Planning for Growth - Reports
Objectives
Ordinary Meeting - 28 May 2014
Response appropriate to the dwelling era.
Comment: The proposal does not include the demolition, alteration or extension of any contributory buildings so in this case complies. To maintain and strengthen the garden Prepare a landscape plan to accompany settings of the dwellings. all applications for new dwellings. Comment: The proposal will effectively remove all opportunities for landscaping in the rear of the site. No landscape plan has been submitted with the application to detail how the proposal maintains or strengthens the garden settings of dwellings. To maintain the consistency, where The front setback should be not less than present, of building front setbacks. the average setback of the adjoining two dwellings. Comment: The proposed dwelling is to front Hoskins Street, which is predominately used as a rear laneway to gain access to lots which front Gladstone Street and Olinda Street. There are a limited number of dwellings fronting Hoskins Street. The adjoining dwelling to the west has a setback not dissimilar to the proposed dwelling. Although the proposed setback of 1.5 metres is small, it is acceptable given the laneway character of the street and the adjoining dwelling’s setback. To maintain the rhythm of dwelling Buildings should be off-set from one side spacing. boundary. Comment: The proposed dwelling is setback from one boundary, however the opposite side boundary is constructed at ground floor level and has a 0.7m setback at first floor level. Given the small size of the proposed lot and the siting of the existing dwelling, the site is somewhat crowded by the proposed development. This highlights the constraints of the site and raises doubts over its capability of accommodating a second dwelling, whilst respecting neighbourhood character and complying with ResCode. To minimise the dominance of car Locate garages and carports behind the storage facilities. line of the dwelling. Use rear access where possible. Comment: The proposal includes a garage door which forms a major focal point of the dwelling’s façade. Again this highlights the constraints of the site, namely being the proposed lot’s small size. To respect the identified heritage Where the streetscape contains identified qualities of the streetscape or adjoining heritage buildings, reflect the dominant buildings. building forms in the street, including roof forms, in the new building design. Comment: The proposal is not respectful of the identified heritage dwellings in the street and the immediate surrounds. The overall height and bulk of the buildings coupled with the small lot size are symptomatic of overdevelopment and have the potential to overwhelm or detract from the valued heritage character of the precinct. The use of a contemporary building design is not of particular concern, rather the dominant size and bulk of the building is out of keeping with neighbourhood PAGE 110