, by Chasecrown on behalf of the owners of the subject land, seeking Development Plan Consent for the demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a pair of two-storey detached dwellings including garages, alfresco, front fence (masonry, pillar and plinth) and side retaining wall (concrete) with fence on top (colorbond). One previous application is related to this proposal, being Development Application 180/0448/14 for a “Land division (semi-detached) creating two (2) allotments from one (1) existing”. This land division was granted Development Approval on 16 June 2014. Schedule 1 of the Development Regulations 2008 describes semi-detached dwellings as being a dwelling:

(a) occupying a site that is held exclusively with that dwelling and has a frontage to a public road or to a road proposed in a plan of land division that is the subject of a current planning authorisation; and

(b) comprising 1 of 2 dwellings erected side by side, joined together and forming, by themselves, a single building;

The proposed buildings in this application do not form a single building, but rather the “party wall” is in effect two boundary walls abutting up against each other with colorbond capping and flashing. As such the nature of development has been identified as “detached dwellings” even though the dwellings appear to the streetscape in the same way that semi-detached dwellings do. The current proposal was determined to be neither a complying nor non-complying form of development, prompting an assessment on merit pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993. The development also was determined to be a Category 2 development pursuant to Residential Policy Area 21 Principle of Development Control 12(a) and (d) of the Burnside (City) Development Plan, due to the two-storey form of the dwellings and the fact that the titles of the previously approved land division are yet to be issued meaning that the site is legally one parcel of land. During the public notification period one (1) written representation was received in relation to the proposal. This representation is in favour of the proposal but has some concerns regarding the temporary fencing being placed during the demolition and construction phase. The applicant subsequently responded to the representation indicating that the existing fencing will remain intact with temporary fencing being erected at the front of the property and that the site safety will accord to the protocols of Safe Work SA. During the course of assessment the proposal was also referred to Council’s Traffic Management Engineer and Tree Management Officer to assess the suitability of access arrangements on the Council verge and existing street trees.

46


04 November 2014


Pursuant to Council’s Delegation policy, the application is presented to the Development Assessment Panel (the Panel) for consideration as a Category 2 development with unresolved representations.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject site is a rectangular shaped allotment located on the northern side of Hay Road with an area of 1308m² and a frontage of 20.42m. It currently accommodates a detached dwelling circa 1957. The subject land is wholly contained within Residential Policy Area 21 – Linden Park. The land has a slight slope from south to north and has minimal mature vegetation.

3.2. Locality

The locality comprises the streetscape of Hay Road, from the intersection with Devereux Road to the east and Rayne Avenue to the west. The locality has been defined on the basis of a direct visual connection with the subject land. The surrounding locality is predominantly comprised of low density, single and two-storeyed detached dwellings of a variety of styles as well as residential flat buildings directly opposite the site on Collyer Court. Front yards are generally open with modest set-backs to front boundaries. Mature street trees enhance the character of the immediate locality. The large public open space of Miller Reserve adds to the attractiveness of the locality.


Kind: Merit





Reason: Residential Policy Area 21 Principle of Development Control 12(a) and (d).

Cut / Fill: Although a degree of cut and fill is to be introduced to the site, it is incidental to the construction of the dwelling and is not considered excessive in light of the negligible slope of the land. The floor plan generally adheres to the natural contours of the land.

The overall cut and fill is considered minor and is not considered to unreasonably impact on the occupiers of adjoining land.

Representations Received: Name suppressed (wish to be heard)



Applicant’s response to representations are provided as an attachment to the Panel.

47


04 November 2014


6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use

In relation to the current proposal, the following comments are made: The development involves the construction of two dwellings on an existing

residential allotment which has recently received sub-division approval within the Residential Zone;

The nature of the proposed built form (detached dwellings) is consistent with the low to medium density residential character envisaged for the Policy Area;

The approved allotments are of sufficient size and dimensions to accommodate dwellings which are in general accordance with the Policy Area and Council Wide guidelines;




7.2. Character

The proposed development involves the construction of two two-storey dwellings on an allotment which currently contains a single detached dwelling. The allotment has sub-division approval which reflects the proposed development at hand. Council is satisfied that the proposal has been designed to contribute to and be consistent with the primary objectives of Residential Policy Area 21. This position is based on the following considerations:

The proposed buildings appear to the streetscape as semi-detached dwellings as envisaged by the Policy Area and reflective of the scale of recently built dwellings within the locality on the southern side of Hay Road east of the subject land;

Two-storey development has become increasingly common with recently built dwellings, and forms part of the character of Residential Policy Area 21;

The proposed dwellings maintain appropriate set-backs to the front, side and rear boundaries of the site reducing the visual presence of the two-storey development;

The dwellings will be centrally sited on the land to provide visual balance and maintain siting patterns within the locality;

The proposed front fence is considered acceptable in a locality with varied styles of fencing. The proposed front fencing manages to maintain an open feel to the locality whilst keeping the site secure;

The proposed contemporary style of the proposed dwelling is not considered to be in conflict with the varied styles of dwellings throughout the locality; and

The proposal is consistent with recently built two-storey development throughout the locality and greater policy area.

48


04 November 2014


7.3. Amenity

The proposal has been designed in a manner that will minimise its impact upon the amenity of the locality and adjoining properties. This position is based on the following considerations:

The use of varied building set-backs and articulation on all sides softens the visual impact of the built form when viewed from adjoining properties;

The dwellings have been designed to a high standard in respect of its overall appearance and functionality;

The proposal includes appropriate privacy treatments to the upper level to ensure adjoining properties are not adversely impacted by the development. This has been reinforced by way of condition;

The upper level component has been centrally sited and adheres to Council’s upper level set-back guidelines;

The western dwelling proposes a double garage whilst the eastern dwelling proposes a single garage. Although the double garage in itself exceeds the 33% garage door to frontage guideline, the whole development presents 36.7% of the frontage of the site as garage doors. This variance is considered to be minor and unlikely to have an adverse impact upon the streetscape;

The proposal does not interfere with any Council street trees;

It is not expected that the proposal will create any stormwater management issues affecting adjoining properties as prior to the issuance of Development Approval the proposal is required to meet the standards of the Building Code of Australia;

The proposal does not include any boundary development; and

Submitted shadow diagrams show that access to sunlight for adjoining dwellings is maintained within Development Plan guidelines.


The development fits upon the land as a workable site-planning outcome. This determination has been based on the following: The overall footprint of development sits well within the guidelines of the

Development Plan for site coverage and is not anticipated to generate negative stormwater impacts as a direct result;

As minimal site works are required to accommodate the proposed finished floor level, little earthworks are required;

The approved sub-division creates two allotments with sufficient site area and street frontage to accommodate two dwellings in the suggested arrangement which adheres to the Policy Area guidelines;

The proposal includes a 4.5m driveway crossover and a clearance from the nearest street tree in accordance with Development Plan guidelines; and

The proposed residences feature four off-street parking spaces to minimise on-street parking congestion within Hay Road.


The proposal was determined to be a Category 2 type of development pursuant to Residential Policy Area 21 Principle of Development Control 12(a) and (d) as the proposal is two-storey in nature and involves the construction of two dwellings on one parcel of land. During the notification period Council received one (1) written submission from owners/occupiers of adjoining land. The only issue raised during public notification was ensuring that during the demolition and construction phase that temporary fencing is used.

49


04 November 2014


Council’s Development Plan does not include any provisions relating to the erection of temporary fencing during construction other than when protection is required for a regulated tree. Therefore the concern is not a consideration for the planning assessment. Nevertheless the applicant has responded to the representor ensuring that all fencing complies with Safe Work SA protocols. Council therefore is satisfied that the planning matters raised through the public notification process are sufficiently addressed through the overall design of the development, insofar as they are to be determined under the Development Act 1993.


Council’s Traffic Management Engineer has reviewed the proposal and has not raised any concerns in relation to off-street parking or traffic congestion within the locality. Standard Engineering recommendations have been included as an advisory note. Council’s Street Tree Management Officer has also provided the recommendation that the proposed driveway should maintain the proposed 1.64m set-back from the face of the trunk of the tree rather than from the centre of the trunk. This has also been included as an advisory note.

7.7. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. that Development Application 180\0887\14, by Chasecrown, is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions


2 The approved works may not commence until such time as the applicant has secured written authorisation for the construction of the new driveway crossover from the Council pursuant to Section 221 of the Local Government Act 1999. Reason: To ensure the applicant has secured all relevant consents/authorisations required prior to the commencement of development.

50


04 November 2014


Engineering Requirements

The development is to utilise the existing crossover in its current location and form. Any modification to the existing access is to be approved by Council.

Existing footpath levels, grades etc. should not be altered as a result of new development works.

Stormwater pipe across the road verge should terminate at an approved galvanised steel kerb adaptor.

If the cover to the stormwater pipe across the Council verge is less than 50mm, then steel pipe housing to be used per Council standard

Excess stormwater runoff from the roof catchment to be discharged to the street water table through sealed system to the satisfaction of the Council.

For stormwater management purposes, it is desirable that the development utilise permeable paving for the proposed external paving work

within the development.

Tree Requirements

The 1.64m set-back from the street tree that is shown on the drawings shall be measured from the face of the trunk of the tree, not its centre.


James Booker Development Officer – Planning

51


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

Representor’s Land (Supressed)

52


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2




Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of the low scale and low-to-medium density residential character that is derived particularly from: (a) residential development, including detached dwellings, in a wide variety of styles, predominantly of the

interwar period, near Greenhill Road, and the post-war period; (b) limited opportunity for a greater range and increased density of residential development, notwithstanding

the proximity of the Policy Area to the District Centre Zone and to public transport services; (c) moderate building set-backs to streets; and (d) generally open, well-established, front gardens, and grassed verges.

Acknowledged, significant variations from the desired character, or the prevailing character or environmental conditions, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are found: (a) on land with frontage to Portrush Road and to Greenhill Road, including the two unbuilt-on and partly

landscaped allotments of Council-owned on the corner of those roads; and (b) in the interface with the Local Centre Zone.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

The proposed development will continue the existing residential use of the land.


Satisfied. The locality contains varied housing stock with larger two storey development within the locality closer to Devereux Road. As the proposal includes set-backs largely consistent with Development Plan guidelines, the proposed dwellings are not expected to have an adverse visual impact upon adjoining properties or a significant streetscape impact.


The proposal meets the site areas and frontages for semi-detached dwellings in the arrangement approved under Development Application 180\0448\14. As these dwellings have been designed to appear the same as semi-detached dwellings, it is considered that they meet the required site area and frontages.

53


04 November 2014







Objective 4: Provision of residential and community facilities and services for the aged community.


Objective 6: A zone accommodating non-residential activities which are small in scale, benign in external impact, and serve the needs of the local community.

Objective 7: Reduction of the impact of established non-residential uses on the amenity of residential areas.

Objective 8: Use of design, management and other techniques to improve all aspects of the environmental performance of development.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.


Council is satisfied that the development has been designed to be consistent with the the primary objectives for Residential Policy Area 21, having due regard to siting, mass and proportion, materials, finished floor levels, roof form and pitch, façade articulation and built form features.

The proposed dwellings are sited on an appropriately sized parcel of land which meets the Policy Area’s guidelines for subdivision. The proposed dwellings are substantially in accordance with Council’s set-back guidelines and the dwellings have been designed in accordance with the prevailing patterns of space observed throughout the locality and wider Policy Area.


Satisfied. The proposed dwellings follow a stepped design which adheres to the natural contours of the land.

54


04 November 2014









Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

Building Set-backs PDC 123–125 Front Set-backs

Satisfied.

Side Set-backs Minor Variance. The proposed eastern dwelling does not strictly meet both the ground level and upper level side set-back. This is considered to be acceptable for the following reasons:

The proposed ground level set-back is a similar distance to the side set-back of the existing dwelling on site;

The proposal does not exhibit an unreasonable degree of overshadowing to the property to the east; and

The proposal maintains acceptable patterns of space between built form within Hay Road.



Satisfied.


Satisfied.

Private Open Space PDC 128, 129

Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied. The proposal includes fixed obscured glazing to upper level windows which has been reinforced via condition.


Satisfied. Because of the north-south orientation of the land the proposal does not unreasonably overshadow adjoining properties.

55


04 November 2014



Satisfied. The proposed retaining walls and fencing is considered suitable to maintain privacy to the adjoining property whilst not appearing visually dominant.




56


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 3


Site Characteristics Proposed dwelling (west)

Proposed dwelling (east)

Guideline

Street Frontage 10.21m 10.21m 9m

(semi-detached)

Site Area 654m2 654m2 400m2

(semi-detached)

Design Characteristics Proposed Proposed Guideline

Site Coverage

- Buildings only 27.1% 23.9% 40%

- Buildings and driveways 38% 32.9% 50%

Building Height

- storeys 2 storey 2 storey 2 storeys

- metres 6.95m 6.95m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 8.5m 7.5m 6m

- side boundary 1.5m (west), 0m (party wall)

1.2m (east), 0m (part wall)

1.5m

- rear boundary 32m 34m 4m

Upper level

- side boundary 4m (west) 0m (party wall)

3.3m (east) 0m (party wall)

4m

- rear boundary 31.3m 33m 8m

Private Open Space

- percentage 46.4% of TFA 42.4% of TFA 50% of TFA*

- dimensions 32m x 10m 34m x 10m 5m x 8m


- number of parks 4 2 2

- width of driveway 4.5m 4.5m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 27.4% of frontage 46% of frontage 33% of frontage


57


58


04 November 2014






Proposal: Non-complying – alterations and additions to existing bakery/coffee shop to include upper level ancillary office space

Zone/Policy Area: Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone


Kind of Assessment: Non-complying

Public Notification: Category One (1)

Appeal Opportunity None

Referrals – Non Statutory: Local Heritage Consultant

Delegations Policy: Non-complying development


Recommending Officer: Theresa James

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:







Team Leader report for non-complying application to proceed

Photographs

59


04 November 2014




Upper level office space and lavatory.

2. BACKGROUND

On 25 March 2014 the subject development application was lodged with Council. Additional information was requested of the applicant, which was submitted in May 2014. Upon receipt of the additional information, the application was determined to be non-complying development as the total floor area of the building, at the completion of the development, would exceed 450m². This classification is pursuant to Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone Principle of Development Control 14. The applicant supplied a brief statement of support, in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Development Regulations, 2008. In June 2014 Council determined to proceed with the assessment of the non-complying development in accordance with Sub-Delegations Policy 60.1.2. Council’s Team Leader – Planning determined the non-complying development application to be Category 1 as it satisfies Schedule 9, Part 1(3)(a), the Development Regulations 2008. The application has been referred to Council’s heritage advisor who supports the amended design, which comprises an upper level office area positioned towards the rear of the Local Heritage Place building. An assessment of the development has been made against the relevant provisions within the Development Plan, and a recommendation has been prepared for the Development Assessment Panel (DAP) to make a decision on the application. A separate application (DA 180\0286\14) has also been lodged, which seeks to construct a garage to the rear of the existing buildings. That application is also included in the November 2014 DAP Agenda.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land comprises a large, rectangular shaped allotment located on the northern side of Glen Osmond Road. The land is located within the Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone, with vehicle access to the rear of the site via Glen Osmond Road. A 3.66m wide ‘right of way’ is located along the eastern side of the land, which spans the entire distance of the allotment, allowing vehicular access to the rear of adjoining land to the east. The land has an overall area of 977.28m2 and a frontage to Glen Osmond Road of 19.2m. An existing Local Heritage Place building is located on the land. The external form, fabric and function of the circa 1910 shop, including the original shopfront and parapet, are key features of the heritage significance. The existing building extends for the majority of the length of the allotment, with a 7.4m set-back from the rear boundary. A storage container is located adjacent the rear boundary fence, and other small items are located between. Several car parking bays are positioned on the site, adjacent the eastern elevation of the building.

3.2. Locality

The immediate locality comprises the streetscape of Glen Osmond Road, which can be described as a busy commercial ribbon shopping precinct, due to the continuous stretch of commercial premises.

60


04 November 2014


The southern side of Glen Osmond Road is located within the City of Unley Local Government Area, and includes buildings and businesses of a similar form and scale as the northern side of Glen Osmond Road, creating an intimate yet busy commercial precinct.


Kind: Non-complying

Reason: Business Glen Osmond Zone Principle of Development Control 14




Reason: Part 1, (3)(a), Schedule 9, the Development Regulations, 2008

Cut / Fill: N/A

Representations Received: N/A


6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The proposed upper level office space is to be used in association with the existing shop use, allowing a place for the business functions of the shop to operate from;

The proposed office space is a subordinate and ancillary use, and does not alter the primary use of the land;

The additional floor area is only marginally greater than the non-complying threshold for the Zone; and

The built form associated with the development is substantially set-back from the building façade which is expected to have minimal visual impact on the built-form streetscape character of the locality.


7.2. Character

The proposed upper level office addition is set-back approximately 23m from the front boundary and 19m from the rear boundary. The building work is positioned towards the northern side boundary, and spans along that boundary for a distance of approximately 7m. Buildings on either side of the subject land are prominent two-storeyed buildings, and as such the proposed building works is predominantly shielded by existing two-storey buildings on adjoining land. In addition to the above, Council’s heritage advisor has reviewed the proposal in its amended form, and considers it to be an appropriate response to alterations and additions to the rear portion of the Local Heritage Place building.

61


04 November 2014


Given the above, the proposed development is not likely to impact on the existing character of the amenity, and the portions of the development that may be visible from public areas is in a form that respects the existing heritage value of the building.

7.3. Amenity

Whilst the development results in a 6m high wall located on a common boundary, its adjacency to an open car parking area, associated with the adjoining shops at 73-79 Glen Osmond Road, ensures that its visual impact is localised to a car park, and not a main outdoor entertaining area, or high-use public place. The proposed administration area is not anticipated to generate additional car parking demand, as the area is to be used ancillary to the existing bakery/coffee shop. As the proposed building work’s purpose is not to increase the seating capacity associated with the cafe, but rather to allow for additional administrative functions associated with the existing use, the proposal is expected to have minimal impact on the intensity of the existing use.


The Application was referred to Council’s independent heritage advisor. Initial concerns were raised regarding the use of concrete panels to the exterior of the addition; however the heritage advisor is now supportive of the amended plans which use corrugated galvanised sheeting.

7.5. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Subject to concurrence from the Development Assessment Commission, that Development Application 180\0285\14, by Progetto Design, is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions


2 The proposed office area is to be used ancillary to the existing bakery/coffee shop and is not to be used by independent/other entities.

62


04 November 2014


Reason: To ensure the development does not unduly diminish the enjoyment of other land in the vicinity.


Theresa James Development Officer – Planning

63


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

64


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2


Summary of Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone Objectives and Principles

Primary Zone Objectives:

Objective 1: A zone accommodating offices, commercial and residential development of a low traffic-generating nature with limited vehicle movements which do not disrupt the free flow of traffic on Glen Osmond Road or generate unduly large traffic volumes in residential streets.

Objective 2: Development undertaken in a manner which preserves and enhances the character and amenity of residential areas in adjoining zones.

Objective 3: Buildings of a high standard of design in scale with adjoining development.

Objective 4: Orderly and proper development of the zone through comprehensive redevelopment and rehabilitation of existing buildings.

Objective 5: A zone with an attractive character and amenity, not marred by large or inappropriately located signs.

Objective 6: Complementary development on each side of Glen Osmond Road.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 1 PDC 1

Satisfied.

The proposed office is an ancillary use to the existing bakery/coffee shop providing an administration area associated with the business.

Building Appearance O 2, 3 & 6 PDC 2-3

Satisfied. Due to the deep set-back associated with the proposed upper level addition, some 23.5m from the front property boundary, it is not expected to be conspicuous from the street, particularly due to the presence of two-storey buildings located on either side of the subject land.


Satisfied. The proposed upper level addition measures 6m above the ground level, which is below the 8m building height Zone provision.

On-site Parking PDC 6–9

As the proposed office area will not be occupied by customers of the shop, but rather it will provide an administrative area for the business operations of the cafe, it is not anticipated to generate additional car parking demand.

65


04 November 2014



Primary Development Objectives:

Objective 5: Development which promotes community identity and exhibits a high quality of design.



Objective 23: The preservation, conservation and enhancement of State and local heritage places identified in Tables Bur/2 and 3 respectively, buildings or sites of scientific or cultural heritage value, and areas valued for their built or environmental character.

Objective 35: Adequate parking for vehicles.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

The proposed ancillary office will not alter the existing use of the land. The office space will enable management and administration functions associated with the existing bakery/coffee shop to be undertaken on-site, yet separated from the main restaurant area.

Building Design PDC 56–57, 70-74 & 76 Satisfied.

Due to the deep front set-back of the proposed addition, together with the use of traditional heritage galvanised roof sheeting, the appearance of the addition will be minimal when viewed from Glen Osmond Road. The portion of the building that contributes to the heritage value of the place is retained, with the proposed upper level office addition located to the rear of the building. The proposed design and materials proposed are visually compatible with the place, and is supported by Council’s independent heritage advisor.

66


04 November 2014






Proposal: Non-complying – addition to existing bakery/coffee shop to include ancillary garage

Zone/Policy Area: Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone



Public Notification: Category One (1)

Appeal Opportunity Third party only, no Applicant appeal rights

Referrals – Non Statutory: Local Heritage Consultant



Recommending Officer: Theresa James

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:







Team Leader report for non-complying application to proceed

Photographs

67


04 November 2014




Addition of attached garage to rear of land.

2. BACKGROUND

On 25 March 2014 the subject development application was lodged with Council. Additional information was requested of the applicant, which was submitted in May 2014. Upon receipt of the additional information, the application was determined to be non-complying development as the total floor area of the building, at the completion of the development, would exceed 450m². This classification is pursuant to Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone Principle of Development Control 14. The applicant supplied a brief statement of support, in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Development Regulations, 2008. In June 2014 Council determined to proceed with the assessment of the non-complying development in accordance with Sub-Delegations Policy 60.1.2. Council’s Team Leader – Planning determined the non-complying development application to be Category 1 as it satisfies Schedule 9, Part 1(3)(a), the Development Regulations, 2008. The application has been referred to Council’s heritage advisor who supports the amended design, which comprises an attached garage located at the rear of the Local Heritage Place building. An assessment of the development has been made against the relevant provisions within the Development Plan, and a recommendation has been prepared for the Development Assessment Panel (DAP) to make a decision on the application. A separate application (DA 180\0285\14) has also been lodged, which seeks to construct an upper level administration area atop the existing buildings. That application is also included in the November 2014 DAP Agenda.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land comprises a large, rectangular shaped allotment located on the northern side of Glen Osmond Road. The land is located within the Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone, with vehicle access to the rear of the site via Glen Osmond Road. A 3.66m wide ‘right of way’ is located along the eastern side of the land, which spans the entire distance of the allotment allowing vehicular access to the rear of adjoining land to the east. The land has an overall area of 977.28m2 and a frontage to Glen Osmond Road of 19.2m. An existing Local Heritage Place building is located on the land. The external form, fabric and function of the circa 1910 shop, including the original shopfront and parapet are key features of the heritage significance. The existing building extends for the majority of the length of the allotment, with a 7.4m set-back from the rear boundary. A storage container is located adjacent the rear boundary fence, and other small items are located between. Several car parking bays are positioned on the site, adjacent the eastern elevation of the building.

3.2. Locality

The immediate locality comprises the streetscape of Glen Osmond Road, which can be described as a busy commercial ribbon shopping precinct due to the continuous stretch of commercial premises.

68


04 November 2014


The southern side of Glen Osmond Road is located within the City of Unley Local Government Area, and includes buildings and businesses of a similar form and scale as the northern side of Glen Osmond Road, creating an intimate yet busy commercial precinct.


Kind: Non-complying

Reason: Business Glen Osmond Zone Principle of Development Control 14




Reason: Part 1, (3)(a), Schedule 9, the Development Regulations, 2008

Cut / Fill: N/A

Representations Received: N/A


6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The proposed garage area is to be used in association with the existing shop use, allowing for two covered car parking spaces, where an empty space and shipping container are currently located;

The proposed garage will not alter the existing use of the land;

The additional floor area is only marginally greater than the non-complying threshold for the Zone; and

The built form associated with the development is substantially set-back from the building façade and unlikely to be visible at all from the adjoining public road.


7.2. Character

The proposed garage addition, located at the rear of the site, is positioned behind the existing building and does not exceed a single storey building height. The proposed garage spans along the rear northern boundary for a distance of 9.2m and along the western side boundary for a distance of 7.49m. Due to the presence of prominent two-storey buildings located on either side of the subject land, the proposed building works is shielded and as such will not be visible from Glen Osmond Road. Council’s heritage advisor has reviewed the proposed development due to its location on land that occupies a Local Heritage Place. The proposed location, form and materials are considered appropriate, and the garage addition is not expected to have any detrimental effect on the heritage significance of the heritage place.

69


04 November 2014


7.3. Amenity

Due to the location of the proposed garage on the north and west boundaries of the land, it will be visible from adjoining land. As the adjoining land to the west comprises a large bituminised car parking area associated with a group of shops on that land, and the proposed western boundary wall will continue existing boundary development associated with the subject land, the boundary wall on the western boundary is not expected to have any negative amenity impacts to adjoining land users. The portion of the garage wall located on the northern boundary entails a height of 4.2m and abuts residential land fronting Main Street, Eastwood. The proposed 4.2m height of the development on the northern boundary is higher than boundary walls typically found on residential land. However, the new 4.2m boundary wall will provide an improved outlook for adjoining residents who currently have views of dilapidated fencing and a shipping container. Furthermore, the masonry construction on the boundary wall will provide an improved acoustic barrier for adjoining residents. Whilst the height of the wall exceeds typical boundary wall heights associated with residential development, the improved appearance of the boundary treatment, together with the enhanced acoustic screening is considered to be, on balance, acceptable.


The Application was referred to Council’s independent heritage advisor. Initial concerns were raised regarding the use of concrete panels to the exterior of the development; however, the heritage advisor is now supportive of the amended plans which use corrugated galvanised sheeting on the eastern elevation.

7.5. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Subject to concurrence from the Development Assessment Commission, that Development Application 180\0285\14, by Progetto Design, is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions


70


04 November 2014


2 The proposed garage is to be used ancillary to the existing bakery/coffee shop and is not to be used by independent/other entities. Reason: To ensure the development does not unduly diminish the enjoyment of other land in the vicinity.


Theresa James Development Officer – Planning

71


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

72


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2


Summary of Business (Glen Osmond Road) Zone Objectives and Principles

Primary Zone Objectives:

Objective 1: A zone accommodating offices, commercial and residential development of a low traffic-generating nature with limited vehicle movements which do not disrupt the free flow of traffic on Glen Osmond Road or generate unduly large traffic volumes in residential streets.

Objective 2: Development undertaken in a manner which preserves and enhances the character and amenity of residential areas in adjoining zones.

Objective 3: Buildings of a high standard of design in scale with adjoining development.

Objective 4: Orderly and proper development of the zone through comprehensive redevelopment and rehabilitation of existing buildings.

Objective 5: A zone with an attractive character and amenity, not marred by large or inappropriately located signs.

Objective 6: Complementary development on each side of Glen Osmond Road.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 1 PDC 1

Satisfied.

The proposed garage development is located to the rear of the site and does not alter the use of the land, rather it enables covered car parking associated with the existing building.

Building Appearance O 2, 3 & 6 PDC 2-3

Satisfied.

The proposed garage addition is located in the rear corner of the land and will be visible from the car parking area on the adjoining land to the east and west, as well as the residential land to the north.

The clean finish of the garage wall on the external boundaries (north and west) will improve the appearance of the site when viewed from adjoining land, as it will replace existing dilapidated fencing and a shipping container. \


Satisfied. The proposed garage measures 4.2m above the ground level, which is below the 8m building height Zone provision.

On-site Parking PDC 6–9

The proposed garage will allow for an additional parking bay, where currently a shipping container occupies the site.

73


04 November 2014



Primary Development Objectives:

Objective 5: Development which promotes community identity and exhibits a high quality of design.



Objective 23: The preservation, conservation and enhancement of State and local heritage places identified in Tables Bur/2 and 3 respectively, buildings or sites of scientific or cultural heritage value, and areas valued for their built or environmental character.

Objective 35: Adequate parking for vehicles.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

The proposed garage at the rear of the site will not alter the existing use of the land. The garage will provide a covered car parking area for two (2) vehicles associated with the shop, likely to be used by owners/ employees of the shop. The proposed garage will not alter the existing use of the land.

Building Design PDC 56–57, 70-74 & 76 Satisfied.

Although the proposed garage is sufficiently separated from the front portion of the Local Heritage Place building, the applicant has nonetheless proposed a finish that is sympathetic to the existing building material.

74


04 November 2014




Applicant: Passivhaus Australia

C/- Bernward Bucheler

Location: 27 Mount Osmond Road, Mount Osmond

Proposal: Non-complying – alterations and additions to existing dwelling involving internal alterations and enclosure of terrace

Zone/Policy Area: Hills Face Zone




Appeal Opportunity None

Referrals – Statutory: Country Fire Service

Referrals – Non Statutory: N/A



Recommending Officer: James Moss

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:






External agency referral reports

Photographs

75


04 November 2014



The proposal involves the following alterations and additions to the lower ground floor of an existing three storey detached dwelling on an existing residential allotment at 27 Mount Osmond Road, Mount Osmond:

Internal alterations creating a bedroom, en-suite and kitchenette; and

Enclosure of space underneath existing terrace to create a sunroom.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0532\14 was lodged on 02 June 2014 and determined to be a non-complying development pursuant to Hills Face Zone Principle of Development Control 27 which states:

The following kinds of development are non-complying in the Hills Face Zone:

Detached Dwelling or additions to, or conversion of, an existing detached dwelling where: (b) the scale and design is such that:

(ii) there is a floor level directly above another floor level, except where the upper floor level is located wholly at or below finished ground level[.]

By enclosing the space beneath the existing terrace on the western side of the dwelling the proposal would, in effect, be creating a situation with one floor level directly above another. Despite this non-complying classification, the proposal was deemed to have sufficient merit to warrant a full assessment, given the modest scale of the dwelling and limited visibility within the local environment. The Team Leader – Planning, subsequently determined to proceed with a full assessment of the application in accordance with Council’s Development Delegations Policy. The development was determined to be a Category 1 development for the purposes of public notification pursuant to Schedule 9, Part 1, 2 (g) of the Development Regulations 2008. In accordance with Regulation 17(6) of the Development Regulations 2008, a statement of effect was not deemed necessary. Pursuant to Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations 2008 the application was referred to the Country Fire Service (CFS), as it comprised the alteration of an existing dwelling within a High Bushfire Risk Area. A full assessment of the proposed development has now been undertaken, and the application is presented to the Development Assessment Panel (the Panel) for consideration as a non-complying development.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is a large irregular shaped allotment on the western side of Mount Osmond Road, within the Hills Face Zone. The land has an approximate area of 3090m2, a combined dual frontage to both Mount Osmond Road and Stymie Place of approximately 116m and a tertiary frontage to St Andrews Avenue of approximately 78m. The land is occupied by a three-storey detached dwelling constructed during the 1950s, with exposed freestone walls and terra cotta tiled roof, as well as a recently constructed double garage and above-ground 145 litre water storage tank.

76


04 November 2014


A moderate degree of vegetation is distributed around the curtilage of the property, with a relatively solid vegetation barrier along the western boundary abutting St Andrews Avenue.

3.2. Locality

The locality is characterised by large irregular shaped allotments within a hills face setting. The locality assumes a predominantly natural character with the varied topographical nature of the Hills Face Zone and residential development of varying scale at very low density.


Kind: Non-complying

Reason: Burnside (City) Development Plan, Hills Face Zone Principle of Development Control 27




Reason: Development Regulations 2008, Schedule 9, Part 1, 2(g)

6. AGENCY REFERRALS

External agency referrals are provided as an attachment to the Panel.


7.1. Land Use

In relation to the current proposal, the following comments are made: The development provides facilities required for the continued accommodation and

welfare of an existing resident with special needs; The development remains consistent with the established residential use of the land,

and does not, in itself, create an additional self-contained residence on the land; The development does not alter the overall form, function or external appearance of

the existing dwelling to any substantial degree; The proposal does not affect the established pattern of subdivision within the locality

and will not generate a need for additional services; and If it can be demonstrated that the proposed development has minimal or no

unreasonable external impacts, then consent could reasonably be expected. The proposed development is therefore not considered to be seriously at variance to the Burnside (City) Development Plan.

7.2. Character and Amenity

The works are considered to be minor in nature despite the non-complying classification, and are not anticipated to have any adverse impact on the natural character of the zone. The development does not increase the height of the existing building, nor does it spread beyond the existing building envelope. Enclosing the terrace constitutes a minor and acceptable increase to the overall visual bulk of the building, and has been designed to integrate fully with the existing built form through the use of sympathetic colours and materials.

77


04 November 2014


The development will not be visible from Mount Osmond Road or Stymie Place due to the orientation of the existing dwelling and the location of the works. The development will have minimal visual presence from St Andrews Avenue to the west, on account of the rise in topography above the road level and the dense line of vegetation spanning much of the western boundary of the site.


As part of the assessment process, the CFS have reviewed the proposal and communicated their requirements with regard to bushfire protection measures. The existing access and water supply has been deemed satisfactory, however, the CFS requires that specific conditions be imposed to ensure appropriate management of landscaping, and that the works are undertaken in accordance with Australian Standard™3959 (AS3959) “Construction of buildings in bushfire prone areas”.

7.4. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Subject to concurrence from the Development Assessment Commission, that Development Application 180\0532\14, by Passivhaus Australia C/- Bernward Bucheler, is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions


2 Landscaping shall include bushfire protection features that will prevent or inhibit the spread of bushfire and minimise the risk of life and/or damage to buildings and property as follows:

Trees and shrubs shall not be planted closer to the building(s) than the distance equivalent to their mature height.

All branches overhanging the roof shall be removed or trimmed clear of the roof, beyond the line of the gutters.

Grasses within 20m of the dwelling or to the property boundaries, whichever comes first, shall be reduced to a height of 10cms during the Fire Danger Season.

Maintain existing garden to be free of accumulated dead vegetation.

78


04 November 2014


Reason: To ensure requirements of the CFS are upheld.

3 The buildings shall incorporate the construction requirements for building in Bushfire Prone Areas, in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, South Australian Housing Code and Australian Standard™3959 (AS3959) “Construction of buildings in bushfire prone areas”. Compliance with the fire protection requirements is not a guarantee that the dwelling will not burn, but provides a ‘refuge’ from the approach, impact and passing of a bushfire. Should there be any need for further information, please contact the Building Fire Safety Unit on (08) 8391 6077. Reason: To ensure requirements of the CFS are upheld.


James Moss Development Officer – Planning

79


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

80


04 November 2014


APPENDIX 2


Summary of Zone Objectives and Principles

Primary Hills Face Zone Objectives and Principles:

Hills Face Zone - Objective 1: A zone in which the natural character is preserved and enhanced or in which a natural character is re-established in order to: (a) provide a natural backdrop to the Adelaide Plains and a contrast to the urban area; (b) preserve and develop native vegetation and fauna habitats close to metropolitan Adelaide; (c) provide for passive recreation in an area of natural character close to the metropolitan area; (d) provide a part of the buffer area between metropolitan districts and prevent the urban area extending into

the western slopes of the ranges; and (e) ensure that the community is not required to bear the cost of providing services to land within the zone.

Hills Face Zone - Objective 2: A zone accommodating low-intensity agricultural activities and public/private open space and one where structures are located and designed in such a way as to: (a) preserve and enhance the natural character or assist in the re-establishment of a natural character in the

zone; (b) limit the visual intrusion of development in the zone, particularly when viewed from roads within the zone or

from the Adelaide Plains; (c) not create, either in themselves, or in association with other developments, a potential demand for the

provision of services at a cost to the community; and (d) prevent the loss of life and property resulting from bushfires. The western slopes of the Mount Lofty

Ranges in metropolitan Adelaide are an important natural asset to both the population of the urban area and the tourism industry. Development which is undertaken in this zone should not only preserve but should also enhance the natural character of the zone or assist in the re-establishment of a natural character.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Desired Land Use O 1, 2

Satisfied.

Local Compatibility PDC 1 - 26

Satisfied.

81


04 November 2014









Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

Building Set-backs PDC 123–125

Side Set-backs Satisfied.



Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.



82

development assessment panel meeting agenda · development assessment panel agenda 04 november 2014...

Documents