proposed additions/alterations to single house (comprising … › files › assets › public ›...

Ordinary Meeting of Council 30 November 2016

3.10 PROPOSED ADDITIONS/ALTERATIONS TO SINGLE HOUSE (COMPRISING RETAINING WALLS, EARTHWORKS, FENCES, WATER TANK, DEVELOPMENT INCIDENTAL TO SINGLE HOUSE) - LOTS 203 AND 204 (NO.136) SWAN STREET, GUILDFORD (DA630-11/C)

Ward: (Midland/Guildford Ward) (Statutory Planning)

Disclosure of Interest: Nil

Authorised Officer: (Executive Manager Planning and Development)

Cr Trease disclosed an interest affecting impartiality in Item 3.10 of Part B - Proposed Additions/Alterations to Single House (comprising retaining walls, earthworks, fences, water tank, development incidental to single house) - Lots 203 and 204 (No.136) Swan Street, Guildford (DA630-11/C) by virtue of his friendship with the owners.

KEY ISSUES • The City has received a proposal for earthworks, retaining walls, fences and

incidental garden structures associated with the approved Single House at No.136 Swan Street, Guildford.

• The land is zoned 'Residential' under the City of Swan Local Planning Scheme No.17 (LPS17) and the works are associated with a 'Single House' which is a 'P' use within this zone. The lot abuts the Swan River foreshore reserve.

• The scope of assessment of the proposal comprises the application of the Residential Design Codes of WA (R-Codes), the Guildford Conservation Precinct Planning Policy and the Floodplain Management and Development policy.

• The application was referred to adjoining and surrounding neighbours and the Guildford Association for comment. Objections were received with respect to the entire scope of works contending that they would, variously, have an adverse visual impact on the streetscape and riverine environment to the detriment of the character of the Guildford locality.

• The Department of Water and Department of Parks and Wildlife have no objections to the works but recommend limitations on the height and design of fencing that is within the floodway portions of the subject lot.

• City staff consider that, subject to conditions the scope of works comply with the relevant policies in that they will not adversely impact the streetscape nor the adjoining riverine environment to the rear.

It is recommended that that the Council grant approval subject to conditions.


AUTHORITY/DISCRETION

Council has discretion in accordance with Part 10.3 of Local Planning Scheme No. 17 (LPS 17) to approve (with or without conditions), or refuse to approve the application. If the applicant is aggrieved with the decision of Council, a right of appeal may existing in accordance with Part 3 of the State Administrative Tribunal Act 2004 and Part 14 of the Planning and Development Act 2005.

BACKGROUND

Applicant: Right Homes Pty Ltd Owner: Mark and Michelle Hansen Zoning: LPS17 - Residential (R5) MRS - Urban Strategy/Policy: Filling of Land (Pol-C-061)

Guildford Conservation Precincts (Pol-C-106) Floodplain Management and Development (Pol-E9.2)

Development Scheme: NA Existing Land Use: Single House (currently under construction) Lot Size: 2990m2 + 232m2 (combined area 3222m2) Lot Area: Guildford Use Class: Incidental to single house (“P”)

DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL

The application is for a variety of landscaping and earthworks, associated retaining walls, side and front boundary fencing and ancillary structures associated with a new Single House, which has existing planning approval. These elements are detailed numerically below as depicted on the site plan included in the attachments to this report.

Retaining Walls

1. Wall extending 64.76m along the western boundary (most of the length of the boundary).

2. Top of wall height ranges between 0.4m and 1.977m above existing ground levels. White plaster finish.

3. Wall along eastern boundary - mostly under 0.5m high. (Note: already approved portion behind the house increases to maximum 1.97m above natural ground level). White plaster finish.

4. Wall along front boundary: retains level area in front of house – cut in on the eastern side, filled on the western side. As viewed from street, only a 10.31m length is higher than 0.5m, increases to 0.9m in the south west corner. A further 6.09m length of wall is under 0.5m high. White plaster finish.

5. On the eastern side of the front yard: retaining wall inside front path.

6. Retains area of “cut” up to 53 cm high. White plaster finish.


7. Retaining walls along driveway, where driveway falls to the rear of the lot, lower than surrounding ground. Up to 0.9m high at lower part of driveway. Finished in Coolum Stone.

8. Near north-west corner: curved retaining wall beside water tank, up to 1.35m high.

9. Stone finish.

Earthworks

1. Grass swale: this swale collects stormwater from the backyard and any overflow from the stormwater system. It aerates the water before it flows into the compensation pit.

2. Fill in backyard (up to 1.16 metres) between rear of house and rear boundary creating a relatively level lawn area behind the rear terrace. The land then falls towards the swale. There is no fill between the swale and the rear boundary.

3. The ground falls from the eastern boundary towards the water tank and compensation pit.

4. Cut in front yard up to 0.53m below natural ground level at deepest point (near south east corner, set back from eastern boundary)

5. Fill in front yard, up to 0.9m above natural ground level (near south west corner)

Fences

1. Front fence at 1.6m high. Style is picket fence with 50mm gaps between pickets, alternating “v” style pickets with round pickets. White painted metal. Front fence includes gates across driveway, and entry gate near eastern boundary, with same style of open fencing.

2. 1.8m high timberlap fence atop proposed retaining wall along western side boundary.

Garden Structures

1. Front gatehouse, comprising a pergola over double gates, with fencing either side. 3.16m high x 4.1m long; gates and fencing at 1.8m high. Gates and fence are “visually permeable”. White powder-coated aluminium.

2. Extension to terrace – comprising extension at western end (semi circular area), and 3 steps falling 51 cm to the lawn area

3. “Flitched beams” to support standing trellises. 2.89m high, arms 2.1m long. Timber finish will be left to weather to grey.

4. Outdoor fireplace: 3.4m high x 3.79m long, stone finish.

5. 90,000L Water tank – 1.5m high, zincalume.

6. Circular seat in front yard, around water feature: 40 cm high, finished in bluestone.

Alterations to House

1. Minor increase in floor level of Courtyards 1 and 2 (9cm increase from previously approved, to 6.70m AHD).


DESCRIPTION OF SITE

The subject property comprises two lots that form a regularly configured area of 3200m2 situated on the northern (river) side of Swan Street, fronting Stirling Square in Guildford. Backing onto the water meadows of Guildford, the property falls approximately 4m from the street to the rear boundary and is part of the Swan River floodplain. At the rear, and along half of its western boundary, the property abuts the river reserve. The Swan River itself is around 170m from the rear boundary of the property. There are no formal constructed access ways through the river reserve in this location.

This part of Guildford has a number of heritage listed properties easily visible from the subject lot, including Stirling Square, St Mathew’s Church, the old Courthouse, the old jail, Barkers Store, and several individually listed houses close to the subject property (including Riversleigh House, next door). The buildings generally face towards Stirling Square.

SITE HISTORY/PREVIOUS APPROVALS

DA-15949/2004 [Approved under Delegated Authority, 21/03/2005, Demolition of Existing Residence & Construction of Single Dwelling]

DA-630/2011 [Approved 23/02/2012, Single Dwelling]

DA-630/2011/A [Approved 14/02/2014, Extension of Time - Single Dwelling]

DA-630/2011/B [Approved 21/11/2014, Amendment - Single Dwelling]

DA-215/2015 [Approved 07/05/2015, Facade Materials for Single House]

Note: DA 215/15 is effectively an amendment to DA 630-11, it relates to the same house. Under the procedures in place at the time, it was dealt with under a new DA number, as construction had already commenced.

It is noted that all the applications and amendments relating to the house currently being constructed on the site (i.e. DA 630-11 and amendments, DA 215-15) have been approved under delegated authority.

APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION

In regard to the proposed fill within the front setback area:

"The owners have discussed this at length with the neighbours and have agreed with the neighbours that they would make every effort to provide good drainage so that the soil does not get washed onto their property, as it currently does. Water runoff often carries sand and debris. So what we have proposed is to place a retaining wall along the boundary to retain the soil and any surface water that will run off in rain events to cater for the difference in height between the two properties and provide a reasonable solution for drainage issues on the site. The owners currently live with the same issue on their existing home in Bassendean and would definitely like to make sure they do not impose this condition on their neighbours."


The 1.6m fence and gates (taller than the standard 1.2m under the Guildford LPP) are requested for security reasons.

• The owners have lived in Bassendean for some 20 odd years, being a nearby suburb to Guildford.

• During this time their residence has been broken into 8 times.

• The result was the owners have nominated a gate of sufficient height that a person cannot easily climb over in an attempt to break into the Guildford residence.

• The owners are aware that due to the size and type of dwelling currently under construction it could lead to the residence being targeted by thieves. Therefore they are hopeful to keep the height of the gate as the most important aspect of approval.

PUBLIC CONSULTATION

The application was advertised for 14 days to 5 adjoining and nearby landowners, including the Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) (as owner of the adjoining foreshore reserve). 5 submissions were received: 4 non-objections (the WAPC’s subject to standard conditions), and 1 objection. The matters raised in the objection are discussed in the report.

CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES AND/OR CONSULTANTS

The application was advertised twice to the Guildford Association. The Association provided a revised response, after clarification that the application was only for amendments to the approved plans, rather than the house itself. Their response raised a range of concerns which are discussed in the report.

The proposal was referred to the Department of Water (DOW), as much of the proposed development falls on flood prone land. The DOW advised they had no objection to the proposal, provided no solid fencing was constructed within the floodway. They also advised that the development would be expected to incur some amount of flood damage during major river flooding.

The proposal was also referred to the Department of Parks and Wildlife (DPAW) (Rivers and Estuarine Division)*, as the property abuts the Riverpark, which is in the Swan River Trust Development Control Area. DPAW advised they had no objection to the proposal, subject to a range of conditions including that fencing along boundaries of the river reserve be no higher than 1.8m overall (including the height of any associated retaining walls); such fencing to be open style; use of clean fill; protection of the river reserve during works; fill within the floodway reflecting the natural contours of the area and being stabilised to prevent erosion; and conditions for landscaping around the water tank.

* This section has absorbed the functions of the former Swan River Trust.


DETAILS

Zoning and Permissibility of use

The subject land is zoned 'Residential' under LPS17 and has an assigned Residential Density Coding of R5.

The various works are all associated with and incidental to the Single House that has been approved for the land and is currently under construction. A 'Single House' is a 'P' use within the 'Residential' zone.

The proposed landscaping works and structural elements are clearly incidental to the single house, and are thus a 'P' (permissible) use under LPS 17.

Nonetheless, there are a number of planning considerations arising due to the property’s location in a heritage precinct, abutting the Swan River reserve, and in the flood plain.

The various works will be assessed as follows:

Filling of Land and Retaining Walls

Filling

The application proposes to fill an area of the front south-western corner of the lot and to fill and contour the land to the rear of the approved terrace into a swale tapering down to the proposed rainwater tank and compensation pit.

There are a number of City policies that address requirements for the filling of land these being the Guildford Conservation Precinct design guidelines, Floodplain Management and Development and the Residential Design Codes of Western Australia.

All three of these policies require the filing of land to have regard to the visual impact on the streetscape and appearance of the natural topography, inclusive in the instance of the first two, of the impact on the riverine/floodplain landscape. Where filling is proposed in the floodplain, consideration of the impact of floodwaters is required.

In address of the last point it is noted that neither the Department of Water nor the Rivers and Estuaries Division of the Department of Parks and Wildlife have no objection to the fill works, inclusive of the retaining walls, provided no solid fencing greater than 1.8 metres in height was constructed within the floodway. It is recommended that management arrangements be imposed as conditions to ensure The Department of Water has pointed out however that the property could be expected to be subject to some amount of flood damage during major river flooding.

With respect to the visibility of the proposed fill to the rear of the lot, public submissions contend:

• The proposed development has reshaped the characteristic topography of the lot, and may have an adverse impact on the landscape.

• Development (including retaining walls and fill) in the floodway or flood fringe should not be supported. It would be better to use earth batters to manage differences in ground level. Development in the floodplain should be limited to what is necessary to elevate the house itself to acceptable floor levels.

• Concerns that, as viewed from the river reserve, the development would be “visually discordant”, and not suited to the Guildford Heritage precinct.


City staff consider a couple of facts to be pertinent:

- The filled area, inclusive of the swale will be a grassed and planted earth embankment following the natural fall of the land at the rear from east to west and north to south.

- The adjoining floodplain area which is the foreshore reserve behind the lot is not readily accessible to the public and so views of the rear of the lot by the public are limited to the river some 170 metres away.

In light of these facts it is considered the landscaped earthworks to the rear of the lot will have negligible impact on the riverine landscape as viewed from points on the river.

With respect to the visibility of the fill to the front of the south-western corner of the lot, public submissions contend:

• Retaining walls should not be approved on the front boundary, as this adversely affects the heritage streetscape, and effectively creates an over-height front fence, giving the impression of a fortification as viewed from the street.

• There is sufficient room within the front setback for all site levels to be managed in a way that is sympathetic to the natural topography of the land. There is no need for the over-height fencing or retaining.

The planning instruments, being both the Residential Design Codes of WA and the Guildford Design Guidelines require the minimisation of fill within the street setback area and the maintenance of the appearance of the natural topography of the site as viewed from the street. City staff consider that the amount of fill is minimal, being only 3% of the lot area. It is not considered to adversely impact the streetscape or the appearance of the natural topography of the land because:

- the filled area is only the westernmost 10 metres of the lot’s 40 metre frontage to the street boundary; and

- The appearance of the natural fall of the land from the street boundary to the rear of the lot is for the most part already obscured by the 30 odd metre front façade of the dwelling under construction.

The applicant has submitted a stormwater drainage plan which indicates that stormwater flows from the house and surrounding land areas will be contained onsite.

For the reasons set out above, approval of all the filling works is recommended.

Retaining wall – western side boundary

The retaining wall to the western side boundary, intended to support filing to curtail drainage flow across the boundary, was referred to the adjoining landowner for comment. This owner has no objection to the walls.


Retaining wall – eastern side boundary

The proposed retaining walls to the eastern side boundary comprise two portions – a long low portion of 28 metres in length but ranging from 10cm to 40cm in height and another portion 9.6 metres long but not exceeding 0.5m in height. The adjoining neighbour has made a submission that queries the accuracy of the natural ground levels depicted on the applicants plans and that the actual visual impact of the level changes and retaining wall is therefore understated. The submission also expressed concern as to the integrity of retaining walls close to their property and liability for potential failure.

City staff have visited the site and inspected the current natural ground levels at the boundary and are satisfied that the levels depicted on the plans are accurate. It was observed that, along parts of the boundary line, the level of the neighbour’s property falls sharply down to form in portions a gully. The applicant has not presented any evidence in support of the claim however that the depicted levels are understated.

Noting the height of much of the neighbour’s property and the proposed heights of the proposed sections of retaining walls, it is not considered that the proposed walls are substantial enough to present an adverse visual impact to the neighbours. It is the responsibility of the owners erecting the walls that will retain fill within their lot to ensure the structural integrity of those walls. It is not considered necessary, or desirable, for Council to impose a requirement by way of a legal deed to have one landowner indemnify another with respect to these works.

Approval of the proposed retaining walls to both the eastern and western side boundaries is recommended.

Retaining wall – front boundary

Whilst half off the front elevation of the lot (western side of the proposed gatehouse) will have a retaining wall, it is only the portion along the western side of the driveway that will exceed 0.5 metres above existing ground levels. Ordinarily, under the Residential Design Codes of WA, retaining within the front setback area not exceeding 0.5 metres in height is acceptable as of right. Consideration of the impact of filling this south-west corner of the front of the lot, which represents 10% of the street frontage, has been addressed already in this report. It is reiterated here that it is not considered to detrimentally impact the streetscape nor impair the visual impression of the natural topography of the site, which is already substantially obscured by the front façade of the approved dwelling.

It is also considered material to note that the streetscape already has topographical variation, specifically between the existing level of the subject lot and the adjoining property to the west - No. 138 Swan Street, where the ground floor level of the dwelling is in the order of 1.5 metres below the level of the street. Given the streetscape along this side of Swan Street only comprises five properties, this disparity is considered a significant element, within the context of which the proposed retaining wall to the front of the subject lot is not of itself considered so discordant as to warrant refusal. However the impact of this portion of the front retaining wall on the streetscape cannot properly be considered in insolation from the proposed front fencing treatment which is intended to be placed on top of it.


Fencing - Front Boundary

It should first be noted that a white aluminium powder coated picket fence to a height of 1.2m has been previously approved. The applicants are now applying to increase the height to 1.6m to provide security. Whilst a front fence which is visually permeable above a height of 1.2m is acceptable under the Residential Design Codes of WA, the Guildford Design Guidelines stipulate that only fences and gates which match the period of the associated house and which, unless on major roads, are not higher than 1.2m are permitted as of right. Were variations to this are proposed the fencing should enhance the character of the streetscape and not have a discordant visual impact.

Concerns were raised in submissions that the proposed 1.6m high front fence will detract from the existing heritage streetscape; will not meet the relevant performance criteria of the policy; and should not be supported. The height of the fence above the proposed retaining wall was also of concern, described as resembling a “fortification”.

Of itself the style of the fence is not considered by City staff to be discordant. Its open style picket design is consistent with the picket fencing to the front of other properties long this part of Swan Street. It is noted that Swan Street has a gentle slope in a westwards direction from its junction with Meadow Street, falling approximately 2m from this point to the western edge of the subject lots frontage to the street. Consequently the taller height of the proposed picket fence to the subject lot would appear consistent with the height of existing fencing to lots along the higher portion of the street frontage. On this basis City staff cannot agree that the proposed front fence would be visually discordant and are of the view that it will enhance the character of the streetscape by contributing an element of relative uniformity.

Where it is considered that a problem may present itself is where the fence is proposed atop the taller portion of the retaining wall along the western 10m of the front boundary. Here the height of the fence above natural ground level would be increased from 2.1m to 2.5m. This would be considered to be discordant with the streetscape. It appears to City staff that the applicants desire to have a taller fence for security purposes and the need to fit in with other fencing elements within the street for the purposes of relative consistency can be achieved by simply shifting the retaining wall back from the boundary such that the proposed fencing sits in front at existing natural ground level and so maintains a height of 1.6m. This would maintain the appearance of the natural slope of the street westwards.

It is recommended that the front retaining wall be approved, likewise the 1.6m high white metal picket front fence subject to a condition that specifies that the front fence to the western side of the western driveway be erected at existing natural ground level and not atop the retaining wall.

Side fencing - eastern boundary

It is useful to note that side boundary fencing in heritage areas which does not exceed 2m in height and which is not within 4.5m of a street boundary does not require planning approval.

On the eastern side boundary the 1.6m high white picket fence extends some 6m from the front boundary along this edge. As it is more than 1m in height within 4.5m of the street boundary it requires planning approval. Whilst the elevation plans reference it being atop a new retaining wall this appears to be a reference to the front boundary. The fence is visually permeable and some 5m from the eastern driveway within the lot. Accordingly it is not considered to interfere with driveway sight-lines and approval is therefore recommended.


It is noted that the elevations that were referred to the owners of No.132 Swan Street depicted 1.8m high timber lap fencing along the full extent of the shared side boundary and atop the proposed retaining wall. It has been confirmed with the owners of the subject lot that this fencing is not intended as an aspect of their application because they wish to discuss this first and reach agreement with their neighbour. Accordingly this does not form part of this application and the concerns raised by the neighbours at No.132 do not need to be addressed here.

Side fencing - western boundary

Similar to the western side boundary a 6m long section of the picket fencing to the front boundary is proposed to warp around the side boundary. As with its proposed placement to the western side it is not considered to impair sightlines to the western driveway.

The application does propose 1.8m tall solid timberlap fencing along the balance of the extent of the eastern side boundary, atop the proposed retaining wall. As has already been noted in discussion of the retaining walls to this side, the adjoining neighbour at No.138 has no objection. However, as has also been noted, for the length of the boundary that is within the floodway, the Department of Water has advised that fencing should be open style whilst the Rivers and Estuaries Division of the Department of Parks and Wildlife have advised that, in addition to being open style, it should not exceed 1.8m in height. The applicant is aware of these requirements and it is recommended that these limitations ben imposed as conditions of any approval and notated on any approved plan.

Garden Structures

Of the listed garden structures subject of this application, the water feature seating area within the front setback, the water tank, outdoor fireplace, terrace extension and trellis beams to the rear of the house attracted a comment which contended that, as part of an overall house design that is considered to be “Mediterranean” they will adversely impact views from the river foreshore. By their scale and placement, and coupled with the intended landscape treatment to the rear of the property it is considered that they will be unobtrusive and approval is recommended.

A submission was also made with respect to the proposed “gatehouse” which contends that it will be a “substantial and imposing structure which detracts significantly from the heritage streetscape, which is characterised by low front fencing, and open and inviting front setback areas, maintaining open vistas up and down the street”.

At 3m in height, it is acknowledged that the structure is tall. However it is intended to present as an arbour frame over the front gates, with the applicant indicating it will support climbing roses. Such treatments are not uncommon in Guildford and it is considered to be consistent with the scale of the house being constructed and the expansive frontage of the lot. Views of the house will not be unduly impaired from the street nor from the house to the street. Within what will be a well landscaped front yard it is considered that “gatehouse” will contribute positively to the appearance of the street as opposed to detracting from it. Accordingly approval of this element is recommended.

9cm increase to level of courtyards to front of house

This has negligible impact and approval is recommended.


OPTIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Option 1: That Council approve the application for Alterations and Additions to the Single House (comprising retaining walls, earthworks, fences, water tanks and other incidental structures) on Lots 203 and 204, (No.136) Swan Street, Guildford subject to conditions.

Implications: The applicant can proceed with the proposed works.

This is the recommended option.

Option 2: That Council refuse the application for Alterations and Additions to the Single House (comprising retaining walls, earthworks, fences, water tanks and other incidental structures) on Lots 203 and 204, (No.136) Swan Street, Guildford for the following reason:

1. The works will have, variously, an adverse visual impact on the streetscape of Swan Street and on the riverine landscape of the water meadows to the rear of the lot, so detracting from the character of the Guildford locality.

Implications: The applicant will have a right of review by the State Administrative Tribunal.

This is not the recommended option.

CONCLUSION

The City has received a proposal for earthworks, retaining walls, fences and incidental garden structures associated with the approved single house at No.136 Swan Street, Guildford.

The land is zoned 'Residential' under the City's LPS17 and the works are associated with a 'Single House' which is a 'P' use within this zone. The lot abuts the Swan River foreshore reserve.

The scope of assessment of the application comprises the application of the Residential Design Codes of WA, the Guildford Conservation Precinct Planning Policy and the Floodplain Management and Development policy.

The application was referred to adjoining and surrounding neighbours and the Guildford Association for comment. Objections were received with respect to the entire scope of works contending that they would, variously, have an adverse visual impact on the streetscape and riverine environment to the detriment of the character of the Guildford locality.

The Department of Water and Department of Parks and Wildlife have no objections to the works but recommend limitations on the height and design of fencing that is within the floodway portions of the subject lot.

City staff consider that, subject to conditions the scope of works comply with the relevant policies in that they will not adversely impact the streetscape nor the adjoining riverine environment to the rear.

Conditional approval is therefore recommended.


ATTACHMENTS

Location Plan

Plan showing floodway and flood fringe

Submitted plans

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS

Local Planning Scheme 17

State Planning Policy 3.1: Residential Design Codes

Local Planning Policy Pol-C-106: Guildford Conservation Precinct

Local Planning Policy Pol-E-9.2: Floodplain Management and Development

Filling of Land Policy Pol-C-061

VOTING REQUIREMENTS

Simple majority

RECOMMENDATION

That the Council resolve to:

1) Approve the application for Alterations and Additions to the Single House (comprising retaining walls, earthworks, fences, water tanks and other incidental structures) on Lots 203 and 204, (No.136) Swan Street, Guildford subject to the following conditions:

1. A Notification under Section 70A of the Transfer of Land Act 1893 must be registered over the certificate of title to the land the subject of the proposed development prior to the occupancy of the dwelling on the land, to notify owners and prospective purchasers of the land that the land is subject to flooding during major Swan River flow events and that development restrictions may apply.

2. The two subject lots shall be amalgamated into a single lot within 90 days of the date of this approval.

3. The section of the picket fencing to the front boundary west of the western driveway shall be erected at existing natural ground level and not atop the approved retaining wall.

4. All proposed fencing to the western side boundary that falls within the Floodway of the Swan River shall not exceed 1.8 metres in height above natural ground level and shall be open style and not solid.


5. The surfaces of any walls on lot boundaries shall be finished to a professional standard (i.e. have raked/rolled joints or an even render finish) to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer.

6. Prior to commencement of earthworks to the rear of the site the applicant is to submit details to the Chief Executive Officer as to how the embankment will be stabilised to prevent erosion and the transportation of sediment into the adjoining foreshore reserve.

7. Measures for stabilisation of earthworks and the prevention of erosion are to be implemented and maintained to the satisfaction of the City of Swan.

8. Fill employed in earthworks shall be clean fill.

9. Earthworks over the site and batters must be stabilised to prevent sand blowing, and appropriate measures must be implemented within the time and in the manner directed by the City in the event that sand is blown or drifts from the site.

10. Earthworks, footings and/or structures are not to extend over any lot boundaries.

11. The applicant is to prepare and submit, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Office, a detailed Landscaping Plan for the filled and earth worked area to the rear of the lot prior to commencement of such works.

12. The approved Landscaping Plan is to be implemented within 60 days of the completion of the fill, and earthworks and maintained thereafter.

13. No soil, building materials, rubbish or any other deleterious matter shall be deposited on the Parks and Recreation Reserve.

14. All stormwater is to be collected and contained onsite. No stormwater is to be discharged from the property into other land or reserves. Stormwater disposal to be in accordance with approved plan.

15. The applicant is to ascertain the location and depth of any services that may interfere with this development. Any adjustment to these services required as part of this approval, must be arranged by the applicant prior to works commencing on the site. Any adjustment must be approved by the relevant service authorities and will be at the applicant's expense.

16. All construction works within the road reserve including crossovers, drainage infrastructure, service adjustment, landscaping and footpath placement or reinstatement, must be built and maintained in accordance with the City's specifications. Failure to do so may result in these works being removed and reinstated by the City at the applicant's expense.

17. Any additional development, which is not in accordance with the application (the subject of this approval) or any condition of approval, will require further approval of the City.

ADVICE NOTES Standard advice notes apply.


2) Advise the applicant/owner of the resolution of Council and relevant advice notes pertaining to the approval.

3) Advise all those who lodged a submission of the Council’s decision accordingly.

MOTION that the Council resolve to:

1) Refuse the application for Alterations and Additions to the Single House (comprising retaining walls, earthworks, fences, water tanks and other incidental structures) on Lots 203 and 204, (No.136) Swan Street, Guildford.

2) Reason for changing the officers' recommendation is that the works will have, variously, an adverse visual impact on the streetscape of Swan Street and on the riverine landscape of the water meadows to the rear of the lot, so detracting from the character of the Guildford locality.

(Cr Johnson -)

MOTION LAPSED due to the lack of a seconder.

MOTION that the Council resolve to adopt the staff recommendation.

(Cr Trease – Cr Kovalevs)

RESOLVED (11/1) TO:

1) Approve the application for Alterations and Additions to the Single House (comprising retaining walls, earthworks, fences, water tanks and other incidental structures) on Lots 203 and 204, (No.136) Swan Street, Guildford subject to the following conditions:

1. A Notification under Section 70A of the Transfer of Land Act 1893 must be registered over the certificate of title to the land the subject of the proposed development prior to the occupancy of the dwelling on the land, to notify owners and prospective purchasers of the land that the land is subject to flooding during major Swan River flow events and that development restrictions may apply.

2. The two subject lots shall be amalgamated into a single lot within 90 days of the date of this approval.

3. The section of the picket fencing to the front boundary west of the western driveway shall be erected at existing natural ground level and not atop the approved retaining wall.

4. All proposed fencing to the western side boundary that falls within the Floodway of the Swan River shall not exceed 1.8 metres in height above natural ground level and shall be open style and not solid.


5. The surfaces of any walls on lot boundaries shall be finished to a professional standard (i.e. have raked/rolled joints or an even render finish) to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Officer.

6. Prior to commencement of earthworks to the rear of the site the applicant is to submit details to the Chief Executive Officer as to how the embankment will be stabilised to prevent erosion and the transportation of sediment into the adjoining foreshore reserve.

7. Measures for stabilisation of earthworks and the prevention of erosion are to be implemented and maintained to the satisfaction of the City of Swan.

8. Fill employed in earthworks shall be clean fill.

9. Earthworks over the site and batters must be stabilised to prevent sand blowing, and appropriate measures must be implemented within the time and in the manner directed by the City in the event that sand is blown or drifts from the site.

10. Earthworks, footings and/or structures are not to extend over any lot boundaries.

11. The applicant is to prepare and submit, to the satisfaction of the Chief Executive Office, a detailed Landscaping Plan for the filled and earth worked area to the rear of the lot prior to commencement of such works.

12. The approved Landscaping Plan is to be implemented within 60 days of the completion of the fill, and earthworks and maintained thereafter.

13. No soil, building materials, rubbish or any other deleterious matter shall be deposited on the Parks and Recreation Reserve.

14. All stormwater is to be collected and contained onsite. No stormwater is to be discharged from the property into other land or reserves. Stormwater disposal to be in accordance with approved plan.

15. The applicant is to ascertain the location and depth of any services that may interfere with this development. Any adjustment to these services required as part of this approval, must be arranged by the applicant prior to works commencing on the site. Any adjustment must be approved by the relevant service authorities and will be at the applicant's expense.

16. All construction works within the road reserve including crossovers, drainage infrastructure, service adjustment, landscaping and footpath placement or reinstatement, must be built and maintained in accordance with the City's specifications. Failure to do so may result in these works being removed and reinstated by the City at the applicant's expense.

17. Any additional development, which is not in accordance with the application (the subject of this approval) or any condition of approval, will require further approval of the City.

ADVICE NOTES Standard advice notes apply.


2) Advise the applicant/owner of the resolution of Council and relevant advice notes pertaining to the approval.

3) Advise all those who lodged a submission of the Council’s decision accordingly.

For: Crs Bailey, Haynes, Henderson, Kovalevs, Lucas, McCullough, McDonnell, McNamara, Trease, Wainwright and Williams

Against: Cr Johnson

MOTION that the Council resolve to:

1) Rescind the decision previously made on this Item.

2) Record the reason for the rescission motion is that Cr Johnson indicated he was against the motion and it did not proceed to debate and that it was important to debate the matter.

(Cr Johnson – Cr Kovalevs)

MOTION WAS PUT TO THE VOTE AND LOST (6/6)

(Absolute majority required)

For: Crs Henderson, Johnson, Kovalevs, McCullough, Wainwright and Williams

Against: Crs Bailey, Haynes, Lucas, McDonnell, McNamara and Trease

DISCLAIMER: Information shown hereonis a composite of information from variousdifferent data sources. Users are warnedthat the information is provided by the Cityof Swan in this format as a generalresource on the understanding that it is not suitable as a basis for decision makingwithout verification with the original source.

10 November 2016

1:2000

Attachment 1. Location Plan.

Lots 203 & 204 (No. 136) Swan St, Guildford

DISCLAIMER: Information shown hereon is a composite of information from various different data sources. Users are warned that the information is provided by the City of Swan in this format as a general resource on the understanding that it is not suitable as a basis for decision making without verification with the original source.

10 November 2016

1:1000

Attachment 2. Flood map.

Floodway

Flood fringe(100 year ARI)

Attachm

ent3.Plan

setforapproval.

Atta

chm

ent4

.Arti

st's

impr

essi

ons

&3D

view

s.

proposed additions/alterations to single house (comprising … › files › assets › public ›...

Documents