notice of council assessment panel meeting · sushil & karuna jasiwal – 37a glenunga avenue,...

Council Assessment Panel Agenda 04 February 2020

Notice of Council Assessment Panel

Meeting

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN

that a meeting of the

COUNCIL ASSESSMENT PANEL

of the

CITY OF BURNSIDE

will be held in the Council Chamber 401 Greenhill Road, Tusmore

on

Tuesday 04 February 2020 at 6.00 pm

Magnus Heinrich

Assessment Manager

1


Disclaimer:

Please note that the contents of this Council Assessment Panel agenda have yet to be considered and deliberated by the Council Assessment Panel therefore the recommendations may be adjusted or changed by the Council Assessment Panel in the process of making the formal Council Assessment Panel decision.

Council is committed to openness and transparency in its decision-making processes, however some documents contained within attachments to Council Assessment Panel agenda items are subject to copyright laws and are not available in the agenda published on council’s website.

The full Council Assessment Panel agenda is available for viewing at Customer Service located at the Civic Centre during ordinary business hours.

City of Burnside Civic Centre

401 Greenhill Road, Tusmore SA 5065

Telephone; 8366 4200

Email: [email protected]

Office hours: Monday to Friday, 8.30am to 5.00pm (except public holidays)

2

mailto:[email protected]


Council Assessment Panel Meeting

Agenda

04 February 2020 | 6.00 pm Council Chambers

401 Greenhill Road, Tusmore

Members: Bill Chandler (Presiding Member)

Ross Bateup, Graeme Brown, Kate Shierlaw and Helga Lemon

1. Kaurna Acknowledgement

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

2. Apologies

Nil

3. Confirmation of Minutes

That the minutes of the Council Assessment Panel Meeting held on 03 December 2019 be taken as read and confirmed.

4. Applications withdrawn from the Agenda

Nil

5. Declarations of Interest

If a Panel Member has an interest in a matter before the Panel they are asked to disclose the interest to the Panel and provide full and accurate details of the relevant interest. Members are reminded to declare their interest before each item.

6. Development Applications for Consideration – Persons wishing to be heard

Non Complying Development Applications

Nil

Category 3 Development Applications

Report Number: 6.1 p7 Application Number: 180\0875\19 Applicant: Pembroke School Inc Location: 337-339 The Parade, Kensington ParkProposal: Change in land use to school (in the form of a school

cafe with associated retail and service training)Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be grantedRepresentors: Renato & Anita Principe – 20 Dunstan Avenue,

Kensington Park (wish to be heard)

3



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: Application Number: Applicant: Location: Proposal:

Recommendation:

6.2 p17 180\0691\19 Mr M Grossi 37 Craighill Road, St Georges Demolition of existing buildings and structures and construction of two-storey detached dwelling including garage, cellar, swimming pool, pavilion (verandah), front fencing, site works and associated landscaping Development Plan Consent be granted

Representors: Jenny Foreman – 36 Woodcroft Avenue, StGeorges (wish to be heard)

Jiajing Ju – 38 Woodcroft Avenue, St Georges (donot wish to be heard)

Report Number: 6.3 p31 Application Number: 180\1128\19 Applicant: Medallion Homes Location: 2 Myola Avenue, Glenunga Proposal: Single-storey dwelling including garage, verandah,

alfresco, retaining walls, fencing and associated landscaping (proposed Lot 1)

Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be granted Representors: Ral Antic – 41 Glenunga Avenue, Glenunga (do

not wish to be heard)

Sushil & Karuna Jasiwal – 37A Glenunga Avenue,Glenunga (wish to be heard)

Ann Wallman – 9 Myola Avenue, Glenunga (donot wish to be heard)

Report Number: 6.4 p45 Application Number: 180\0824\19 Applicant: Mr S Jadon Location: 14 Birnie Avenue, Kensington Park Proposal: Double Storey Dwelling and Front Masonry Fence Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be refused Representors: Steven and Irena Morotti – 17 Birnie Avenue,

Kensington Park (do not wish to be heard)

Kim Wong – 16 Birnie Avenue, Kensington Park(wish to be heard)

Bernard W.K. Li & Mariana W.C Li – 17 LomondAvenue, Kensington Park (do not wish to beheard)

4


Report Number: 6.5 p63 Application Number: 180\1020\19 Applicant: Kathy Rogers Location: 10-12 Mariner Street, Linden ParkProposal: Four (4) two-storey dwellings including garages,

porches, alfrescos, retaining walls and fencingRecommendation: Development Plan Consent be refusedRepresentors: M & R Burnard – 13 Mariner Street, Linden

Park(do not wish to be heard)

D Duffy & E O’Hallaran – 9 Hay Road, LindenPark (wish to be heard)

G Hewitt – 16 Mariner Street, Linden Park (do notwish to be heard)

M Xu & Y Ouyang – 8 Mariner Street, Linden Park(do not wish to be heard)

H & D Zulfic – 14 Mariner Street, Linden Park(wish to be heard)

7. Development Applications for Consideration – No persons to be heard

Non Complying Development Applications

Report Number: 7.1 p75 Application Number: 180\0781\19 Applicant: Ms Donny Walford Location: Proposal:

Recommendation:


Recommendation:

10-12 Watson Avenue, Rose ParkChange of Land Use - Residential to Residential and OfficeSubject to concurrence from the Development Assessment Commission, that Development Plan Consent be granted

7.2 p89 180\0126\19 J Stewart-Rattray Burnside Tennis Courts Newland Road, Burnside Non-complying: Three (3) Advertising Signs associated with Existing Tennis Club – Two (2) affixed to existing tennis court fencing and one (1) to existing club rooms Subject to concurrence from the State Planning Commission, that Development Plan Consent be granted


Nil

5




Recommendation:

7.3 p99 180\0986\19 R Wood C/- Atelier Bond 31A Stuart Road, Dulwich Change of use from consulting rooms and office to residential and undertake alterations and additions to existing single-storey commercial building including upper level addition, balconies, pergolas, masonry fence and associated partial demolition Development Plan Consent be granted


Nil

8. Outstanding Matters – Appeals and Deferred Items

8.1 Development Application: 180\0326\18 Applicant: Aplin Cook Gardner Location: 44 Watson Avenue, Rose Park

8.2 Development Application: 180\1265\18 Applicant: PC Infrastructure Pty Ltd Location: 285-287 Kensington Road, Kensington Park

9. Other Business

Matters for referral

Nil

10. Confidential Reports

Nil

11. Closure

6

Council Assessment Panel Agenda

04 February 2020

Report Number: PR 6.1

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

Application Number: 180\0875\19

Applicant: Pembroke School Inc

Location: 337-339 The Parade, Kensington Park

Proposal: Change in land use to school (in the form of a school cafe with associated retail and service training)

Zone/Policy Area: Community Zone

Community Policy Area 2 – Pembroke School

Development Plan consolidated 19 December 2017

Kind of Assessment: Merit

Public Notification: Category 3

One (1) representation received

Appeal Opportunity Applicant and third party appeal rights

Referrals – Statutory: N/A

Referrals – Non Statutory: Technical Officer Engineering

Delegations Policy: Unresolved representations

Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be granted

Recommending Officer: Jake Vaccarella

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:

- Appendix 1 – Aerial Locality Map

- Appendix 2 – Detailed Planning Assessment

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 Council Assessment Panel to facilitate decision making:

Plans and supporting documents

Internal agency referral reports

Representations received

Applicant’s response to representations

Photographs

7


04 February 2020


1. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the change in the use of land to a School, comprising School café, associated retail and service training. The café will be operated during school terms only between the hours of 7:00am – 5:00pm Monday to Friday and between 7:00am – 12:30pm on Saturdays. The café will seat up to 25 persons inside and up to 25 persons outside (50 max). It is intended that the café would provide a service to the school community as well as be used to provide retail and service training opportunity for current and past students with learning difficulties as a transition pathway to employment.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0875\19 was lodged on 30 August 2019 by Simon Channon of URPS on behalf of Pembroke School, the registered owner of the land. The proposal was determined as a merit form of development pursuant to section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993 (the Act). For the purposes of public notification, the application was

determined to be a Category 3 development pursuant to section 38(2)(c) of the Act. The application was made available for public inspection between 01 October and 17 October 2019, during which time Council received written submissions from one (1) external party, of whom expressed a desire to appear in person before the Council Assessment Panel (the Panel) in support of their submission. The submission raised concerns with respect to traffic congestion, on-street car parking and noise. Copies of the submissions were provided to the applicant, who has responded through a private planning consultant (URPS). As part of the internal assessment process, the proposal was referred to Council’s Technical Officer Traffic for an assessment of the impact of the development on local roads and infrastructure as well as car parking requirements. The proposal is now presented to the Panel as a Category 2 development with unresolved representations, and a staff recommendation that Development Plan Consent be granted, subject to conditions.

3. SUBJECT LAND AND LOCALITY ATTRIBUTES

3.1. Subject Land

The subject land encompasses the Pembroke School grounds which are located on the northern side of The Parade in the suburb of Kensington Gardens, as recorded in Certificate of Title Volume 5702 Folio 119. The subject land is wholly contained within the Community Zone (Policy Area 2) and measures approximately 1200 square with frontages to both the Parade and Dunstan Avenue. Existing on the site is an existing building and verandah which was previously used as a service station up until 1990. Following its use as a service station, the building has been used as a laundry by the School. The subject land is serviced via two existing crossovers, one along the Parade and one along Dunstan Avenue.

8


04 February 2020


3.2. Locality

The locality is heavily discernible by large open areas of land associated with the extensive landholding of Pembroke School on the northern side of the Parade as well as Kensington Park Reserve on the southern side of the Parade. There are both School and community uses on the southern side of the Parade where that land incorporates the Kensington Community Leisure Centre land used by the RSL, YMCA and the School. Remaining land in the locality includes residential land directly opposite the eastern boundary of the subject land extending along the Parade and Dunstan Avenue. The residential character comprises low density detached and semi-detached dwellings.

4. KIND OF ASSESSMENT

Kind: Merit

Reason: Development Act 1993, Section 35(5)

Applicant Appeal Opportunity: Yes

5. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

Category: Category 3

Reason: Section 38(2)(c) – Development Act 1993

Representations Received: Renato & Anita Principe – 20 Dunstan Avenue, Kensington Park (wish to be heard)

Third Party Appeal Opportunity: Yes

Representations received are provided as an attachment to the Panel.

Applicant’s response 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

7.1. Land Use

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

The proposal maintains the established and desired use of the land as an educational establishment by introducing an ancillary café to the existing school;

The proposed change of use does not involve any building work, as it seeks to operate within the existing buildings on site, with only internal building work required;

The establishment of the school cafe land use will service the community and educational services located on the subject land and adjacent land;

The proposed land use will not unreasonably impact the local road network in terms of traffic generation and provision for off-street car parking; and

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

9


04 February 2020


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

7.2. Character and Amenity

The Community Zone contemplates a variety of community, educational and health care activities in a manner that minimises adverse effects on adjoining development. The proposed change of use to school café with associated retail and service training elements, is considered to have a positive impact upon the surrounding site and immediate locality by providing the school community (students, teachers & parents) with a communal area for socialising and meetings in a safe and accessible location on the premises. Furthermore, the school café will provide a retail and service training opportunity for current and past students with learning difficulties as a transition pathway to employment. On account of this, the proposed use in this location is considered to speak to the intent of Zone Objectives 1 and 2. Community Zone, Principles of Development Control 1, 2 and 5 seek to protect the amenity of adjacent residential land in from higher levels of noise than would normally be experienced in residential areas as well as disturbances to the flow of traffic, particularly along Dunstan Avenue (Policy Area 2, PDC 2). The proposed land use is considered to be of a low-to-moderate scale in comparison to the surrounding uses of the associated School grounds and the wider locality. The proposed land use is considered to have a limited impact upon the amenity of adjacent residential land and responds appropriately to its contextual setting, having made the following observations:

The locality and in particular subject land (Pembroke School) comprises a mix of educational and community land uses which in terms of their function are of a higher intensity than a typical residential zone;

The proposed land use will utilise an existing building and thereby not introduce any visual amenity impacts;

The proposed school café is not an inherently noisy activity, with noise generally limited to that of the patrons in the outdoor area and vehicles entering and exiting the site. No music will be proposed in the outdoor dining area;

The hours of operation are limited to school terms only during the hours of 7:00am and 5:00pm Monday to Friday and 7:00am to 12:30pm on Saturdays, which aligns with the EPA’s daylight hours for noise assessment purposes;

The proposed development does not involve significant food preparation that would create ongoing odour or significant waste; and

The proposed land use will not impede upon the privacy of adjacent residential land as the outdoor dining area is sited on ground level where there are no direct views of neighbouring yards and windows to habitable rooms.

Traffic & Car parking The proposed land use will maintain vehicular access via the existing crossover points located along the Parade and Dunstan Avenue, with a slight modification (narrowing) of the crossover to the Parade. The Dunstan Road access point will provide access to two (2) parking spaces and a loading zone; thereby serving a limited number of vehicles and in turn creating little increase in traffic along Dunstan Avenue.

10


04 February 2020


The remainder of vehicles entering the site will utilise the existing crossover points along the Parade which once within the site, will be serviced by a further twelve (12) car parking spaces (Total of 14). This access point to the primary car parking area is longstanding and thus unlikely to introduce any traffic conflicts along this section of the Parade. Table Bur/5 of the Development Plan prescribes a desired off-street car parking requirement of 17 spaces (rounded up) based on the capacity of 50 seats. The proposed development will provide a total of 15 spaces. Of these 15 spaces, 8 are exclusive to the site, 4 are shared with the adjacent boarding house and 3 are comprised of on-street parks made available by the closure of the redundant portion of the crossover. The Frank Siow and Associates traffic analysis considers the provision of 15 parking spaces to adequately service the proposed school café on the basis that:

The intended ‘in house’ use of the café will primarily serve students, teachers and parents of the school and therefore would not generate any additional parking demand;

The proposed café would not experience peak parking demands at the same time as school pick up and drop off times. Therefore, peak times for the café (around lunch time) would be met with adequate capacity to accommodate the anticipated demand;

The shared car parking approach is commonly adopted when assessing land uses that have different peak times. The proposed café and the adjacent boarding house fall within this scenario;

The on-street car parking availability generated by the closure of an 18m portion of the existing crossover along the Parade assists in ensuring the proposed land use is capable of meeting its anticipated car parking demand. In this instance, a dedicated parking lane is marked on the Parade and thus the ability to utilise on-street parking is evident for visitors of the site;

The subject land is situated within 10m of a high-frequency public transport service (Go Zone) and the Parade comprises dedicated bicycle lanes for alternative transport options. Typically, a discount to the off-street parking demand of 10% would be applicable for development which benefits from these additional services, reducing the parking demand to 15.3 spaces (rounded down to 15).

7.3. Public Notification

During the public notification period, Council received one (1) submission from owners of adjacent land, of whom expressed a desire to formally present their submission before the Panel. The primary concerns raised in this submission were mentioned previously in the background section of this report. In accordance with Regulation 36(1) of the Regulations, a formal response to the representations was submitted by private panning consultant on behalf of the applicant. A copy of this response is attached to this report.

7.4. 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.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS

It is recommended that the Council Assessment Panel resolve that:

11


04 February 2020


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

2. Development Application 180\0875\19, by Pembroke School Inc 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 The hours of operation of the cafe shall be limited to the following times:

7am to 5pm Monday to Friday

am to 12:30pm Saturday Reason:

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

3 Seating shall be restricted to 50 seats on the premises at any one time for patron usage. Reason: To ensure the amenity of the adjacent properties is not diminished as a result 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. Reason:

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

Reserved Matters

1 That pursuant to Section 33(3) of the Development Act 1993, the City of Burnside

reserves its decision on the adequacy of the following matters for further assessment prior to the granting of any Development Approval:

Site contamination remediation.

To enable further assessment of these matters the applicant shall provide the following:

Site contamination report prepared by a suitably qualified expert confirming

what measures, if any, are required to ensure the subject land is suitable for its

intended purpose.

12


04 February 2020


2 The assessment of these reserved matters may result in the imposition of further conditions of Development Plan Consent pursuant to Section 42(1) of the Development Act 1993.

Advisory Notes

1 Expiration Time of Approval

Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 48 under the Development Act 1993, this Consent/Approval will lapse at the expiration of 12 months from the operative date of the Consent/Approval unless the relevant development has been lawfully commenced by substantial work on the site of the development within 12 months, in which case the Approval will lapse within 3 years from the operative date of the Approval subject to the proviso that if the development has been substantially or fully completed within those 3 years, the Approval will not lapse.

2 Building Consent Development Approval will not be granted until a Building Rules Consent has been obtained. A separate application must be submitted for such consent. No building work or change of classification is permitted until the Development Approval has been obtained.

3 Food/Hygiene Requirements

The Applicant should ensure that the proposed development conforms to the Food Act, 2001, the Food Regulations, 2002 and Australian Food Safety Standards.

13


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land Representor’s Land

14


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2

DETAILED PLANNING ASSESSMENT

Summary of Policy Area Objectives and Principles

Community Zone Objectives:

Objective 1: A zone to accommodate community, educational and health care facilities. Objective 2: Provision for the current and identifiable future needs of such institutions in a manner that does not adversely affect the use and enjoyment of adjoining land.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:

Desired Land Use O 1

Satisfied.

Local Compatibility PDC 1

Satisfied.

15


04 February 2020


Summary of Residential Zone Objectives and Principles

Community Policy Area 2 – Pembroke School: Principle of Development Control 1 Land owned by Pembroke School on the western side of Dunstan Avenue should not be developed to a scale out of character with residences on the eastern side of Dunstan Avenue. Principle of Development Control 2 Any vehicular access point onto Dunstan Avenue should not create a significant increase in traffic volume in that street. Principle of Development Control 3 Principle vehicular access to Pembroke School land north of The Parade should be from The Parade.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use PDC 1

Satisfied.

The proposed land use utilises an existing building which is of a scale, form and proportions consistent with adjacent residential development.

Access & traffic PDC 2, 3

Satisfied.

The proposed land use maintains existing access points along Dunstan Avenue and the Parade, and thereby the proposed development is not likely to introduce and conflicts on the surrounding road network.

16


04 February 2020




Applicant: Mr M Grossi

Location: 37 Craighill Road, St Georges

Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings and structures and construction of two-storey detached dwelling including garage, cellar, swimming pool, pavilion (verandah), front fencing, site works and associated landscaping

Zone/Policy Area: Residential Zone

Residential Policy Area 25 – St Georges




Two (2) representations received

Appeal Opportunity Applicant only, no third party appeal rights



Urban Forestry Officer



Recommending Officer: Renae Grida

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:



- Appendix 3 – Development Data Table







Photographs

17


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the construction of a new two-storey detached dwelling, referencing Georgian style design characteristics, sited across two existing contiguous allotments located on the northern side of Craighill Road in the suburb of St Georges. The proposed dwelling features a double garage, gym, master suite, 4 bedrooms 2 ensuites, 2 wcs, lift, mud room, kitchen and scullery, dining, living, rumpus, study, cellar, courtyard, alfresco and swimming pool. The main building comprises a symmetrical streetscape presentation, with a low scale connection to the garage sited to the eastern side of the main building, 32.5 degree hipped roof pitch and sash windows. The proposal is also inclusive of site works, associated landscaping and masonry front fencing comprising pillar and plinth and infill.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0691\19 was lodged on 24 July 2019 by Mr M Grossi, the registered owner of the land, c/o Atelier Bond Architects. The proposal was determined to be a merit form of development pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993 (the Act). For the purposes of public notification, the application was determined to be a Category 2 development in accordance with the Burnside (City) Development Plan, Residential Policy Area 25 Principle of Development Control 7. The application was made available for public inspection for a period of two weeks, during which time Council received written submissions from two (2) adjoining land owners who raised concerns with respect to demolition of an existing boundary wall, fencing and privacy.

Pursuant to Council’s Delegation Policy, the application is presented to the Panel for consideration as a Category 2 development with unresolved representations.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is located on the northern side of Craighill Road, within the suburb of St Georges. The land has an area of 1768 square metres and a frontage to Austin Crescent of approximately 37.2 metres. There is a steady cross fall from east to west of approximately 1.2 metres. The subject land currently contains a single storey 1950s conventional style dwelling, swimming pool, outbuildings and tennis court. The subject land comprised two existing allotments (35 and 37 Craighill Road) of which are currently used for a single residence, and have since been amalgamated.

3.2. Locality

The locality comprises allotments located on the northern and southern sides of Craighill Road, bound by Anglesey Avenue to the west and Blairgowrie Road to the east. The locality is exclusively residential in nature and comprises a range of single and two storey development on regular and irregular shaped allotments.

18


04 February 2020


The dominant architectural style is 1950s Conventional dwellings with key features including tiled hip roof forms and modest building and external wall heights. Recent redevelopments present a modest range of other architectural styles. Built form siting and orientation varies throughout the streetscape, in part due to the bend in the road. Dwellings are typically set back from the front boundary at a distance of between 5 metres and 8 metres. Streetscape amenity is enhanced by the strong visibility of mature street trees, low and open front fencing on the northern side of the street and well landscaped front gardens.


Kind: Merit





Reason: Residential Policy Area 25, Principle of Development Control 7

Representations Received: Jenny Foreman – 36 Woodcroft Avenue St Georges (wish to be heard)

Jiajing Ju – 38 Woodcroft Avenue St Georges (do not wish to be heard)

Third Party Appeal Opportunity: No


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

6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The proposal maintains the established and desired residential use of the land;

The proposed dwelling maintains and enhances the established residential character of the Policy Area;

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

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



The Development Plan seeks to maintain and enhance a low scale, low density residential character, with detached dwellings of primarily single and split-level design in a variety of

19


04 February 2020


post-war styles. The Development Plan also seeks development that will complement the scale, bulk, siting and positive elements of existing dwellings within the streetscape. The immediate streetscape and wider locality displays an established character where several two-storey buildings are present, in a wide variety of styles. The proposed development is considered to complement the bulk, scale, siting and positive elements of the existing housing stock within the streetscape and locality. The building is also set back a greater distance than prescribed by the Development Plan, and of those existing buildings either side, further recessing the presentation of the building to minimise its visual prominence. The proposed building is unapologetically large in form and scale, however sits appropriately within the context of the site and locality. The building is well set back from side and rear boundaries for both the ground and upper floors, reinforcing spatial separation and allowing for the establishment of landscaping so as to reflect the height and scale of the building. Whilst the overall height above natural ground level is in excess of 9m, the generous setbacks offset the vertical obtrusiveness and amenity impacts that may be seen from adjoining properties. The site experiences a cross fall from the front south-eastern corner of the site to the rear north-western corner of the site The western end of the building is built up so as to provide a flat finished floor level, which at the lowest point of natural ground, elevates some 1.5m. Landscaping inside the fence line to the northern rear and western side adjacent the pool patio area is proposed to mitigate any direct or unreasonable imposition to adjoining properties, with finer details to be addressed via a reserved matter. Privacy from the proposed building itself is suitably managed through the use of fixed obscure glazing to a height of 1.7m above the finished floor level. Overshadowing to adjoining properties does not exceed the minimum hours of sunlight required, due to a combination of factors, being the generous side setbacks and the orientation of the allotment with the public road to the southern end. The overall siting and design of the building is considered to be appropriate within the context of the locality in terms of scale, height, form, style, materials and finishes, and is considered to be an appropriate planning outcome for the subject land and locality.

7.3. Site Functionality / Agency Referrals

As a result of the contiguous allotment’s spacious surrounds, the proposed dwelling is afforded generous curtilage which enables the development to be largely consistent with the relevant quantitative guidelines of the Development Plan. The bench and finished floor levels of the proposed dwelling ensures an appropriate balance with the slope of the allotment and surrounding locality and avoids large scale earthworks and boundary retaining walls to provide a stable platform. For vehicular access purposes, the subject land is proposed to be serviced via a new driveway crossover sited further east of the existing crossed (to be reinstated to kerb and gutter). The access arrangement has been reviewed by Council’s Technical Officer and Urban Forestry Officer and deemed suitable from a traffic and assets retention perspective. An application has been provided under Section 221 of the Local Government Act 1999

and, should the proposal be approved, an accompanying authorisation will be issued for the new driveway crossover as proposed.

20


04 February 2020


The development provides generous space for on-site car parking to meet the needs of future occupants and visitors and to avoid on-street parking that would restrict the free flow of traffic (including pedestrian traffic) or cause significant nuisance to nearby residents or other users of land.


During the public notification period, Council received two submissions from owners of adjacent land, of whom expressed a desire to formally present their submission before the Panel. The primary concerns raised in these submissions are centred on the removal of an existing outbuilding constructed along the common boundary and visual impacts associated with the two storey building form. The Applicant provided a formal response to the representation in accordance with Regulation 36 (1) of the Regulations. The response confirms that the boundary wall sought to be retained by the neighbours will be retained if it is practical to do so. If it is not then the future state of fencing between the properties will be pursued under the processed of the Fences Act 1975. Concerns regarding visual impacts associated with the two storey building are, in the opinion of the Applicant, sufficiently addressed through distance, while overlooking is addressed through the use of high window sills. Council considers that the planning matters raised through the public notification process have been sufficiently addressed through the overall design of the building as they are to be determined under the Development Act 1993.

7.5. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\0691\19, by Mr M Grossi is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions



21


04 February 2020


2 All side and rear 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 1.7m 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.

Reserved Matters

1

2

That pursuant to Section 33(3) of the Development Act 1993, the City of Burnside

reserves its decision on the adequacy of the following matters for further assessment

prior to the granting of any Development Approval:

Landscaping screening to provide for privacy to the northern rear and

western side adjoining properties due to the elevated floor level of the

dwelling and pool patio area.

To enable further assessment of these matters the applicant shall provide the following:

A detailed landscaping plan regarding vegetation screening to be

established adjacent the western side and northern rear boundary so as to

provide reasonable privacy to adjoining properties. The landscaping plan

shall include selected evergreen species, planting locations, spacing and

spread, height at establishment and height at maturity. The height shall be

a minimum 1.6m above the relative finished floor level (FFL 142.55) i.e. top

of vegetation screening shall be a minimum 144.15.

The assessment of these reserved matters may result in the imposition of further conditions of Development Plan Consent pursuant to Section 42(1) of the Development Act 1993.

Advisory Notes

1 Engineering Requirements:

Driveway Conditions

Unless approved otherwise, construction of the driveway crossover shall be in accordance with Council’s Standard Specification and General Conditions and completed to the reasonable satisfaction of Council.

The existing second driveway/gutter crossing must be removed and reinstated to kerb upon completion of the proposed gutter crossing.

A driveway width of 4.5 metres is permitted across the verge and a crossover width of 5.5 metres (maximum) is permitted at the kerb and gutter.

If you elect to carry out the works yourself (or via a contractor) evidence of Public Liability Insurance must be provided to Council before any works can commence on the public verge/road.

22


04 February 2020


Street Trees

The proposed crossover requires a 2.7m setback from the eastern most tree a mature Kurrajong and 1.5 metres from the middle tree, semi-mature Kurrajong.

Storm water to be discharged a minimum of 1.5m from any street trees.

Utilities require a minimum setback of 1.5m from any street trees.

No tree roots larger than 40mm in diameter are to be cut without Council consent.

Street trees to be protected during development with bunting set 1.5m from the trunk for duration of works.

Crossover to be constructed using Permeable materials.

No storing of materials on road verge during construction.

No pruning of street trees.

No vehicles on road verge at any time during development.

The applicant will be liable for any damage caused to public trees during the development process, including damage by privately engaged contractors.

Footpath Maintenance

Existing footpath levels, grades etc. shall not be altered as a result of the new works associated with the development.

Stormwater Detention

Due to the increase of the impermeable area, detention shall be provided to limit post development flows. Calculations shall be provided to verify the ability of the proposed detention quantity to meet the Council’s default detention and discharge requirements below:

The volume of any detention device shall be equal to the volume of water generated on the site with an impervious (Cp = 0.9) site coverage of 75% and pervious (Cp = 0.1) area of 25%, during a 1 in 20 year flood event for a 10 minute duration.

The maximum rate of discharge from the site shall be equal to the volume of water generated on the site with an impervious (Cp = 0.9) site coverage of 40% and pervious (Cp = 0.1) area of 60%, during a 1 in 5 year flood event for a 10 minute duration.

For stormwater management purposes, it is desirable that:

An additional detention storage of 1,000Ltrs be provided in addition to the standard 1,000Ltrs retention tank provided; and

The development utilises permeable paving for the proposed external paving work within the development site.

Stormwater Discharge

The 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 65mm, steel pipe housing is to be used as per Council’s standards.

The developer is responsible for locating all existing services and to consult with the necessary service providers if there is a conflict when placing stormwater infrastructure.

Construction of the stormwater infrastructure is in accordance with Council’s Standard Specification and General Conditions and to the overall satisfaction of Council.

Trenching and connections are to be undertaken as per Australian Plumbing Standards.

23


04 February 2020


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

24


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

Representor’s Land

25


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2



Primary Residential Policy Area 25 Objectives:

Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of the low scale, low density residential character that is derived particularly from:

(a) primarily one-storeyed, or split-level, detached dwellings in a variety of post-war period styles (typically conventional);

(b) streetscapes enhanced by well-established, open, front gardens, and grassed verges; and (c) in certain areas, tall trees, including indigenous eucalypts.

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) along eastern Wootoona Terrace and Olde Coach Lane, where bulky, recently built, two-storeyed dwellings dominate the streetscape, contrasting with older substantial single-storeyed dwellings with a lower floor area ratio and height;

(b) on land with frontage to Portrush Road; and (c) adjacent to the Community Zone and the Historic (Conservation) Zone.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.


Satisfied.

The proposal preserves the existing low density character of the policy area.

The overall form, height and scale of the proposed building is compatible with adjacent development and contributes to the variety of architectural styles envisaged for the policy area.

The proposed building comprises a high quality design which utilises an appropriate mix of materials and finishes which both complement and enhance the existing streetscape character of the locality.

Site Areas and Frontages PDC 2–5

Satisfied.

26


04 February 2020



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.

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

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 1–8 PDC 1

Satisfied.

Building Appearance PDC 2–4

Satisfied.

The scale of the building is much greater than the scale of buildings within the street, however is set-back behind those building facades on adjoining land in an attempt to reduce its obtrusiveness, and maintain generous separation from relative boundaries.

Design for Topography PDC 5–6

Satisfied.

The benching of the site has been designed in a manner that responds to the general fall of the land from east to west and is reflective of the broader locality.

27


04 February 2020


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 52: A compact metropolitan area.

Objective 53: A variety and choice of dwelling types to meet the needs and preferences of all sections of the community.

Objective 54: Containment of housing costs through the encouragement of a full range of design and development techniques.

Objective 55: Safe, pleasant, accessible and convenient residential areas.

Objective 56: 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 52–60 Satisfied.

Design and Appearance O 11 PDC 14–18, 23-28

Satisfied.

The height, mass and proportion of the building does not immediately respond to features of dwellings within the locality, however, this is largely due to the dated buildings comprising the locality. Buildings of similar massing and scale are typically sited on larger allotments with significant curtilage so as to provide for a buffer to adjoining development.

The building is appropriately sited on the land achieving front, side and rear setbacks in accordance with the Development Plan guidelines.

Building Set-backs PDC 161–163 Front Set-backs

Satisfied.

Side Set-backs Satisfied.

Rear Set-backs

Satisfied. Building Height PDC 164

Variance.

The building height above natural ground level (lowest spot level beneath the building footprint) is 11.2m, which is less than the 12m non-complying threshold.

Whilst the building is higher than what is typically desired, it is not an unreasonable outcome given the context of the site, having side boundary setbacks well in excess of the guidelines so as to create increased spatial separation and reduce vertical obtrusion when viewed from the streetscape and adjoining properties.

28


04 February 2020


Site Coverage

PDC 165 Satisfied.

Private Open Space PDC 166, 169

Satisfied.

Amenity O11, 20–22 PDC 14–18, 52-69, 170-173

Satisfied.

Privacy PDC 22, 174–176

Satisfied.

The plans include a notation regarding fixed obscure glazing to upper level windows to a height of 1.7m above floor level. This is reinforced via a condition.

Access and On-Site Car Parking

PDC 177–182

Satisfied.

The site provides for sufficient off-street car parking (covered and uncovered).

Crossover location does not conflict with assets or infrastructure. Access to Sunlight PDC 21, 183–186

Satisfied.

Fences and Retaining Walls PDC 190–194

Satisfied.

Front boundary fencing is sympathetic to existing fencing styles observed within the streetscape, is not large or dominant and allows visual permeability.

Trees and Other Vegetation O 24-28 PDC 77-92

There are no regulated or significant trees affected by the proposed development.

29


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 3

DEVELOPMENT DATA TABLE

Site Characteristics Proposed Guideline

Site Area 1768m2 550m2

Street Frontage 37.2m 15m

Design Characteristics Proposed Guideline

Site Coverage

- Buildings only 415.05m² 23.4%

40%

- Buildings and driveways 532.35m² 30.1%

50%

- Total floor area 658.25m² 37.2%

50%

Building Height

- storeys 2 storeys 2 storeys

- metres 11.2m above natural ground level 9m above natural ground level

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 9.9m 6m

- side boundary 6m (w) 3.7m (e) to the garage

16.4m (e) to the dwelling

2m

- rear boundary 12.1m (dwelling) 8.2m (alfresco)

4m

Upper Level


- side boundary 6m (w) 16.4m (e)

4m

- rear boundary 25.2m 8m

Private Open Space

- percentage 645.7m² >100% of TFA

50% of TFA

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

Car Parking and Access

- number of parks 4 2

- width of driveway 4m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 5.8m 15.6%

33%

30


04 February 2020




Applicant: Medallion Homes Pty Ltd

Location: 2 Myola Avenue, Glenunga

Proposal: Single-storey dwelling including garage, verandah, alfresco, retaining walls, fencing and associated landscaping (Lot 1)


Residential Policy Area 26 – Glenunga (South)




Three (3) representations received








REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:










Photographs

31


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the construction of a contemporary single-storey dwelling including garage, alfresco, retaining walls to a maximum 1m in height, 1.8m high Colorbond fencing and associated landscaping. The dwelling will comprise a master suite, two bedrooms, theatre, bathroom, powder room, laundry, wine room and open plan living including butler’s pantry.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\1128\19 was lodged on 30 October 2019 by Medallion Homes Pty Ltd on behalf of the registered owner of the land. The subject application was lodged alongside concurrent applications for the subject land, as summarised below:

DA 180\1045\19 Land Division (to divide one allotment into three)

Approved

DA 180\1080\19 Single storey dwelling (Lot 3) Approved

DA 180\1308\19 Single storey dwelling (Lot 2) Under assessment

The proposal was determined to be a merit form of development pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993 (the Act). For the purposes of public notification, the application was determined to be a Category 2 development in accordance with the Burnside (City) Development Plan, Residential Policy Area 26 Principle of Development Control 7(b) and (d). The application was made available for public inspection for a period of two weeks, during which time Council received written submissions from two (3) adjoining land owners who raised concerns with respect to boundary fencing and street trees.



3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is a large regular rectangular shaped allotment located on the eastern side of Myola Avenue in the suburb of Glenunga. The subject land has a valid land division approval (DA 180\1045\19) to divide the land into three (3) allotments (resulting in two additional allotments) of a hammerhead arrangement. The subject land is identified as ‘Lot 1’, being the northern-most allotment fronting Myola Avenue. Lot 1 has a site area of 616 square metres, a depth of 33 metres and a frontage width of 18.49 metres.

3.2. Locality

The locality comprises allotments on both the eastern and western sides of Myola Avenue, as well as those on the northern side of Glenunga Avenue and southern side of Bevington Road in proximity to the Myola Avenue street junction. Allotments are varied in size and shape, predominantly regular shaped allotments however there are other hammerhead divisions present. Dwellings are typically detached, however there are examples of semi-detached dwellings, and buildings of both single-storey and two-storey profile, of a wide variety of architectural styles.

32


04 February 2020


Streetscape amenity is considered intimate, and is enhanced by the strong presence of street trees comprising Pyrus calleryana (Callery Pear) trees, and a mix of open front gardens and brush and/or masonry fencing.


Kind: Merit





Reason: Residential Policy Area 26 Principle of Development Control 7(b) and (d)

Representations Received: Ral Antic – 41 Glenunga Avenue Glenunga (do not wish to be heard)

Sushil & Karuna Jasiwal – 37A Glenunga Avenue Glenunga (wish to be heard)

Ann Wallman – 9 Myola Avenue Glenunga (do not wish to be heard)




6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The proposal maintains the established and desired residential use of the land;

The proposed dwelling maintains and enhances the established residential character of the Policy Area;

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




Residential Policy Area 26 seeks the maintenance and enhancement of the low scale, low density residential character derived particularly from detached dwellings in a variety of styles, predominantly of the interwar and postwar periods (and some earlier villas), streetscapes enhanced by well-landscaped gardens and mature trees and generally

33


04 February 2020


moderate to deep building setbacks from roads. The proposed development is generally compatible with these characteristics and is anticipated to enhance the streetscape character by introducing a new building of a suitably high design standard. The proposed dwelling offers a modern, contemporary architecturally designed single storey building which is comparable in bulk and scale to the adjacent existing built form and the recently approved single storey dwelling to the south on Lot 3 associated with the approved land division. As such, the dwelling is generally regarded as being compatible with the streetscape character and that described in the policy area objective in terms of its architectural form, style, bulk, scale, setback from the street and open front garden.

The dwelling has been sympathetically designed with emphasis on creating a visually interesting primary façade highlighted by its appropriate mix of high-quality materials and finishes including rendered external walls, feature stone blade wall, timber panel lift door, large floor to ceiling windows, and large feature entrance with window highlights, all of which create an appropriate level of articulation.

In terms of its visual impact on adjoining properties, the proposed building comprises vertical wall heights that are typical of a single storey building and compatible with the existing housing stock of the locality. The proposed building achieves adequate spatial separation from adjoining properties with stepped external walls which assist in providing articulation and visual interest across the side elevations. As such the proposal is not likely to prejudice the occupiers of adjoining land in terms of its bulk, scale and vertical profile.

7.3. Site Functionality

The development is largely consistent with the relevant quantitative guidelines of the Development Plan and is not considered to be an overdevelopment of the site. Despite exceeding the site coverage guideline and marginally departing from the setback guidelines concerning a portion of the southern side boundary, the proposed development is considered to fit neatly within this context and will have a minimal impact to the adjoining properties in terms of bulk, scale and overshadowing. For vehicular purposes, the subject land proposes to modify the existing crossover by shifting it further north, so as to achieve safe and convenient access to the garage. The modified crossover maintains a 1.5m clearance to adjacent street trees, ensuring the retention of existing street trees. . The development provides generous space for on-site car parking to meet the needs of future occupants and visitors and to avoid on-street parking that would restrict the free flow of traffic (including pedestrian traffic) along Myola Avenue, or cause significant nuisance to nearby residents or other users of land.


The proposal was made available for public inspection for a period of two weeks, during which time Council received three (3) written submissions from notified adjoining properties in regards to the proposed development. The matters raised through this process relate to concerns regarding monetary costs relating to boundary fencing, retention of existing brush fencing and retention of street trees. The applicant engaged a private planning consultant to provide a response which in summary provided justification for the proposed development on its appropriate regard for the relevant objectives and policies of the Development Plan, noting that the fencing matters relate to the Fences Act 1975, and all street trees are retained as a result of the proposed development.

34


04 February 2020


Council considers that the planning matters raised through the public notification process have been sufficiently addressed through the overall design of the building and the amendments introduced following the notification period insofar as they are to be determined under the Development Act 1993.

7.5. Agency Referrals

The proposal was referred to Council’s Engineering Services and Urban Forestry teams for consideration. The proposal initially sought the removal of a newly established street tree at the far northern end of the frontage to be removed. The proposed crossover has since been modified to retain the street tree and still facilitate safe and convenient vehicular access to the proposed dwelling. As such, all issues have now been resolved. Engineering and urban forestry comments have been incorporated as advisory notes to this recommendation.

7.6. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\1128\19, by Medallion Homes Pty Ltd 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.

3 The landscaping detailed on the stamped and approved plans granted Development Plan Consent shall be undertaken within three (3) months of the substantial completion of development and in any event prior to the occupation or use of the development.

35


04 February 2020


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.

Advisory Notes

1 Engineering Requirements:

Driveway Conditions:


Existing redundant driveway/gutter crossing must be removed and reinstated to kerb and gutter upon the completion of the proposed altered gutter crossing.

Driveway width of 4.5 metres is allowable across the verge and a crossover width of 5.5 metres (Maximum) total is allowable at the kerb and gutter.





Due to the increase of the impermeable area, detention shall be provided to limit post development flows. Calculations shall be provided to verify the ability of the proposed detention quantity to meet the Council’s default detention and discharge requirements below:

The volume of any detention device shall be equal to the volume of water generated on the site with an impervious (Cp = 0.9) site coverage of 75% and pervious (Cp = 0.1) area of 25%, during a 1 in 20 year flood event for a 10 minute duration.

The maximum rate of discharge from the site shall be equal to the volume of water generated on the site with an impervious (Cp = 0.9) site coverage of 40% and pervious (Cp = 0.1) area of 60%, during a 1 in 5 year flood event for a 10 minute duration.

For stormwater management purposes, it is desirable that:

An additional detention storage of 1,000Ltrs be provided in addition to the standard 1,000Ltrs retention tank provided; and

The development utilises permeable paving for the proposed external paving work within the development site.

36


04 February 2020



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






2 Building Consent Development Approval will not be granted until a Building Rules Consent has been obtained. A separate application must be submitted for such consent. No building work or change of classification is permitted until the Development Approval has been obtained.

3 Expiration Time of Approval

Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 48 under the Development Act 1993, this Consent/Approval will lapse at the expiration of 12 months from the operative date of the Consent/Approval unless the relevant development has been lawfully commenced by substantial work on the site of the development within 12 months, in which case the Approval will lapse within 3 years from the operative date of the Approval subject to the proviso that if the development has been substantially or fully completed within those 3 years, the Approval will not lapse.

4 Boundaries

It is recommended that as the Applicant is undertaking work on or near the boundary, the Applicant should ensure that the boundaries are clearly defined by a Licensed Surveyor, prior to the commencement of any building work.

5 Public Utilities The Applicant must ensure there is no objection from any of the public utilities in respect of underground or overhead services and any alterations that may be required are to be at the Applicant's expense.

6 Other Authorities

The applicant must ensure that any consent from other authorities (including but not limited to SA Water, Telstra, Native Vegetation Board, ETSA ) that may be required to undertake the development, has been granted by that authority prior to the commencement of the development.

7 Damage to Council's Footpath/Kerbing /Road Pavement/Verge Section 229/221 of the Local Government Act provides that where damage to Council footpath/ kerbing/road pavement/verge occurs as a result of the development, the owner/applicant shall be responsible for the cost of Council repairing the damage.

37


04 February 2020


8 Fences Act 1975 The Applicant is reminded of the requirements of the Fences Act 1975. Should the proposed works require the removal, alteration or repair of an existing boundary fence, a 'Notice of Intention' must be served to adjoining owners. Please contact the Legal Services Commission for further advice on 1300 366 424 or visit www.lsc.sa.gov.au

9 Consultation with adjoining owners In addition to notification and other requirements under the Development Act and Fences Act, it is recommended that the applicant/owner consult with adjoining owners and occupiers at the earliest possible opportunity after Development Approval, advising them of proposed development work so as to identify and discuss any issues requiring resolution such as boundary fencing, retaining walls, trees/roots, drainage changes, temporary access, waste discharges, positioning of temporary toilets etc.

38

http://www.lsc.sa.gov.au/


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land


39


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2




Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of the low scale, low density residential character that is derived particularly from:

(a) detached dwellings in a variety of styles, predominantly of the interwar and postwar periods (and some earlier villas), including substantial bungalow-style dwellings on larger allotments in some localities;

(b) streetscapes enhanced by well-landscaped gardens and mature trees (such as the significant avenue of eucalypts in Taminga Avenue); and

(c) generally moderate to deep building set-backs from roads.

Acknowledged, significant variations from the desired character, or the prevailing character, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are found on land with frontage to Glen Osmond Road and Portrush Road.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.


Satisfied.

The proposed density is consistent with the low scale, low density residential character sought within the Policy Area.

The locality comprises a mix of single storey detached dwellings in a variety of architectural styles.

The single storey form is compatible with existing single storey housing stock and is consistent with Policy Area guidelines.

The proposed siting of the building is consistent with the prevailing setback pattern, with sufficient spacing between built form and the public realm to enable the future landscaping of the front yard.

The proposed building comprises a high quality design which utilises an appropriate mix of materials and finishes which both complement and enhance the existing streetscape character of the locality.

Site Areas and Frontages

PDC 2–5 Satisfied.

40


04 February 2020









Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.


Satisfied.


Satisfied.

41


04 February 2020










Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use



Satisfied.


Satisfied.

Side Set-backs Minor Variance.

The proposed building does not strictly accord with the quantitative DP guidelines concerning the southern side boundary, where the setback is proposed at 1.1m for a portion of the building line.

The proposed siting of the building maintains adequate separation from the adjacent approved single storey building and maintains a pattern of spacing which is comparable to the established housing stock of the locality, noting that this elevation is adjacent the access driveway to Lot 2 of which will allow for increased perception of space being an open area and will have no consequential amenity impact.

Rear Set-backs Satisfied.

Building Height PDC 164

Satisfied.

Site Coverage

PDC 165 Minor Variance.

The development exceeds the 40% guideline for the building footprint, but not to a substantial degree (46.8%).

The extent of site coverage proposed is not considered out of character for the locality and has not impaired the development’s ability to secure appropriate built form set-backs.

Private Open Space Satisfied.

42


04 February 2020


PDC 166, 169

Amenity O11, 20–22 PDC 14–18, 52-69, 170-173

Satisfied.

The proposed building is considered suitable to the site and locality in terms of scale and proportions and is not anticipated to impair the amenity of the locality through the appearance of land, buildings or other conditions or factors.

The proposed development is considered to protect and enhance the visual amenity of the locality by providing a new development of a high design standard and appearance.


Satisfied.

Access and On-Site Car Parking PDC 177–182

Satisfied.

The proposal provides two (2) off-street car parking spaces and as such accords with Table Bur/5 of the DP.

The driveway design accords with DP guidelines regarding safe and convenient access.

The proposed location of the driveway crossover has been supported by Council’s Engineering and Urban Forestry departments.

Access to Sunlight PDC 21, 183–186

Satisfied.


Satisfied.

Retaining walls ranging from up to 1m in height are required due to the associated earthworks. The proposed retaining walls are not out of character for the locality and Policy Area.

The proposed boundary fencing (1.8 metre high Colorbond) is regarded as standard within the Residential Zone and suitable in providing reasonable privacy without appearing visually dominant of large in scale.

43


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 3






Site Coverage


40%

- Buildings and driveways 328.22m² 53.4%

50%

Building Height

- storeys 1 storey 2 storeys

- metres 6.174m above natural ground level 9m

Set-backs

- front boundary 6m 8m

- side boundary 1.11m – 1.5m (s) Garage on boundary – 2.6m (n)

2m


Boundary Wall

- length 6.6m 8m

- height 3m 3m

Private Open Space

- percentage 156.7m² 54.2% of floor area

50%

- dimensions 6m x 8m 5m x 8m



- width of driveway 3.3m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 4.9m 26.5%

33%

44


04 February 2020




Applicant: Mr S Jadon

Location: 14 Birnie Avenue, Kensington Park

Proposal: Multi storey detached dwelling and masonry front fence


Residential Policy Area 2 – Northern




Three (3) representations


Referrals – Statutory: Nil




Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be refused

Recommending Officer: Jessica Grima

REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:





Documentation provided as attachments to the report to members of the Council Assessment Panel

to facilitate decision making:





Photographs

45


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the construction of a multi storey detached dwelling and a masonry front fence. The floor plan of the proposed dwelling contains the following:

Cellar for the purpose of a theatre room Ground Floor

A double garage under the main roof;

Alfresco attached to the rear of the dwelling;

An office/study;

Laundry;

A water closet; and

An open plan kitchen, living and dining area. Upper Level

A master bedroom with ensuite and walk in wardrobe;

Three (3) bedrooms;

A lounge/rumpus room; and

A bathroom with a separate water closet.

The proposal includes a nominal amount fill (0.31 metres max of fill above the natural ground level) toward the middle of the subject land, where the dwelling footprint will be located. The application also includes landscaping to portions of the front, rear and side of the site and an open style front fence with rendered brick pillars and iron infill. The front fence will be no higher than 1.8 metres. The existing crossover will be made redundant with vehicle access to be obtained via a proposed crossover at the southern end of the front boundary.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0824\19 was lodged on 16 August 2019 by Simon Jadon on behalf of the registered owner of the land. The application was determined to be a merit form of development pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993 (the Act). For the purposes

of public notification, the application was determined to be a Category 2 form of development, as prescribed by Residential Policy Area 2, Principle of Development Control 7(a) and (b), of the Burnside (City) Development Plan. The application documents were made available for public viewing for a period of ten (10) days, during which time Council received three (3) written submissions identifying concerns on matters including loss of privacy, the two storey form, bulk and scale, uncomplimentary dwelling style with established development along the streetscape and overshadowing. Copies of the representations were forwarded to the Applicant, who has since provided a written response prepared by Mark Kwiatkowski of Adelaide Planning & Development Solutions Pty Ltd. No amendments to the proposal were made as part of this response. As part of the assessment process, planning staff undertook internal referrals to Council’s Technical Officer Engineering and Urban Forestry Officer, with respect to stormwater management, access and impacts to Council infrastructure and assets.

46


04 February 2020


An assessment against the Development Plan has now been completed and the proposal is presented to the Panel as a Category 2 development with unresolved representations and a staff recommendation that Development Plan Consent be refused.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is a rectangular shaped allotment, located on the eastern side of Birnie Avenue, and situated toward the southern length of street, closer to its intersection with Lossie Street. The subject land has a total area of 627 square metres, with a single frontage to Birnie Avenue measuring 15.24 metres and a depth of 41.15. The land is relatively flat and is not laden with any encumbrances, easements or land management agreements. The subject land currently accommodates a 1920s bungalow with an attached carport, verandah and small shed in the rear yard. Currently vehicle access to the property is gained via an existing crossover located at the northern end, of the front property boundary. In the verge area, directly adjacent the subject land, there is a Stobie pole and a Callistemon viminalis (Bottlebrush) street tree. There are no regulated or significant trees located on the subject land or the adjoining allotments.

3.2. Locality

The immediate locality comprises land on both the eastern and western sides of Birnie Avenue, and extends to the allotments that are approximately within sixty (60) metres in both northern and southern directions of the subject land, and those that are adjoining the rear boundary of the subject land, including 15, 17 and 19 Lomond Avenue. The wider locality includes allotments along the Birnie Avenue up to approximately one hundred (100) metres away from the subject land in either direction north and south, and 1, 3 and 5 Lossie Street and 20 and 22 Gurrs Road. The immediate locality predominantly comprises single storey detached dwellings of historical architectural styles including 1900s symmetrical cottages, 1920s bungalows and 1900s villas. The recently developed dwelling on the adjoining property to the south (16 Birnie Avenue) is a simple design incorporating elements from the other heritage style dwellings that are predominant along the streetscape, such as a hipped roof, with gable infill and a brick exterior. One example of a dwelling within the immediate locality that differs from the traditional dwelling styles expressed previously can be found within the immediate locality. This is at 9 Birnie Avenue and is a single storey dwelling with a 2000s renovated facade, including contemporary features such a skillion roof and square accents. Whilst the wider locality and immediate locality largely contain development of a single storey nature, there are some examples of double storey development including the reproduction style dwellings on 1 and 3 Lossie Street, and 6 Birnie Avenue. Dwellings within the locality are generally situated on regular shaped and medium sized allotments with well-landscaped front yards. There is slight variation in building setback patterns along the streetscape, ranging from as little as two (2) metres approximately nine (9) metres. Overall, the streetscape amenity is considered to be attributed to the generally low scale character, low and open front fencing of a variety of forms, landscaped front gardens, and a high prevalence of early 1900s – 1920s dwellings including bungalows, villas and symmetrical cottages.

47


04 February 2020



Kind: Merit





Reason: Residential Policy Area 2 Principle of Development Control 7(a) and (b)

Cut / Fill: Although a degree of fill is to be undertaken and the proposed dwelling has a finished floor level that is raised, it is not considered excessive for the locality. The earthworks are considered incidental to the construction of the dwelling and will not cause any unreasonably amenity impacts to adjacent properties or the streetscape.

The Applicant has indicated the no retaining walls will be necessary to support the proposed dwelling and all side and rear boundary fencing will not exceed 2.1m in height and thus, does not constitute development.

Representations Received: Steven and Irena Morotti – 17 Birnie Avenue, Kensington Park (do not wish to be heard)

Kim Wong – 16 Birnie Avenue, Kensington Park (wish to be heard)

Bernard W.K. Li & Mariana W.C Li – 17 Lomond Avenue, Kensington Park (do not wish to be heard)




6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The subject land is located within the Residential Zone and is currently utilised for residential purposes;

The proposal seeks to construct a multi storey detached dwelling on the subject land;

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

Whilst the objective of the Policy Area seeks a character predominantly derived from single storey development, the Development Plan does not explicitly preclude two-storey development; and


48


04 February 2020




The proposed dwelling will occupy a single, rectangular shaped allotment measuring 627 square metres in area, which is fitting with the established allotment pattern of the locality. Residential Policy Area 2 – Northern seeks the maintenance and enhancement of a residential character that is derived particularly from dwellings of low scale and low to medium density, predominantly of the interwar and post-war periods, and single-storeyed detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings that are moderately set back from road boundaries and similar in scale that are the dominant built form feature in most streetscapes. The policy area does acknowledge significant variations from the predominant desired character, however this is allowed for in areas that are outside of the locality of the subject land. Whilst the relevant Development Plan provisions do not prohibit a variety of dwellings styles to be developed, the desired character of the policy area does seek that the predominant built form character be maintained and enhanced and that new development complement the scale, bulk, siting and positive elements of existing dwellings where an attractive streetscape character exists. A streetscape analysis of the locality demonstrates that the majority of dwellings (whether single or double storey) do resemble buildings typical of interwar and post-war periods. This has been achieved through the inclusion of multiple (or often all) of the following features into their design:

gable and hipped roof forms;

use of a variety of coordinated materials and colours and always including brick;

a porch or verandah extended across a generous portion of the front façade;

quoining;

gable infill detailing; and

lace work or timber fretwork lining porches or front verandahs.

Whilst the proposed development includes some of the abovementioned features, such as quoining and mouldings, the dwelling would more appropriately be described as a Georgian style inspired dwelling. This dwelling style was established in the early 1800’s rather than the interwar or post war period. The proposed dwelling exhibits strong square features and vertical lines with a low-pitched roof form that is obscured by a parapet, so to appear flat as viewed from the streetscape. The square features of the dwelling design heighten the perceived bulk and scale of the building. The large total floor area, which exceeds the maximum set out within the Development Plan, contributes to the overall bulk and mass of the building also. It is noted that more recent dwellings within the locality may not strictly replicate dwelling styles such as symmetrical cottages, bungalows or villas, however the designs display greater compatibility or sympathy to these traditional built forms and are therefore seen to maintain and enhance the established residential character. The dwellings at 17 Birnie Avenue, 6 Birnie Avenue, 1 Lossie Street and 3 Lossie Street are examples of this.

The proposed dwelling does not conform to or complement the predominant single storey character of the streetscape as it is two storey in nature and the upper level is not contained within the roof space in such a manner as to obscure its presence. Notwithstanding this, the policy area does not specifically preclude two-storey

49


04 February 2020


development and the finished height of the development sits comfortably under the nine (9) metre maximum height guideline prescribed (Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 163 (b)). To help maintain the single storey pedestrian scale of the streetscape, the upper level of the dwelling is setback further from the street than the lower level, but, it will still remain relatively visible from the streetscape given that the design of the dwelling adopts a low pitched roof form, which does not greatly obscure the upper level. There is no particular pattern established within the locality with respect to building setback from the street boundary. However, buildings do maintain reasonable setback distances to other buildings from at least one side boundary so to contribute to openness and the low-density character of the area. From a building separation perspective, the development is sited as such that it maintains this character and does not appear unbalanced in the context of the streetscape. However, the placement of the garage on the boundary does add to the garage dominance. The Development Plan does discourage garage dominance through measures such as limiting the width of garage doors. Council Wide Principle of Development Control 188 describes that garage doors should not have a width that exceeds one third of the frontage width of the site of the dwelling. In this instance, the garage door should be no greater than five (5) metres in width, and therefore the development results in a 500mm departure from this principle. Whilst the deficiency may not be highly discernible to the naked eye, when viewing the property from the public realm, its positioning abutting the garage of the neighbouring property, highlights the presence of the garages in the streetscape, as it presents as a continuous expanse of garaging. The purpose of the placement of the driveway to the south (rather than the north) may be due to location of a Stobie pole close to the northern boundary therefore, not allowing for a wider crossover so to accommodate the double garage unless relocated. To reduce the massing of the garaging and provide a visual break between the two, some mature landscaping that is dense with foliage, may be located in the landscaping strip between these garages. The application in its current form, includes only some small shrubbery in this landscaping strip. Many allotments along Birnie Avenue includes front boundary fencing. The proposed development will not be dissimilar to the existing streetscape in that, it too, proposes a front boundary fence. Unlike the majority of other front fences, the proposed fence will contain masonry portions. Although this may be the case, the fence is not considered to negatively affect the visual amenity of the streetscape, as it is not considered visually dominant. The fence includes transparent elements, allowing view through to the associated proposed dwelling, and is less than two (2) metres in overall height (Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 189 & 191).


The development presents departures Development Plan provisions, with regard to site coverage and overshadowing. Site coverage based upon the total floor area of the proposed dwelling presents a variance of sixteen per cent (16%); however the subject land provides sufficient space for:

off-street car parking;

safe and convenient vehicle access (i.e. endorsed crossovers and adequate vehicle manoeuvrability);

50


04 February 2020


adequate areas for domestic storage and provision for service areas containing rainwater tanks and air conditioning;

sizeable areas of private open space including a rectangular shaped area exceeding the policy area guidelines;

a covered area of private open space to allow for all year round use; and

compliant lower level side setbacks.

Whilst the functionality of the proposed dwelling is not compromised with respect to the above mentioned points, the excess floor area manifests to a larger scale building outcome. The upper level of the proposed dwelling is setback three (3) metres from both side boundaries. A minimum upper level side setback of four (4) metres is set out in the Development Plan (Council Wide Principle of Development Control 161 (c)), to help ensure development that does not cause a significant loss of amenity in terms of its visual impact and access to daylight. The shortfall of the upper level side boundary setbacks may result in an amplified perception of the bulk and scale of the development from the perspective from the adjoining allotments north and south of the subject land. Further, as a result of the upper level of the development, at least three (3) hours of sunlight will not be accessible to the north facing windows of the dwelling on 16 Birnie Avenue (Council Wide Principle of Development Control 183). The dwelling at 16 Birnie Avenue has two north facing windows. The first is a window to the kitchen and is located approximately 700 millimetres from the associated western garage wall. The other is a window to the family room, which is located approximately 3.7m from the associated western garage wall. With the above being said, due to the orientation of the land, overshadowing of the allotment to the south is inevitable and setting back the upper level an additional metre so to meet the minimum quantitative guidelines may not have a substantial impact on the reduction of overshadowing.

Earthworks associated with the proposed development is considered to appropriately correspond to the natural ground level and is finely balanced in achieving minimal manipulation of the landform and impacts to neighbouring properties. Only a typical boundary fence of 1.8 metres in height and no retaining walls are required to support the proposed development. Fencing of this height does not constitute development, whereby development approval is unnecessary. From the ground level, the boundary fencing is considered appropriate an appropriate means of maintaining mutual privacy for occupants of the subject land and those of the adjoining allotments. The development also avoids direct overlooking from the upper level windows as all windows will either include fixed obscure glazing to greater than 1.6 metres above the upper floor level, or have a sill height greater than 1.6 metres above the upper floor level. The Development Plan recognises a sill height of 1.6 metres above the upper floor level as appropriate for mitigating direct overlooking (Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 174). The area of private open space associated with the dwelling satisfies the Development Plan provisions (Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 165, 166 & 167 and Residential Policy Area 2 – Northern, Principle of Development Control 5) in that it:

Exceeds the minimum area required. The area of private open space is greater than 50% of the total floor area of the dwelling;

Is of ample size to cater to the typical number of occupants of a 4-bedroom dwelling;

51


04 February 2020


Is located in one area that accessible from a main living space;

Satisfies the minimum dimensions to be considered useable and functional;

Is located in the rear yard so to be private;

Is exclusive of service areas and so will not be further reduced for nonrecreational purposes; and

Is partially covered to promote use all year round.

The proposed driveway arrangements have been assessed by Council’s Technical Officer Engineering and Urban Forestry Officer and are considered to provide safe and convenient vehicle access. The proposed development demonstrates adequate functionality to support the intended residential land use, however some elements such as, the upper level setback, currently compromise the amenity of the properties adjoining the side boundaries, as it translates to a greater visual imposition and greater extent of overshadowing.


Council received three (3) written submissions during the public consultation period, and one of which currently wishes to be heard. In summary, the concerns raised within the representations received are as follows:

The development is not in keeping with the established built form, and bulk and scale of surrounding development;

Two storey development is not in keeping with the low scale and nature of development of the area;

Modern ‘square’ design not compatible with existing development;

Overshadowing;

Garage location on boundary;

Front boundary fence height; and

Loss of privacy. In response to the matters raised within the representations, the applicant provided some correspondence prepared by Mark Kwiatkowski of Adelaide Planning & Development Solutions Pty Ltd, addressing the abovementioned points. The response to the representations received is summarised as follows:

The upper level windows are of a height and are treated so to satisfy the Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 173 and 174, and maintain adequate visual privacy of surrounding properties;

The Applicant is happy for Council to condition that the privacy treatments of windows be maintained and be in accordance with the Principle of Development Control 173 and 174;

There are other examples of two storey development within the locality and wider area;

The development has been designed so to be complementary to the other development within the locality, including some two storey dwelling within the area;

The proposal has incorporated appropriate landscaping, siting, setbacks and use of materials, to enhance the appearance of the development and the site, and to help reduce visual dominance of the upper level;

Boundary development is not prohibited and the garage wall, if approved, will be built to Building Code of Australia requirements;

Boundary development does not disrupt a specific pattern of dwelling siting within the area;

52


04 February 2020


The shadow diagrams demonstrate that the development will not unreasonably overshadow the adjoining dwellings, allotments and solar panels; and

The design and materials used for the front fence are complementary to the mixture of front fencing styles that currently exist along Birnie Avenue.

A full copy of the representations and responses are included as part of the report as attachments.


Although no statutory referrals were required under Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations 2008, Council sought internal advice from Council’s Technical Officer

Engineering to assist in determining the suitability of the development against certain provisions of the Development Plan concerning traffic and stormwater management, and Council’s Urban Forestry Officer to assist in determining suitable offset distances from adjacent street trees. With the inclusion of the recommended advisory notes on any future decision for consent, Council's internal referral departments are satisfied that the development presents no concerns.

7.6. Conclusion

The policy area anticipates residential development of a low-scale nature. Whilst the proposed development can be reasonably expected in terms of the land use and adequate functionality is demonstrated, the design and appearance presents disparities from the desired character of the policy area, and the development is considered incompatible with the character of the established built form of the streetscape and with the amenity of adjoining neighbours. The proposed development is not considered seriously at variance to the policies of the Development Plan in accordance with Section 35 (2) of the Act, but still remains sufficiently at variance to the relevant objectives and development control principles so as not to warrant consent.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\0824\19, by Simon Jadon is refused Development Plan Consent for the following reasons:

Reasons

1. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Policy Area 2, Objective 1 as it does not maintain or enhance residential character;

2. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Policy Area Principle of Development Control 1 as it does not complement the scale, bulk, and positive elements of existing dwellings;

3. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Zone, Objective 2 as it does not enhance the amenity of the residential area, given that the design and appearance demonstrates incompatibility with the objective of the relative policy area.

53


04 February 2020


4. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Zone, Objective 5 as it does not enhance the amenity of the residential area, given that the dwelling design is not sympathetic to the attractive qualities of the established built form that comprises the streetscape.

5. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Zone, Principle of Development Control 2(d) in relation to building materials, finishes and decorative elements, roof form and pitch, and and parapets.

6. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide Principle of Development 14 as it does not reflect the desired character of the locality with regard to mass, external materials, finishes and decorative elements, roof form and pitch, façade detailing, verandahs and parapets.

7. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide Principle of Development Control 161 as it does not achieve minimum guidelines with respect to upper level side setbacks.

54


04 February 2020


AERIAL LOCALITY MAP APPENDIX 1

Legend

Subject Land


55


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2



Primary Residential Policy Area 2 – Northern Objectives:

Objective 1: Maintenance and enhancement of a residential character that is derived particularly from:

(a) dwellings of low-scale and low to medium density, widely varied in age but predominantly of the interwar and post-war periods; and

(b) single-storeyed, detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings, moderately set-back from road boundaries and similar in scale, that are the dominant built-form features in most streetscapes.

Acknowledged significant variations from the predominant, desired character, forming, nevertheless, part of the character that is to be maintained and enhanced, are found:

(a) in an area of recent housing south of Lossie Street, west of Toowong Avenue and north of Beulah Road; and

(b) on land with frontage to Magill Road and to Glynburn Road; and (c) adjacent to the Local Business Zone, the Local Centre Zone and the Community Zone.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Desired Land Use

O 1 Partly satisfies.

The proposed development maintains the existing residential use of the land.

The proposed dwelling is not in keeping with the desired character of the area in terms of design and appearance and compatibility with streetscape character.

Local Compatibility

PDC 1 Partly Satisfies.

The development is sited similarly to other buildings within the locality;

The policy area seeks to maintain and enhance a character derived particularly from single storeyed dwellings and low scale development, where in this case the development seeks two storey built form.

The dwelling design is not complementary with existing dwellings, which make up a distinctive and attractive streetscape. This can be attributed to a difference in the roof form, and a combination of the materials, finishes, square edging and strong use of vertical lines.

Site Areas and Frontages


The subject land is of a size that satisfies the minimum quantitative guidelines for allotment frontage and area.

Private Open Space

PDC 5 Satisfied.

The proposed dwelling is capable of containing an area of private open space accommodating 4m x 6m.

56


04 February 2020









Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use

O 1–8 PDC 1

Partly Satisfied

The proposed land use is expected within the Zone and it will not disrupt the anticipated dwelling density of the local area.

The proposed dwelling is considered to be at variance with positive aspects of the streetscape with regard to design and appearance.

Building Appearance

PDC 2–4 Partly Satisfied

The development does not have due regard to building features of the predominant dwelling character which largely consists of interwar and post war dwelling styles.

The building avoids use of materials, which may disrupt the amenity of surrounding occupants, such as highly reflective surface.

The reduced upper level side setback is considered to be increase the mass of the building when viewed from the adjoining allotments.

57


04 February 2020









Objective 56: Residential development which moderates adverse climatic conditions, takes advantage of solar energy, does not unreasonably overshadow adjacent development, and protects the natural environment. use.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use

O 52–56 Satisfied


Partly Satisfied

The dwelling is designed so that the main façade faces the primary street frontage and adequately addresses and is identifiable from the public realm.

The building is proposed so to avoid lengths of uninterrupted walling facing areas exposed to the public view.

The upper level of the dwelling is sited more closely to the side boundary than encouraged, which contributes to the visual massing of the building and the restriction of daylight to north facing windows of the dwelling to the south of the subject land.

The building is not compatible with the predominant dwelling character, by way of dissimilarity of roof forms and pitch, articulation and detailing.

Building Set-backs PDC 161–163

Partly Satisfied

The proposed dwelling is setback appropriately with respect to front and rear boundary setbacks.

The lower level is partly setback closer to the northern boundary by 500mm. This departure is considered nominal, given that the first half of the expanse of wall will meet the DP guideline and create an adequate perception of space between the surrounding buildings. Although there is portion of the wall that is setback 1m from the side boundary (in lieu of 1.5m), this will be further away from the streetscape it will be less noticeable from the public realm.

At the upper level, each side boundary setback falls short of the 4m guideline. This shortfall coupled with the “boxy” upper floor plan, may heighten the visual mass of the building from the perspective of the occupants on the adjoining properties to the

58


04 February 2020


north and south of the subject land. The only visual break in walling is attributed to the window openings.

Building Height PDC 164

Satisfied.

The proposed dwellings do not exceed two-storey in built form.

The proposed dwellings are within the building height guideline above natural ground level.

Site Coverage PDC 165

Partly Satisfied.

The development complies with the site coverage provisions when calculated based upon ground floor only and when including the associated driveway area.

The total floor area of the proposed dwelling results in a 16% departure from the 50% guideline. This additional area does not jeopardise the overall functionality of the site for residential purposes, however it could be contributing factor to the visual bulk and scale of the building.

Private Open Space PDC 166, 169

Satisfied.

Amenity

O11, 20–22 PDC 14–18, 52-69, 170-173, 188

Variance.

Refer to reasoning in Design and Appearance

Due to the reduced setbacks the upper level can be considered to impair the visual amenity of adjoining land, resulting in increased massing and prolonged overshadowing.

The development will not result in loss of privacy.

Landscaping provided will contribute to the enhancement of the amenity of the streetscape, however additional species could be considered to reduce garage dominance.


Satisfied.

The finished floor level and boundary fencing will adequately maintain reciprocal privacy between allotments.

All upper level windows will be treated so to avoid instances of direct overlooking.


Satisfied.

A sufficient number of off-street car parking spaces can be accommodated.

The crossover and driveway arrangement satisfies Council internal department’s requirements.

Safe and convenient vehicle access can be gained to the site of the development.


Partial Variance.

Due to the orientation of the land, overshadowing of the property to the south is inevitable.

The proposed development will enable an acceptable amount of sunlight to be available to the areas of private open space to the surrounding dwellings.

The proposed development will result in overshadowing of the north facing habitable room windows of the dwelling to the south.

Fences and Retaining Walls


59


04 February 2020


No retaining walls are required to the support the proposed floorlevel of the dwelling.

The front masonry fence is in keeping with the streetscape,given that there are many examples of front fencing associatedwith dwellings in the locality. The fencing is part transparent tomaintain passive surveillance or the area, visibility of theassociated dwelling and not be visually dominant.

Trees and Other Vegetation

O 24-28 PDC 77-92

Satisfied.

There are no regulated or significant trees on or on propertiessurrounding the subject land.

60

Council Assessment Panel Agenda 04 February 2020 Report Number: PR 6.4

APPENDIX 3






Site Coverage

- Buildings only Approximately 35.5% 40%

- Buildings and driveways Approximately 41% 50%

- Total floor area Approximately 66% 50%

Building Height

- storeys 2 storeys 2 storeys

- metres 7.2m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 5.5m 5.1m (average setback distance of dwellings on abutting land on either side of subject land)

- side boundary North – 1m to 2m South – 2.4m

1.5m


Upper Level


- side boundary North - 3m South – 3m

4m


Boundary Wall

- length 7m 8m

- height 3m 3m

Private Open Space

- percentage 56.8% = Approximately 236.3sqm

50% of the total floor area = Approx. 208.15sqm

- dimensions 13.67m x 11.5m One area measuring 4m x 6m



- width of driveway 4.2 – 6.3m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 36% 33%

61

this page is left intentionally blank

62


04 February 2020




Applicant: K Rogers

Location: 10-12 Mariner Street, Linden Park

Proposal: Four (4) two-storey dwellings including garages, porches, alfrescos, retaining walls and fencing


Residential Policy Area 21 – Linden Park




Three (3) representations received






Recommendation: Development Plan Consent be refused


REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:










Photographs

63


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the following:

Construct two (2) two-storey dwellings (proposed dwelling 1 and proposed dwelling 2) in the form of detached buildings.

Construct two (2) two-storey dwellings (proposed dwelling 3 and proposed dwelling 4) in the form of semi-detached buildings.

Retaining walls up to 1m in height with 1.8m high Colorbond fencing.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0691\19 was lodged on 3 October 2019 by Kathy Rogers on behalf of the registered owners of the land. It is noted that there is a separate and concurrent land division application active within the system, however no decision has yet been made. The proposal was determined to be a merit form of development pursuant to Section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993 (the Act). For the purposes of public notification, the application was

determined to be a Category 2 development in accordance with the Burnside (City) Development Plan, Residential Policy Area 21 Principle of Development Control 12. The application was made available for public inspection for a period of two weeks, during which time Council received written submissions from three (3) adjoining land owners who raised concerns with respect to a number of planning matters such as density, visual amenity, site coverage, setbacks, privacy, fences and retaining walls, landscaping, overshadowing, scale and massing. Council also received an additional two (2) submissions from nearby residents who were not formally notified through the public notification process.



3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is located on the southern side of Mariner Street, within the suburb of Linden Park. The land has an area of approximately 1722 square metres and a frontage to Mariner Street of 40.5 metres. The land elevates from the front north-western corner to the rear south-eastern corner by approximately 2.8m. The subject land currently contains a two-storey 1950s colonial style dwelling, swimming pool, outbuildings and tennis court. The subject land comprised two existing allotments of which are currently used for a single residence.

3.2. Locality

The locality comprises both sides of Mariner Street, bound by Portrush Road (to the west), and Burnell Street (to the east), and is located wholly within the Residential Policy Area 21 – Linden Park. For this reason the locality primarily consists of residential land uses with the exception of the Linden Park Primary School Oval, located north-east of the subject land. The area has a low scale, low-to-medium density residential character, derived from a range of dwelling types and styles. Properties have moderate front setback with generally open front landscaped gardens. The streetscape of Mariner Street, is predominantly comprised of single storey detached dwellings on consistently sized allotments with

64


04 February 2020


frontages to the public road. However, there are examples of two storey development, as well as semi-detached and group dwellings. Allotments within the locality are generally rectangular with wide frontages. Recent subdivisions that have occurred within the locality and broader locality have maintained the rectangular pattern of division however with narrower frontage widths.


Kind: Merit





Reason: Residential Policy Area 21, Principle of Development Control 12(a), (b), (d)

Representations Received: D Duffy & E O’Hallaran – 9 Hay Road Linden Park (wish to be heard)

M Xu & Y Ouyang – 8 Mariner Street Linden Park (do not wish to be heard)

H & D Zulfic – 14 Mariner Street Linden Park (wish to be heard)




6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The subject land is located within the Residential Zone and is currently contains a two-storey dwelling and ancillary structures.

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

The Development Plan anticipates detached and semi-detached dwellings and does not preclude two-storey development; and

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


65


04 February 2020



Residential Policy Area 21 seeks to maintain and enhance a low scale, low-to-medium density residential character derived from residential development, including detached dwellings, in a wide variety of styles with moderate building setbacks and generally open, well-established front gardens and grassed verges.

The policy area has reduced site area guidelines for allotments in excess of 1200 square metres, namely 360 square metres for detached dwellings in lieu of 425 square metres, and 320 square metres for semi-detached dwellings in lieu of 400 square metres. As such, in terms of site area, each proposed allotment is in excess of the minimum guidelines. These exceptions also nominate frontage guidelines, being 12 metres for detached dwellings and 9 metres for semi-detached dwellings. The proposed development appears to read as dwellings 1 and 2 being detached, but abutting dwellings, and dwellings 3 and 4 being semi-detached, however abutting dwelling 2. As such, dwellings 1 and 2 fall short of the 12 metre guideline. Whilst achieving site area guidelines, the frontage width issues are further compounded with shortfalls in side boundary setbacks, to both the ground floor and upper floor of each proposed dwelling. The upper floor side setbacks were increased as a result of the public notification process, however only to those elevations that interface with adjoining properties, being the eastern side of dwelling 4 and the western side of dwelling 1 which have increased from 1.8m and 2.6m respectively. Internal separation of the upper floors between each dwelling remain gravely short of the guideline, and in the case of dwellings 1 and 2, have a two-storey external wall located on a side boundary of the site.

The proposed design does little to address patterns of space and streetscape amenity. At the ground level, spatial separation varies from 1m – 1.5m, however the facades present as boundary to boundary, effectively resulting in 40.5 metres of continuous development, which is not considered to maintain or enhance the residential character sought by the policy area, or retain existing streetscape character and amenity, resulting in an increase in visual massing and scale, and disproportionate patterns of space.

From a quantitative perspective, total floor area for each dwelling is well in excess of the 50 percent guideline, which is considered to be manifested by other fundamental planning issues such as setbacks and frontages. Additionally, the design and presentation to the streetscape is one that results in garages sited forward to comprise the main building line, with the upper levels marginally cantilevered above. The garages are considered a dominant feature, whilst also exceeding one third of the frontage width of each proposed allotment, further contributing to an undesirable development outcome. Finally, the proposed external materials, colours and finishes, coupled with the elongated span of continuous built form offer little reprieve in breaking up the visual massing and scale of the development. Whilst achieving some degree of articulation and fenestration, the repetitive nature is considered to further attribute to the massing and scale, and disproportionate setting of the proposed development. Site Functionality / Agency Referrals

For vehicular access purposes, the existing western-most crossover is proposed to service dwelling 1, the existing eastern-most crossover is proposed to be modified to service dwelling 3, with two new crossovers proposed to service dwellings 2 and 4. The proposed crossovers do not conflict with existing street trees, maintaining 1.5m setbacks as prescribed by the Development Plan and Council’s Urban Forestry Officer.

66


04 February 2020


The access arrangement has been reviewed by Council’s Technical Officer Engineering and no concerns have been raised regarding additional crossovers and impacts to on-street car parking. The development provides sufficient space for on-site car parking to meet the needs of future occupants and visitors and to avoid on-street parking that would restrict the free flow of traffic (including pedestrian traffic) or cause significant nuisance to nearby residents or other users of land.


The proposal was made available for public inspection for a period of two weeks, during which time Council received three (3) written submissions from notified adjoining properties in regards to the proposed development, as well as two (2) additional submissions from other land owners in the vicinity of the site of the development who were not formally notified through this process. The matters raised through this process are summarised as follows:

Lack of variance in external materials, colours and finishes and the impact a 40m span of this outlook has on adjoining properties, as well as reflectivity.

The height and lack of separation between the proposed four dwellings.

The development does not meet site coverage, total floor area or private open space guidelines.

The development does not meet side boundary setback which results in reduced visual amenity due to increased consumption of space.

The development results in 8 second storey windows overlooking neighbouring private open spaces.

The height of retaining walls and lack of consultation on the rear fence.

Concern regarding potential regulated trees.

Overshadowing impacts due to reduced setbacks, in particular to the western and eastern neighbouring properties.

Concern about low regard for the spacious nature of dwellings in the street.

The proposed development conflicts with Objective 1 of Residential Policy Area 21.

The development reduces the opportunity for green landscaped front yards.

The development site is occupied by mostly double garages which is aesthetically unattractive.

Concern regarding the height, massing and proportion of the dwellings and lack of aesthetic appeal.

The applicant provided written responses to the representations as received and made some changes to the proposal, including increased upper level setbacks to the western side of dwelling 1 and eastern side of dwelling 4, which also reduced the upper level footprint, however these modifications have in turn increased the ground level footprint, essentially maintaining total floor area as per the original submission and have not sufficiently addressed concerns regarding the scale, intensity and impact of development. Planning matters such as dwelling types in the context of site frontages and areas, setbacks, garage dominance, total floor area etc. were identified as issues to be addressed in the early stages of the assessment. Council considers that the public notification process has been carried out and addressed, however maintain that there are critical design issues manifesting to poor planning outcomes associated with the proposal as it stands.

67


04 February 2020


7.4. 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, but is sufficiently at variance with the policies of the Development Plan so as not to warrant approval. The policy area anticipates residential development of a low-scale nature. Whilst the proposed development can be reasonably expected in terms of the land use and two-storey nature, the design and appearance presents significant disparities from the desired character of the policy area, and displays cumulative planning issues due to the incompatible functionality of the proposed development in terms of siting, setbacks, scale, streetscape compatibility and with the amenity of adjoining neighbours.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\1020\19, by K Rogers, is refused Development Plan Consent for the following reasons:

Reasons

1. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Policy Area 21, Objective 1 as it does not maintain or enhance the low scale residential character.

2. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Policy Area 21, Principle of Development Control 1 as it does not complement the scale, bulk, siting and positive elements of existing dwellings.

3. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Policy Area 21, Principle of Development Control 5, as proposed dwellings 1 and 2 do not satisfy frontage guidelines.

4. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Zone, Objective 2 as it is not considered to protect and enhance the amenity of residential areas, with particular reference to the objectives for the relevant policy area, in regards to siting, scale and streetscape presentation.

5. The proposal fails to achieve Residential Zone, Principle of Development Control 3 as it presents with a monotonous design spanning a considerable frontage to the street.

6. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Objective 11 as the proposed development is not considered to be of a high design standard and appearance, and it does not respond to or reinforce positive aspects of the local environment and built form.

7. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 160 in regards to the garage siting.

8. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 161 in regards to ground level and upper level side boundary setbacks and the impacts on the established and desired pattern of space between buildings.

9. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 161 in regards to boundary wall heights and setbacks.

10. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 164 in regards to site coverage and total floor area.

11. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 166 in regards to private open space.

12. The proposal fails to achieve Council Wide, Principle of Development Control 188 in regards to the proportionate width of garage doors to frontages.

68


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land


69


04 February 2020


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 maintains the existing and lawful residential use of the land.


Variance.

The proposed development is not considered to maintain or enhance the low scale residential character, by way of increased massing and scale and limited side boundary setbacks, which are considered to result in an overcrowded streetscape presentation.

Site Areas and Frontages PDC 2 - 10

Partial Variance.

Dwellings 3 and 4, reading as semi-detached dwellings, satisfy RPA 21 PDC 7 in regards to site areas and frontages.

Dwellings 1 and 2, reading as detached dwellings, do not satisfy RPA 21 PDC 5 in regards to site frontages.

70


04 February 2020









Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.


Variance.

The proposed buildings are not considered to be consistent with, or contribute to the achievement of the objectives for the policy area, as the siting of the buildings result in a boundary to boundary streetscape outcome which does not maintain patterns of space and established streetscape amenity.

The lack of setbacks results in increased visual massing, bulk and scale, which is disproportionate to the existing streetscape character.

The repetitive and monotonous design is considered a poor design outcome, offering little variation across the proposed 4 buildings.


Satisfied.

The stepped FFL’s along the street reflect the natural topography of the street.

Retaining walls up to a maximum 1m are commonplace and not considered unreasonable in the context of the site and locality.

71


04 February 2020










Objective 57: Medium and high density residential development in areas close to activity centres, public and community transport and public open spaces.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use O 52–60

Satisfied.

Design and Appearance

O 11 PDC 14–18, 23-28

Variance.

The design and appearance of the proposed dwellings is not considered to be of a standard that responds to and reinforces the positive aspects of the local environment and built form, in terms of siting, setbacks and massing.

The proposed development is designed with garages sited forward to comprise the main building line, with the upper levels marginally cantilevered above


Satisfied.

Side Set-backs

Variance.

Ground level side setbacks are negligible from the street, due to the boundary to boundary design and streetscape outcome.

Ground level side setbacks vary from 1m to 1.5m, being a partial variance to the 1.5m – 2m guideline.

Upper level side setbacks do not satisfy the 4m guideline, which is considered to result in a loss of amenity from an occupant’s perspective, as well as from a streetscape and local amenity perspective.

The development proposes two-storey external wall heights sited on side boundaries.

Rear Set-backs Satisfied.

72


04 February 2020


Building Height

PDC 164 Satisfied.


Variance.

Each proposed dwelling exceeds site coverage and total floor area guidelines, which coupled with the departure in achieving setback guidelines, is an inappropriate outcome.

Private Open Space

PDC 166, 169 Variance.

Each proposed dwelling falls short in achieving sufficient private open space that equates to at least half the total floor area of the dwelling.

Each proposed dwelling achieves minimum dimensions for private open space, and are useable and accessible areas.

Amenity O11, 20–22 PDC 14–18, 52-69, 170-173

Variance.

The proposed development involving two-storey external walls sited on a boundary (dwellings 1 and 2) is considered to result in a sense of enclosure and loss of visual amenity to the occupant of the affected neighbouring property (in this case the dwelling to the east of each respective wall).


Satisfied.

Side and rear facing windows nominate fixed and obscure glazing to the full extent of the windows.

Access and On-Site Car Parking

PDC 177–182

Satisfied.

Each proposed dwelling achieves minimum off-street car parking guidelines.


Satisfied.

The shadow diagrams provided (albeit shown as 22 June instead of 21 June as requested) demonstrate that the development will not unreasonably restrict sunlight access beyond the parameters of CW PDC 183, partially due to the orientation of the site and setback of the upper level from the rear boundary.


Satisfied.

Trees and Other Vegetation Satisfied.

The applicant has not identified whether any regulated or significant trees are affected by the proposed works, however it was identified as a possibility by one of the submissions received during public notification. The tree in question is not a Willow Myrtle or Eucalyptus tree, and is within 10m of an existing swimming pool on the subject land and therefore is not a regulated tree.

73


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 3


Site Characteristics

Dwelling 1 Dwelling 2 Dwelling 3 Dwelling 4 Guideline

Site Area 411.17m² 404.94m² 412.49m² 493.46m² 360m² (detached)

320m2 (semi-

detached)

Street Frontage 10.4m 9.2m 9.915m 11m 12m (detached)

9m (semi-

detached)

Design Characteristics

Guideline

Site Coverage


179.78m² 44.3%

179.78m² 43.5%

203.62m² 41.2%

40%

- Total floor area 290.01m² 70.5%

287.69m² 71%

287.69m² 69.7%

311.53m² 63.1%

50%

Building Height

- storeys 2 storey 2 storey 2 storey 2 storey 2 storeys

- metres 7.4m 7.4m 8.4m 8.4m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 6m 9.135m 10m 10m 6m

- side boundary 1.5m (w) On boundary (e)

1m (w) On boundary (e)

1m (w) Party wall (e)

Party wall (w) 1.5m (e)

1.5m - 2m

- rear boundary 8m 8m 8m 8m 4m Upper Level

- front boundary 6m 9.135m 9.2m 9.2m 8m

- side boundary 3m (w) On boundary (e)

2.2m (w) On boundary (e)

2.1m (w) Party wall (e)

Party wall (w) 4m (e)

4m

- rear boundary 17.2m 17.2m 18.5m 18.5m 8m

Private Open Space

- percentage 112.3m² 38.7%

110.71m² 38.4%

110.71m² 26.8%

132.44m² 26.8%

50%

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


- number of parks 2 2 2 2 2

- width of driveway

4m 4.294m 4m 4m 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door

4.8m 46.1%

4.8m 52.1%

4.8m 48.4%

4.8m 43.6%

33%

74


04 February 2020




Applicant: Ms D Walford

Location: 10-12 Watson Avenue, Rose Park

Proposal: (Non-complying) Change of Land Use - Residential to Residential and Office

Zone/Policy Area: Historic Conservation Zone

Historic Conservation Policy Area 1 – Rose Park


Kind of Assessment: Non-complying


Nil (0) representations received

Appeal Opportunity Third party only, no Applicant appeal rights

Referrals – Statutory: Nil


Local Heritage Consultant

Delegations Policy: Non-complying development

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


REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:







Delegate’s Report to Proceed

Photographs

75


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks retrospective approval for a change of land use to one in a pair of attached maisonettes under single ownership at 10-12 Watson Avenue, Rose Park, from residential to office. Specifically, the Applicant seeks to change the use of the westernmost dwelling on the subject land to support the administration operations of two (2) businesses that are both owned by the Applicant; Behind Closed Doors and DW Bottomline. Both businesses offer professional development services aimed at two different target markets. Behind Close Door is specifically aimed at coaching and networking for women, while DW Bottomline provides advice and expertise to clients regarding business development and assists them with responding to change. Both businesses rely on common administration processes, practice and staff, which lends to the necessity of only one office to support both businesses. The staffing arrangement for the proposed office is as follows:

One full time

Two part-time

Managing Director (The Applicant) attends the site one half-day per week

The two part time staff members will work alternate days/shifts, therefore only two employees in total will generally occupy the site. However, the Applicant has advised that on the odd occasion, for situations such as staff meetings, all employees (four persons) will be on site at one time. Business services are conducted offsite, however a one on one meeting with the Managing Director and a client may be held at the subject site. The Applicant’s representative has advised that due to the operations of the business it will not be necessary for more than one client for each business (i.e. two clients) to be present at the subject site at any one time. The use of the proposed office will be for the occasional one on one meeting as described above and for the primary purpose of administrative activities associated with membership management, website management and finance. No structural changes to the building, floor plan layout are proposed. The external appearance of the building will also remain unchanged as a result of the proposed development and no advertising signage associated with the office use is proposed. No deliveries are required to support the office land use, other than stationary and other items such as domestic cleaning products, which will be purchased in frequently by employees rather than having these goods delivered directly to the site. The hours of operation are weekdays from 9am to 5:30pm.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0781\19 was lodged 31 July 2019 by Helen Dyer of Holmes Dyer, on behalf of the registered owner of the land Hauschild Properties Pty Ltd. The proposal was determined to be a non-complying form of development pursuant to the Burnside (City) Development Plan, Historic Conservation Zone, Principle of Development Control 25, which states:

“The following kinds of development are non-complying:

76


04 February 2020


Office Office and Dwelling where the total floor area of the office component is more than 40 square metres

(my underlining) The proposed development was determined to be non-complying given that it comprises a change of use from dwellings to office and dwelling where the total area of the office use comprises more than 40 square metres.

For the purposes of public notification, neither the Historic Conservation Zone nor Schedule 9 of the Development Regulations 2008 identify a category of development for the change of use. Therefore, in accordance with the Development Act 1993 Section 38 (2)(c) any development that is not assigned as either a Category 1 or Category 2 form of development, it will be taken to be a Category 3 development for the purposes of this section.

The applicant initially provided a Statement of Support in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 17(1) of the Development Regulations 2008. The administration considered the proposal and in accordance with Regulations 17(3) (b) of the Development Regulations 2008

(the Regulations) and determined to proceed with an assessment of the application. A copy of the Delegate’s Report to Proceed with the assessment of the application, is included as an attachment to this report, for your information. Following this, a Statement of Effect was requested in accordance with Clause 17(4) of the Regulations, and was supplied by the Applicant on 26 November 2019. As part of the assessment process the application was referred to Council’s Technical Officer Engineering to assess the suitably of the proposed use regarding on and off street parking, as well as general impacts on local road network. The application was also referred to Council’s Local Heritage Consultant to inform of any heritage implications associated with the proposed development. The application was made available for public consultation for a period of ten (10) business days, excluding the days that fell between 25 December 2019 and 1 January 2020, during which time Council received no representations. The proposal is now presented to the Council Assessment Panel (the Panel) for consideration as a non-complying development with recommendation that Development Plan Consent be granted, subject to the concurrence of the State Planning Commission.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is formally known as Allotment 191 Deposited Plan 750 in the area named Rose Park Hundred of Adelaide, as described on Certificate of Title Volume 5687 and Folio 27. It is more commonly known as 10-12 Watson Avenue, Rose Park. The subject land is rectangular in shape and has a frontage width of 15.24 metres to Watson Avenue, a depth of 45.72 metres and an area of 696.77 square metres. The subject land is located on the southern side of Watson Avenue between its intersection with Thomas Place and Close Street. The rear boundary abuts Aviator Lane. The land is currently occupied by a pair of maisonette dwellings in the form of a symmetrical cottage dating from the 1915-1920 period. The dwelling is a Contributory

77


04 February 2020


Item within the Historic Conservation Zone. Also situated on the land is a verandah attached to the rear of the building and an outbuilding allowing for the storage of two vehicles per dwelling and a small domestic storage area. A small white picket fence exists across the front boundary of the subject land. The internal layout of each dwelling is identical to the other.

3.2. Locality The subject land is located on the southern side of Watson Avenue between its intersection with Thomas Place and Close Street and the locality is considered to comprise those allotments:

on the northern and southern side of Watson Avenue between Thomas Place and Close Street;

with a boundary abutting the Aviator Lane and are located between Thomas Place and Close Street;

1 Alexandra Avenue, Rose Park;

1,3 and 5 Thomas Place, Rose Park; and

142-144, 147 & 151 Fullarton Road, Rose Park.

The locality spans over two zones, including the Urban Corridor Zone (and more particularly the Boulevard Policy Area), and the Historic Conservation Zone (more specifically the Historic Conservation Policy Area 1 – Rose Park). The built form fabric is made up of single storey dwellings with distinct and refined historical character including bay window villas, villas and symmetrical cottages established from 1890 to the early 1900’s and 1920. The majority of the dwellings within the locality are Contributory Items. The built form differs on allotments that are located within the Urban Corridor Zone. These are in the form of multistorey buildings, with modern appearance including square features, with associated car parking areas and signage. Buildings within the Urban Corridor Zone are generally used for the purpose of offices and consulting rooms. The only other non-residential land use within the locality outside of the Urban corridor Zone is the Kindergarten located at 22 Watson Avenue. Overall, the streetscape amenity is considered to be of a high standard, which is generally attributed to the historical character, fencing of a variety of forms, well-kept landscaped front gardens and the wide street lined with a generous planting of established street trees located within the road verge.


Kind: Non-complying

Reason: Burnside Development Plan – Historic Conservation Zone, Principle of Development Control 25

Applicant Appeal Opportunity: No



Reason: Development Act 1993, Section 38 (2)(c)

Representations Received: Nil

Third Party Appeal Opportunity: Yes

78


04 February 2020


6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The subject land is located within the Historic Conservation Zone and has historically been utilised for residential purposes;

The Development Plan anticipates detached and semi-detached dwellings generally of low scale and low to medium density;

Conservation and enhancement of the established historical character is envisaged;

Although the proposed development is identified as a non-complying kind of development in the Burnside (City) Development Plan, dwellings and consulting rooms or offices are permitted in certain circumstances and form part of the locality within which the subject land is situated;

The Development Plan contemplates non-residential activities within residential areas in general, provided they are small in scale and benign in nature; and




The Burnside (City) Development Plan seeks to maintain and enhance the established historic character of the area and accommodates detached and semi-detached dwellings. The proposed development is considered to maintain the established historic character given that no changes to the built form are proposed and the external appearance will remain the same. No advertising is associated with the office and businesses, or at all for that matter, is proposed. The number of persons expected to utilise the office is comparable to the number of occupants or visitors that could be expected at the site if maintained as a dwelling. The activities associated with the operations of the office or any office are low impact in terms of noise and unlike other non-residential uses such as a shop, do not rely on other services to facilitate the land use. For instance, an office that for the most part, accommodates two (2) employees, will not generate a high amount of waste that otherwise cannot be supported by the Council waste service, and does not require good to be delivered to support its function. Further, as only a maximum of two (2) clients at any one time, will rarely visit the premises traffic movements on or surrounding the site is expected to be infrequent. The development is therefore not anticipated to impart any unreasonable visual or amenity impacts to the local area and the streetscape outlook will remain unchanged. It is acknowledged that if approved as an office and the current owner chooses to vacate the premises, another business that may operate differently and for example, have a greater number of clients or employees, may occupy the land and consequently have greater impact on the surrounding land uses than the one which is currently proposed. Due to the small floor area of the proposed office space, it is anticipated that this would limit and only lend itself to support offices that are also of a small scale which have similar

79


04 February 2020


impacts as a result. To ensure that the premises will only allow for a business that has the same impact to what is currently being assessed, conditions of consent restricting the number of employees and customers on site at any one time, deliveries, waste storage and the operating hours have been provided should the Panel determine to approve the application. The subject land is in proximity to the Urban Corridor Zone, which includes several non-residential land uses. The proposed development proposes a continuation of this however outside of the Urban Corridor Zone. Whilst the development could be considered an infiltration of this type of development into the Historic Conservation Zone, which encourages residential development, the development is in keeping with the desired character being that it will remain low scale and conserve the established historic character of the area. It is noted that some non-residential land uses could be expected within the Zone should they be paired with a dwelling and are no more than 40 square metres. Therefore, this type of land use could be expected should it be low in scale and compatible with the area so that the objectives of the Zone are fulfilled. The development is considered to be in keeping with this as it is low in scale (as mentioned previously) and discounting the associated areas such as the bathroom, the office space will cover an area of approximately 35 square metres.


The proposed development will result in the change of use of the western maisonette (10 Watson Avenue) from residential to office and maintain the eastern maisonette (12 Watson Avenue) as a dwelling. The functionality of the dwelling at 12 Watson Avenue will not change or be impacted upon in any way, as the change of use does not affect the site of that dwelling. The proposed change of land use is considered to have a limited impact upon the amenity of adjacent residential land and responds appropriately to its contextual setting, for the following reasons:

The proposed land use will utilise an existing building;

No physical changes to the existing building are required to support the land use and thereby it will not introduce any visual amenity impacts;

The locality includes a mixture of land uses given its proximity to the Urban Corridor Zone;

Noise generally created and associated with the operation of an office of this size is not expected to generate an unreasonable level of noise;

From the public realm perspective, the development will operate similarly to the dwelling, with respect to frequency of traffic, the number of people expected to occupy and visit the site and the absence of deliveries;

It will not generate an excessive amount of waste, that can otherwise not be sustained by the current three bin system offered by Council;

Waste will be stored out of public view;

No advertising is proposed;

The operating hours are limited to conventional business hours and thus not disrupt the surrounding dwellings occupants hours of sleep, with respect to noise permeation;

Visual privacy will of surrounding allotments will be maintained given that no changes to boundary fencing is proposed; and

80


04 February 2020


The development will not change the nature of the movement through the local road network and it will be complaint with the traffic and parking guidelines as explained below.

The Applicant engaged an independent traffic engineer to assess the traffic and parking implications of the proposed development and details of this assessment is provided within the plans and application documentation. In summary, it was found that the development is considered to supply a sufficient amount of off-street parking and will not unreasonably affect the local road network, in consideration of the following:

nominal amount of client or customer visits to the site;

limited number of staff on the site at any one time;

no deliveries necessary to service the land use and site;

the small size of the “office space” specifically (i.e. not including bathroom or staff amenity area) being approximately 35 square metres;

two off-street parking spaces and area for bicycle parking is provided;

public transportation is within walking distance of the site;

the width of Watson Avenue; and

the number of on street parking spaces available in proximity to the subject land.

In accordance with TABLE Bur/5 of the Development Plan, approximately five (5) off-street parking spaces should be provided to support the office use. The subject land offers two (2) off-street parking spaces within the existing garage that is accessible from the rear laneway. Although the development is technically deficient of three (3) off-street parking spaces, it is not considered to impair the functionality of the land or the amenity of the surrounding land uses. This is because, only two (2) employees will be on the site at any one time and should clients attend the site it is anticipated they will only be on site for a small period of time and on an irregular basis. In this instance, the on street parking is considered sufficient to support visitors to the site, just visitors associated with a dwelling land use be required to rely on street parking. To ensure that an abundance of employees and/or customers do not attend the site and therefore constrain the availability of on street parking, a condition restricting the number of employees and customers will be established for any future decision.


Public notification for the application commenced on 17 December 2019 and finished on 9 January 2020. No representations were submitted to Council throughout or on the closing date of this period.


The proposal was referred to Council’s Technical Officer engineering and Local Heritage Consultant for consideration. No issues of concern were raised through this process.

7.6. Conclusion


81


04 February 2020


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Subject to concurrence from the State Planning Commission, that Development Application 180\0781\19, by Ms D Walford 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:


2 The hours of operation of the premises for the office shall be limited to Monday to Friday

from 9am until 5:30pm.

Reason:


3 No more than two (2) staff members shall be on the premises at any one time during the specified operating hours, other than during infrequent staff meetings or the like, whereby no more than four (4) employees shall be permitted on the premises during the specified operating hours.

Reason:

To ensure the development remains of low scale and intensity so not to conflict with desired character of the Historic Conservation Zone and more specifically the Historic conservation Policy Area 1 - Rose Park, and diminish the established amenity of the area.

4 No more than two (2) customers shall be on the premises at any one time.

Reason:

To ensure the development remains of low scale and intensity so not to conflict with desired character of the Historic Conservation Zone and more specifically the Historic conservation Policy Area 1 - Rose Park, and diminish the established amenity of the area.

5 No delivery of goods associated with the office approved herein shall occur.

Reason:


6 Waste and waste bins shall not be stored in view of the public.

82


04 February 2020


Reason: To ensure the development does not unduly diminish the amenity of surrounding land uses.

Advisory Notes

1

2 3 4

Building Consent

Development Approval will not be granted until a Building Rules Consent has been obtained. A separate application must be submitted for such consent. No building work or change of classification is permitted until the Development Approval has been obtained.

Expiration Time of Approval Pursuant to the provisions of Regulation 48 under the Development Act 1993, this Consent/Approval will lapse at the expiration of 12 months from the operative date of the Consent/Approval unless the relevant development has been lawfully commenced by substantial work on the site of the development within 12 months, in which case the Approval will lapse within 3 years from the operative date of the Approval subject to the proviso that if the development has been substantially or fully completed within those 3 years, the Approval will not lapse.

Other Authorities

The applicant must ensure that any consent from other authorities (including but not limited to SA Water, Telstra, Native Vegetation Board) that may be required to undertake the development, has been granted by that authority prior to the commencement of the development.

Noise

The emission of noise from the premises is subject to control under the Local Nuisance and Litter Control Act 2016 and the applicant (or person with the benefit of this consent) must comply with those requirements.

83


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

84


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2



Historic Conservation Policy Area 1 – Rose Park

Objective 1:

Development that conserves and enhances the Established Historic Character.

Objective 2:

Development primarily accommodating detached and semi-detached dwellings.

Objective 3:

Maintenance and enhancement of the low scale, low and medium density residential character.

Objective 4:

Single-storey buildings, except for the eastern and western side of Prescott Terrace, where two-storey buildings may be appropriate.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Objective 1 - 4 Satisfied

Principle of Development

Control 1-9 Satisfied

The development proposes not changes to the built form

85


04 February 2020


Summary of Historic (Conservation) Zone Objectives and Principles

Primary Residential Zone Objectives: Objective 1: The conservation and enhancement of the historic character of the relevant Policy Area.

Objective 2: The retention and conservation of land, buildings, outbuildings, structures, and landscape elements that contribute positively to the established historic character of a Policy Area.

Objective 3: Development accommodating those housing types which are compatible with the historic character of the zone.

Objective 4: Development which conserves and enhances the historic character of the relevant Policy Areas of the zone, in terms of: (a) overall and detailed design of buildings; (b) dwelling type and overall form; (c) allotment dimensions and proportions; (d) placement of buildings on the allotment and alignment to the street; (e) layout of the site and the type and height of fencing; (f) streetscapes, verge treatment and street planting; and (g) curtilages and garden areas.

Objective 5: A zone where the majority of the existing housing stock is maintained through the retention of items which contribute positively to the character of the Policy Areas, and the number of dwellings is increased primarily through:

(a) the replacement of dwellings that are not identified as contributory items, and (b) the appropriate development of vacant sites.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:

Objectives O 1–5

Satisfed

General PDC 1-5

N/A

Appearance of Land and Buildings PDC 6-15

N/A

Alterations and Additions PDC 16-18

N/A

New Buildings

PDC 19-22 N/A

Demolition PDC 23

N/A

86


04 February 2020



Primary Development Objectives: Objective 1: Satisfaction of the social, cultural, economic, environmental and health needs of the community.

Objective 4: Provision and maintenance of employment opportunities. Objective 5: Development which promotes community identity and exhibits a high quality of design.

Objective 8: A rational distribution and arrangement of land uses to avoid incompatibility between activities, and permit efficient use of land within the metropolitan area.


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 22: Conservation of streetscapes and landscapes of aesthetic merit, and sites and localities of natural beauty.

Objective 29: Provision for the safe, convenient and efficient movement of people and goods having regard to the road hierarchy, including arterial roads for major traffic movements, shown on Map Bur/1 (Overlay 1).

Objective 30: Provision of facilities: (a) for public and private transport systems and services; and (b) the movement of vehicles, cycles and pedestrians generally that are comprehensive, integrated, economic, efficient and safe, and which minimise adverse impacts on residential areas and the environment.

Objective 31: Encouragement of walking and cycling by provision of: (a) safe, convenient and legible movement networks to points of attraction; and (b) secure bicycle parking.

Objective 32: A compatible arrangement between land uses and the transport system which: (a) ensures minimal noise and air pollution; (b) protects the amenity of existing and future land uses; (c) promotes greater use of public transport; (d) provides adequate accessibility; and (e) maximises safety in all modes of transport.

Objective 35: Adequate parking for vehicles.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:

Objectives

Satisfied

87


04 February 2020


Design and Appearance

O 11 PDC 20, 23, 24

Satisfied

The development proposes no changes appearance of the existing building

Amenity

O 20-22 PDC 52, 55, 60 and 66

Satisfied

No change in streetscape from a visual perspective;

The development will not have any unreasonable impact on the surrounding residential landuses, for example it will maintain visual privacy, not create unreasonable noise levels, and not alter the visual outlook and amenity of the area.

Operations of the office are low scale and low impact.

Traffic O 29-32 & 35 PDC 93, 94, 96, 101, 106-111 & 114-116

Minor Variance

The development results in a deficiency of three (3) off-street parking spaces;

The applicant has provided advice from an independent traffic engineer to justify the shortfalls in off-street car parking;

The number of off street parking spaces is considered appropriate in this context due to the low intensity and size of the proposed office use, the availability of on street carparks and proximity to public transport.

88


04 February 2020




Applicant: J Stewart-Rattray

Location: Burnside Tennis Courts Newland Road, Burnside

Proposal: Non-complying: Three (3) Advertising Signs associated with existing Tennis Club – Two (2) affixed to existing tennis court fencing and one (1) to existing club rooms


Residential Policy Area 17 - Ferguson


Kind of Assessment: Non-complying


Appeal Opportunity Third party only, no Applicant appeal rights

Delegations Policy: Non-complying development

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


REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:






Photographs

Delegate’s Report to Proceed

89


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for installation of three (3) different advertising signs on the site comprising the Burnside Tennis Clubrooms and associated outdoor tennis courts. The advertisements are described as follows:

Sign A - To be fixed on the existing tennis clubrooms measuring 8.1m long and 700mm wide. This will include the image of the Burnside Beagle Tennis Club Logo and the words, “Burnside Tennis Club”. This sign will be made of an aluminium composite panel with polymeric self-adhesive vinyl and anti-graffiti film.

Sign B - To be fixed onto the clubroom building measuring 900mm wide by 1.6m high. This will include also the image of the Burnside Beagle Tennis Club Logo and the words, “Burnside Tennis Club”, with other services worded concisely and the clubs website. This sign will be made of an aluminium composite panel with polymeric self-adhesive vinyl and anti-graffiti film.

Sign C - Banner like sign fixed to the existing tennis court fencing. Retrospective approval is sought for this sign. The sign measures 2m wide by 1m high and includes the same info as the other two signs along with sponsor images and contact information. This sign is made of a vinyl.

2. BACKGROUND

Development Application 180\0126\19 was lodged 22 February 2019 by Justin Stewart-Rattray. The proposal was determined to be a non-complying form of development pursuant to the Burnside (City) Development Plan, Residential Policy Area 17, Principle of Development Control 10, which states:

“The following kinds of development are non-complying:

Advertisement or advertising display that: (a) is illuminated (internally, externally or indirectly); or (b) moves, flashes or rotates; or (c) if free-standing, is more than two metres above natural ground level at any point; or (d) is on the site of a building and protrudes above highest level of that building; or (e) is more than 0.35 square metres in area”

(my underlining)

The proposed development was therefore considered non-complying given that all advertising signs have an area greater than 0.35 square metres in area.

For the purposes of public notification, the Residential Policy Area does not identify a category of development for advertising displays whereby Residential Policy Area 17, Principle of Development 11 does not assign a development category for the proposal.

With reference to Schedule 9, Part 1, Clause 3(b), the proposal is considered to be a Category 1 form of development, as it states:

“Any development classified as non-complying under the relevant Development Plan which comprises-

90


04 February 2020


(b) the construction of a building to be used as ancillary to or in association with an existing building and which will facilitate the better enjoyment of the purpose for which the existing building is being used, and which constitutes, in the opinion of the relevant authority, development of a minor nature only.”

In determining that the signage constitutes a ‘building’, Part 1, 4 of the Development Act 1993

defines a building as:

“building means a building or structure or a portion of a building or structure (including any fixtures or fittings which are subject to the provisions of the Building Code of Australia), whether temporary or permanent, moveable or immovable, and includes a boat or pontoon permanently moored or fixed to land, or a caravan permanently fixed to land”

Additionally, the Oxford Dictionary defines a structure as:

“A building or other object constructed from several parts”

Given the above definitions, the proposed signage, is considered to constitute a building, and structure. The signage is considered to facilitate the better enjoyment and use of the land, and is of a minor nature only and as such considered to be assigned to Category 1. The applicant has provided a Statement of Support in accordance with the requirements of Regulation 17(1) of the Development Regulations 2008. A Statement of Effect is not required in this case, pursuant to Regulation 17(6)(a) of the Development Regulations 2008.

The proposal is now presented to the Council Assessment Panel (the Panel) for consideration as a non-complying development with recommendation that Development Plan Consent be granted, subject to the concurrence of the State Commission Assessment Panel.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land is described in Certificate of Title Volume 5782 Folio 250 as Allotment 8 in Filed 158824 Plan 2954. The land is not subject to any easements or encumbrances. The allotment is an irregular shape and located in between Lockwood Road and Hallett Road, in the suburb of Burnside. The subject land also has a frontage to Newland Road and the subject land is otherwise known as Newland Park. The land has an area of approximately 33691 square metres with a frontage to Lockwood Road of approximately 63 metres, a frontage to Newland Road of approximately 414.8 metres and a frontage to Hallett Road of approximately 136 metres. The land is currently occupied by a Newland Park Kindergarten, Burnside Tennis Club including their clubrooms, four (4) tennis courts, a cricket pitch and grassed surrounds, a car park with access via Newland Road, a baseball pitch with grass surrounds, and baseball clubrooms. Whilst the subject land is large, the site of the proposed development contains the tennis courts and the Burnside Tennis Club clubrooms.

3.2. Locality

91


04 February 2020


The locality is largely comprised of existing residential properties. Some non-residential uses within the locality are those that exist on the subject land, being the Newland Park Kindergarten and the grassed area surrounding the cricket pitch on the subject land. The area has a low scale, low-to-medium density residential character, derived from a range of dwelling types and styles. Properties have moderate front setback with generally open front landscaped gardens. Whilst the predominant dwelling form is single storey detached dwellings, there are examples of double storey dwellings and semi-detached dwellings. The locality is also inclusive of many large trees, and the surrounding streets are lined with street trees of varying degrees of maturity and species.


Kind: Non-complying

Reason: Development Act 1993, Section 35 (5)

Applicant Appeal Opportunity: No



Reason: Development Regulations 2008, Schedule 9, Part 1, Clause 3 (b)

Third Party Appeal Opportunity: Nil


6.1. Land Use


The proposed development is ancillary to, and associated with the existing and lawful use of the land and existing clubrooms;

The proposed signs are not illuminated and are of a scale and design that is reasonable and expected to be associated with a non-residential land use (and in particular the existing use); and

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



It is recognised that Residential Policy Area 17 is primarily for residential development, which exhibits a high level of amenity and relatively low levels of non-residential land uses. The subject land comprises a non-residential use including public open spaces used for public recreation and for exclusive use by established sporting clubs leasing the land. The siting of the signs are such that they have not been considered to diminish the amenity of the surrounding local area beyond those already imparted by the land use of the subject land itself.

92


04 February 2020


The proposed signs are considered to be of a form, style, scale, height and size that is appropriate to the character of the locality, and will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of adjacent premises and the wider Residential Policy Area. Sign A and B are will primarily be visible from within the subject land itself, rather than highly noticeable from surrounding allotments due to their generous setbacks to the surrounding allotments. The view of the signs will be partly obscured from these streets by buildings such as the Kindergarten and vegetation such as street trees. The purpose of Sign A and B are primarily for identification for people who will attend the site for things such as lessons or matches, rather than advertising a service. The signs are on two different faces of the tennis clubrooms to provide identification for those attending the grounds from different points of entry.

Sign C is located directly adjacent a public road (Lockwood Road) and contains greater amount of information pertaining to the services of the tennis club. Whilst the sign advertises services, the purpose of the sign is to capture the attention of those who are specifically visiting the land to use the courts, rather than the attention of passing drivers. This is reflected in the placement of the sign, size of the sign and the content. This sign will span a minor (6%) length of the tennis court fence it is attached to. The materials and colours used for all signs will not be highly reflective, and so will not disturb passing motorists or occupants of surrounding land uses.

Considering the size of proposed signs in the context of the site area and large area of the subject land as a whole, the signs are not considered to clutter the area. Although Sign A B will both be fitted to the clubrooms, they are on different faces of the building. In that case, the development is not considered proliferation of signage. Further, when considering the development in the context of the larger subject land the development is considered to have an even lesser impact.

The proposed signage has no impact on the established building on the land and maintains appearance of the site as a recreational area. Given the small scale nature of the proposed signs associated with the approved use of the land, the nominal impacts on the character and amenity within the locality the proposal is considered to be reasonable.

6.3. Conclusion


7. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Subject to concurrence from the State Planning Commission, that Development Application 180\0126\19, by J Stewart-Rattray, 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

93


04 February 2020


submitted to the Council that are relevant to the consent to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council.

Reason:


94


04 February 2020


AERIAL LOCALITY MAP APPENDIX 1

95


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2



Primary Residential Policy Area 17 - Ferguson Objectives:

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:

Desired Land Use O1&2

Satisfied.

The subject land is approved for non-residential use

The proposed development will not result in any tree damaging activity


Satisfied.

The development is in association with an existing land use

The development is of a considerate size, scale and siting so that it does not have a significant presence within the locality

Colours used complement the natural landscape of the area and the high prevalence of the vegetation.

96


04 February 2020







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.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use

O 1–7 PDC 1

Satisfied.

The proposed signs associated with the existing and lawful non-residential land use are considered small in scale and benign in external impacts as per Objective 6.

Building Appearance PDC 2

Satisfied.


N/A

Non-residential Development

PDC 7 & 9 Satisfied.

The proposed signage is considered to be of a nature and scale that does not detrimentally affect the amenity or character of the locality; and

The signs are considered appropriate in consideration of the fulfilment of PDC 9 for the following reasons: They are non-illuminated and are static; They are associated with a lawful non-residential land use; They are attached to existing structures;

whilst they exceed guidelines for advertising area, in consideration of the size within the context of the site area and the location, they will have minimal visual impact on the streetscape and locality;

the signs are not considered to impart unreasonable impacts on the locality.

97


04 February 2020



Primary Council Wide Objectives:

Objective 1: Satisfaction of the social, cultural, economic, environmental and health needs of the community.


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 83: Advertisement and advertising displays confined to appropriate areas, and designed and located to:

a) complement and improve the character and amenity of the area within which it is located, including the appropriate rectification of existing unsatisfactory signage;

b) maintain equity of exposure for all business premises; c) avoid creating or contributing to any hazard; and d) be concise and efficient in communicating with the public to:

i. avoid proliferation of confusing and cluttered information; and ii. minimise the number of advertisements displayed.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:

Advertising Displays PDC 246-252

Satisfied.

The proposed signage conveys a simple and clear design and layout as per CW PDC 246(a);

The proposed signage is of a form, style, scale, height and size which is appropriate to the location of the land;

The location of the signage, and that it is not illuminated, will not result in any distraction to motorists, and did not require a mandatory referral to DPTI;

The purpose of the signage is for identification of the associated tennis club, as considered appropriate by CW PDC 247(c);

The size and scale of the signage does not detract or dominate the streetscape in any manner.

98


04 February 2020




Applicant: R Wood C/- Atelier Bond, 29 Stuart Road

Location: 31A Stuart Road, Dulwich

Proposal: Change of use from consulting rooms and office to residential, and undertake alterations and additions to existing single-storey building including upper level addition, balconies, masonry fence and associated partial demolition resulting in two attached dwellings.


Residential Policy Area 13




Nil (0) representations received





Delegations Policy: Manager’s discretionary determination

Recommendation: Development Plan Consent granted


REPORT CONTENTS

Assessment report:








Photographs

99


04 February 2020



The Applicant seeks Development Plan Consent for the following:

Conversion of land use from ‘consulting rooms and office’ to ‘residential’;

Retention of existing building façade to both Stuart Road and Union Street, as well as existing building footprint beyond;

Building work creating two attached dwellings, including new upper levels and integrated home office with separate pedestrian access from Stuart Road;

Masonry fencing to northern boundary and small portion of western boundary;

Modification to existing vehicle crossover points to Union Street allowing for two crossovers; and

Removal of a street tree.

Specifically the dwelling with frontage to Stuart Road will include: Ground level:

Entry portico;

Home office (31m²) with separate pedestrian access via Stuart Road;

Two bedrooms;

Open living room with direct access to private terrace and rear yard;

Bathroom;

Kitchenette including provision for washing machine (‘European laundry’);

Internal lift for access to upper level; and

Double garage.

Upper level:

Open dining/living with access to north facing balcony;

Kitchen, including butlers’ pantry;

European laundry;

Lounge room;

Wash closet; and

Master bedroom with walk-in robe and ensuite.

Specifically the dwelling with frontage to Union Street will include: Ground level:

Entry portico;

Two bedrooms each with walk-in robe;

Open living room with direct access to private terrace and rear yard;

Bathroom;

Separate ‘European laundry’;

Kitchenette;

Internal lift for access to upper level; and

Double garage. Upper level:

Open dining/living with access to north facing balcony;

Kitchen, including butlers’ pantry;

Laundry, accessed via butlers’ pantry;

Lounge room;

Wash closet; and

Master bedroom with dressing room and ensuite.

100


04 February 2020


2. BACKGROUND

Development application 180\0986\19 was lodged with Council on 25 September 2019. Pursuant to section 35(5) of the Development Act 1993, the application was determined to be assessed on merit against the provisions of the Burnside (City) Development Plan as Category 2 development. The assignment to Category 2 is pursuant to both Policy Area 13 principle of development control 9 d, as the development will result in more than one dwelling within the area of the site of the development, and Part 2, 18, Schedule 9, the Development Regulations, 2008 as the development will result in a change of land use consequent on the construction of a building of 2 storeys comprising dwellings. In October 2019 Council planning staff reviewed the application and requested additional information from the Applicant. At this time, Council staff also highlighted policy within the Development Plan the proposal did not satisfy. Planning staff later met with the applicant at which time streetscape elevation diagrams were provided to support the Applicant’s proposal. No changes were made to the floor plan or elevations. The application documents were made available for public viewing from 05 December 2019 to 19 December 2019 (inclusive), during which time Council received no written submissions regarding the proposed development. Whilst a decision on this application can be made under delegated authority, the Delegate (Team Leader Planning) has requested that the Group Manager City Development and Safety invoke his discretionary powers to elevate the determination of the application to the Council Assessment Panel.


3.1. Subject Land

The subject land comprises an allotment historically described as Lot 2 in Community Plan 21671 in the area named Dulwich hundred of Adelaide, as recorded in Certificate of Title Volume 5396 Folio 496. The subject land is wholly contained within the Residential Zone, and more specifically Policy Area 13 (Dulwich). The subject land is largely rectangular in shape and located on the corner of two intersecting roads, on the north-western corner of the Stuart Road and Union Street intersection. The total area of the land measures 425m², with a frontage of 17m and 25m to Stuart Road and Union Street respectively. The land currently contains a single building, circa 1920, comprising 2 commercial tenancies. The building presents as a single storey rendered build, with a high level of window openings to both streets, and single vehicle access from Union Street. The building comprises 89% of the site (site coverage) and is built to both street boundaries.

3.2. Locality

The locality comprises the streetscape of Stuart Road, where it meets Dulwich Avenue to the north and Mellington Street to the south. It also includes the streetscape of Union Street, where it meets Warwick Avenue to the east and Cleland Avenue to the west. The immediate locality comprises of mostly residential land uses, however north of the subject land, land use is solely commercial. The locality encompasses eclectic building styles, with no predominant built form character.

101


04 February 2020


The immediate locality includes both detached, semi-detached and row dwellings, and building heights of one and two stories. Dwelling styles vary and are generally located close to site boundaries. Streets are lined with She-oak, Golden Rain Trees, Capital Callery Pear, White Cedar and Jacaranda trees. Grassed road verges further add to the general amenity of the locality.


Kind: Merit





Reason: Part 2, 18, Schedule 9, the Development Regulations, 2008

Policy Area 13, Principle of Development Control 9(d)

Representations Received: Nil


6. AGENCY REFERRALS



7.1. Land Use


The proposal seeks to change the use of the land to residential in nature, which is reflective of the zoning preferences;

The existing building façade is largely maintained, such that the built form character at ground level remains the same;

The upper level addition is set-back from the ground level façade and well-articulated to ensure minimal visual bulk as viewed from the street; and

New access arrangements are supported by Council’s technical officers. The proposed development is therefore not considered to be seriously at variance to the Burnside (City) Development Plan.


The Residential Zone seeks for primarily residential land uses, and a range of dwelling types in appropriate policy areas. The policy area seeks the enhancement of low-to-medium residential densities, and single storeyed ‘character’ homes of relatively consistent scale, sited to the front of properties. This policy area also notes significant variations to the desired character on land with frontage to Stuart Road, and others, which also form part of the character of the locality. It is relevant to note that this particular locality, formed by and around the subject land, includes dwellings of varying forms, sizes and styles, resulting in no predominant built form character. The immediate presentation to the street, offered by the proposed building, is considered to respect the existing streetscape character in that it maintains the existing building line

102


04 February 2020


and height at the ground level. Whilst the proposed development includes an upper level not within roof space as envisaged by the policy area guidelines, it is recessed beyond the ground level facades some 2m and 1.8m to the east and south road boundaries respectively. A flat roofed, modern addition is proposed at the upper level, which includes a high level of fenestration. The overall height of the building is lower than the ridgeline height associated with the existing building roof. The use of face red brick and slender black steel framed window and door openings adds visual interest and articulation to the building façade, minimising potential building mass as viewed from adjacent land and the road network. Nearby buildings, namely those on adjacent land 33 Stuart Road, 14a Union Street and 14b Union Street, are two-storey ‘Georgian’ style dwellings, with the upper levels designed to be in line with their ground level façade. Such design features have resulted in minimal façade articulation and an increased built form bulk within the locality. The location of these taller dwellings at the corner of Stuart Road and Union Street have resulted in a heightened visual presence within the locality. On balance, the overall design and siting of the proposed dwelling is considered to be appropriate within the context of the locality in terms of the scale, height, form, style and materials. The upper level associated with the proposed development includes a high level of detail to its façade, and will have a softer visual presences within the streetscape than the existing two-storey detached dwellings referred to above. Its overall height is considered to be compatible with the existing building height, and the use of an alternate building material (face red brick) at the first level, together with slender steel frames to the many window and door openings, results in an acceptable built form presence within the locality.


The proposal seeks to create two individual self-contained dwellings on a parcel of land of approximately 392 square metres. Residential Policy Area 13 states that the site area for a dwelling (other than a detached dwelling) in this location should be not less than 400 square metres. Nevertheless, the development seeks to establish two dwellings on the land in a manner that is more akin to the adjacent two storey dwellings on the southern side of Union Street directly opposite the subject land. The proposed building footprint covers a large percentage of the site, per existing circumstances. The overall ground level site coverage measures 76% against a guideline of 40% and the total floor area including the upper level measures 138% of the site against a guideline of 50%. Whilst the proposed building footprint and overall envelope is greater than that envisaged by the Development Plan the partial demolition of the existing building on the northern side enables a greater level of rear yard space than is currently available. Furthermore, the roofed area of many dwellings within the locality exceed Development Plan guidelines and nonetheless form part of the character of the area. As such, the proposed development is not inconsistent with the locality in respect to site coverage. The orientation of the land at the corner of 2 roads, results in acceptable impacts in terms of overshadowing to adjoining residential land. Shadow will be cast to the south, east and west of the land, which will fall onto public road and roofing associated with the existing dwelling built on the common boundary to the west of the subject land. Each dwelling will include double car garages within the roofed area of the building, which should provide adequate car parking spaces for residents of the dwelling. As no driveways

103


04 February 2020


exist, visitor parking will rely on street parking. The current commercial tenancies offer no onsite car parking for clients. The net difference in off-street parking demand for the proposed residential development (including a home office) is considered to be less than the requirements for the existing consulting rooms and office. Council’s Traffic team supports the new crossover to Stuart Road associated with the development, as does the Open Space team who have consented to the removal of a street tree to allow for its construction.

7.4. Conclusion


8. RECOMMENDATIONS



2. Development Application 180\0986\19, by R Wood is granted Development Plan Consent subject to the following conditions:

Conditions



2 The driveways 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.

3 The proposed paving delineated on the stamped and approved plans shall be constructed with permeable paving. Reason:

To ensure the proposed development minimises stormwater run-off in accordance with sound environmental principles.

4 The landscaping detailed on the stamped and approved plans granted Development Plan Consent shall comprise of evergreen species and shall be undertaken within three (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

104


04 February 2020


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.

5 The approved 'home office', as per drawing '07-004-P03' and correspondence by the Applicant dated 02 December 2019 advising Council how the 'home office' will be used, shall be used by a person resident on the site and shall not require or involve any of the following:

assistance by more than 1 person who is not a resident in the dwelling; and

the imposition on the services provided by a public utility organisation of any demand or load greater than that which is ordinarily imposed by other users of the services in the locality; and

the display of goods in a window or about the dwelling or its curtilage; and

the use of a vehicle exceeding 3 tonne tare in weight. Reason:

To ensure the home office is used as per the application details, and will not result in unreasonable impacts to adjacent residential land users.

Engineering Requirements

Driveway Conditions


Driveway width of 4.5 metres is allowable across the verge and a crossover width of 5.5 metres (Maximum) total is allowable at the kerb and gutter.

A minimum of 1.0 metre distance from the closest point of the driveway to the stobie pole is required in the specification.





Detention shall be provided to limit post development flows. Calculations shall be provided to verify the ability of the proposed detention quantity to meet the Council’s default detention and discharge requirements below: o The volume of any detention device shall be equal to the volume of water generated on

the site with an impervious (Cp = 0.9) site coverage of 75% and pervious (Cp = 0.1) area of 25%, during a 1 in 20 year flood event for a 10 minute duration.

o The maximum rate of discharge from the site shall be equal to the volume of water generated on the site with an impervious (Cp = 0.9) site coverage of 40% and pervious (Cp = 0.1) area of 60%, during a 1 in 5 year flood event for a 10 minute duration.


The stormwater pipe across the road verge should terminate at an approved galvanised steel

105


04 February 2020


kerb adaptor.






Open Space Requirements

The full amenity cost and replacement of the street trees proposed for removal has calculated to a fee of $1037.55 ex GST and shall be paid by the Applicant. In particular:

The proposed removal of a Pyrus street tree (ID:37313) is supported at the applicants cost of $1037.55 ex GST. This includes the amenity value and replacement fee.

The applicant is to contact the Urban Forestry Officer to arrange for payment and the trees removal.

A new tree will be planted between the two crossovers and will require a 2.5 distance between the two crossovers to allow for adequate planting space.

Storm water to be discharged a minimum of 2m from any street tree.

Utilities require a minimum setback of 2m from any street trees.

No tree roots larger than 40mm in diameter are to be cut without Council consent.

Street trees to be protected during development with bunting set 1.5m from the trunk for duration of works.

Crossover to be constructed using Permeable materials.

No storing of materials on road verge during construction.

No pruning of street trees.

No vehicles on road verge at any time during development.

The applicant will be liable for any damage caused to public trees during the development process, including damage by privately engaged contractors.

For further information in relation to street trees, please contact Council’s Customer Service Centre on 8366 4200.

106


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 1

AERIAL LOCALITY MAP

Legend

Subject Land

107


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 2



Primary Residential Policy Area 13 Objectives and Principles:

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.

Principle 1: Development should: (a) conserve and enhance the character of the Policy Area, described in Objective 1; (b) be compatible with the height, roof-forms and pitches, proportions, siting, architectural style and detailing,

materials, and frontage patterns of the predominant one-storey housing stock in the locality; and (c) be compatible in scale, height, bulk and appearance with buildings that are adjacent in the Historic

(Conservation) Zone.

Principle 3: The site area per dwelling of any type, other than a detached dwelling, (averaged for group dwellings or dwellings in a residential flat building) should be not less than 400 square metres.

Principle 5(c): A site for the development of a dwelling or dwellings should have a frontage to a public road of not less than nine metres for each dwelling of any other type.

Principle 6: Development should be limited to one storey, except where the development involves: (a) sympathetic two-storeyed additions which utilise or extend existing roof space to the rear; or (b) in new dwellings, a second storey within the roof space where the overall building height and scale is

compatible with existing single-storeyed development in the locality; or (c) a two-storeyed dwelling in Tudor Street, Kitchener Street south of its intersection with Albert Street or

adjoining the Local Centre Zone.

Principle 7: Dwellings should be set-back not less than four metres from the boundary of a road.

Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.

The proposed development will convert the commercial use of the land to a residential use, which is in line with the residential character envisaged for the zone and the policy area. Whilst the development includes a small ‘home office’ measuring 31m² with sole access from a single door fronting Stuart Road, the applicant has confirmed that it will be utilised as per the definition of ‘home activity’ by the Development Regulations, 2008, with the exception of the maximum floor area ≤30m².

108


04 February 2020


To ensure the home office used accordingly, a condition of planning consent has been included on this recommendation ensuring the use of the home office accords with the details submitted by the Applicant.

Local Compatibility

PDC 1 Satisfied.

Site Areas and Frontages PDC 3 & 5

Variance.

The overall site measures 425m², equating to an average of 212.5m²² per dwelling. The frontages associated with the land adequately satisfy frontage requirements for two dwellings. The proposed density results in a significant reduction in the anticipated site areas envisaged for dwellings within the policy area. However, site areas such as that which are proposed, is not inconsistent with dwelling sites within the immediate locality.

Three (x3) two-storey detached dwellings are located adjacent to the site of the proposed development, each entailing site areas of approximately 260m². The row dwellings located at the intersection of Union Street and Mill Street, west of the subject land, have an averaged site area of 221m², and the semi-detached dwellings on the opposite corner of that intersection have site areas of 179m² and 228m².

As there is no consistent pattern of division within the locality, described above, the proposed site areas are considered acceptable in this locality.

Building Height

PDC 6 Variance.

The policy area seeks for development to be limited to one storey, except where the development involves a sympathetic two-storeyed addition which utilises roof space.

The majority of the proposed upper level is located within the area that would be occupied by the existing roof, refer to elevation drawings which highlight the portions that fall within the existing roofline. Whilst the proposed development involves a contemporary modern two-storey addition, it is considered acceptable in light of the following:

It is not the first instance of a two-storey building within the locality;

It will provide a better transition in building height from the bulky two-storey buildings on the south-west corner of the intersection and the low-scale buildings fronting Stuart Road, to the north of the subject land;

The upper level façade is set-back from the ground level façade of the building;

The upper level includes a high level of window and door openings, breaking up mass typically associated with taller buildings; and

The face red brick complements the more traditional building materials found within the wider locality.

Building Set-backs

PDC 7 Variance.

The existing building façade is maintained, hence continuing the building line to the street. The façade of the upper level uses red face brick and large expanses of glazing, offering a contrast to the building material used at the ground level. The varied façade materials is considered to be of a high design standard, and will contribute positively to the streetscape building quality despite its proximity to the road boundaries.

109


04 February 2020









Subject:

DP Ref

Assessment:


Satisfied.


Satisfied.

The ground level remains consistent with the existing building, as such the siting of the building at the pedestrian level conserves the character of the locality;

The upper level does not exceed a building height than that displayed by the existing building; and

The inclusion of face red brick, slender steel framing and many windows/doors reduces the visual bulk of the upper level.

Design for Topography


110


04 February 2020










Objective 57: Medium and high density residential development in areas close to activity centres, public and community transport and public open spaces.

Subject: DP Ref

Assessment:

Zoning and Land Use



Satisfied.

Building Set-backs PDC 161–163

Variance. Whilst the proposed development does not satisfy the general set-back requirements envisaged by the Development Plan, they are considered acceptable in this instance due to the following:

The ground level walls maintain present circumstances;

The adjoining building on the land to the north is located on and in proximity to the common boundary, and as such the proposed development will not be visible from within that building, or the rear yard area;

The adjoining dwelling to the west is built completely on the common boundary, and views of the additions will not be easily achieved from that land;

The northern elevation comprises of an open balcony, with only the top parapet wall and columns meeting the boundary. As such patterns of space between buildings, as viewed from the street are only mildly altered by these slender features; and

The orientation of the land and surrounding buildings results in no overshadowing of private open space or windows to habitable rooms on adjoining land.


Variance.

Although the proposed development will keep much of the existing ground floor level, the resultant ground floor area will be less than

111


04 February 2020


existing circumstances. The current site coverage equates to 89%, whereas the new site accounts for 76% of the site.

The total floor area of the proposed dwellings, not including verandah space, equates to a site coverage calculation of 138%, which is significantly greater than the Council Wide provisions. Whilst this departure is noted, it is not uncharacteristic of the locality. The subject land, adjoining land, adjacent land and several other buildings within the immediate locality entail site coverage calculations well in excess of the Development Plan guidelines. These buildings nonetheless form part of the character of this locality, and as such bear some weight in justifying the proposed development.

Private Open Space PDC 165-166

Variance.

The proposed development includes private open space at the ground level for each dwelling, to the north of the land. A portion of the existing building will be demolished to allow for this space. To increase the level of outdoor space, balconies to the street elevations are also proposed. Whilst the private open space available to future residents is below that envisaged by the Development Plan, it is not disproportionate to that seen on sites housing both attached and detached dwellings within the locality. The partial demolition of the existing ground level, together with the addition of the balconies will provide more outdoor space than currently available.

Privacy

PDC 22, 173–175 Satisfied.

Whilst upper level balconies and windows are proposed, they are considered acceptable given the following:

The adjoining building to the north comprises a non-residential land use, as such residential amenity is not impacted;

Notwithstanding the above point, frosted glazing is proposed to the north-facing windows, liming outward views from within the dwellings;

The adjoining building to the north is built on, and in proximity to the common boundary, thus limiting northern views from balconies to roof sheeting;

Enclosing the western blade wall associated with the balcony prevents north-western views;

The proposed balconies lay adjacent public roads associated with dwellings on the opposite side of the road; and

The side yard of 33 Stuart Road is positioned adjacent the proposed balconies fronting Union Street, however the 15m separation and existing boundary fencing should provide reasonable privacy.


Satisfied.

Council’s Open Space team supports the removal of a street tree to accommodate the new crossover.

Access to Sunlight

PDC 21, 182–185 Satisfied.

112


04 February 2020


APPENDIX 3



Site Area 196m2 (averaged per dwelling site) 400m2

Street Frontage 17m – Stuart Road

25m – Union Street

9m


Site Coverage

- Buildings only 76% (averaged) 40%

- Total floor area 138% (averaged) 50%

Building Height

- storeys Two storeys One storeys

- metres 7.3m 9m

Set-backs

Lower Level

- front boundary 0m – Primary 0m – Secondary

4m 3m

- side boundary 3.7m (dwelling) - N 1m (verandah post) - N 0m - S

2m

- rear boundary 0m 4m

Upper Level

- front boundary 2m 4m

- side boundary 3.7m (dwelling) - N 1m (verandah post) - N 1.8m (dwelling) - S 0m (balcony/parapet edge) - S

4m

- rear boundary 0m 8m

Boundary Wall

- length 12.6m 8m

- height 3.9m-7.3m 3m

Private Open Space

- percentage 32% (averaged) 50%

- dimensions 3.6m x 14m 5m x 8m


- number of parks 4 (2 per dwelling) 2

- width of driveway 4.5m (conditioned) 4.5m

- width of garage/carport door 44% - Union Street 33%

113

notice of council assessment panel meeting · sushil & karuna jasiwal – 37a glenunga avenue,...

Documents