minutes - City of Stirling

MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL
18 SEPTEMBER 2012
One (1) Submission Received – Relative Location
Submissions Within 100m of Remainder of
Received proposed site City
All Submissions
SUPPORT 0% 0% 0%
OBJECT 100% 0% 100%
OTHER
'conditional')
(Not stated/
no opinion/
0% 0% 0%
Applicant's Justification
The applicant has provided the following justification in support of the proposed
development.
“The proposed external wall height for the low side of the skillion roof of the proposed
residence is 7m (Wall + Roof height) which is 1m higher than the City’s Residential
Building Height Policy (2.6) regulation recommends.
While on the surface this would appear to negatively impact neighbouring houses I
have taken this into account in the design process and have increased the relevant
setbacks to at least offer the same (if not improved) outcome to the neighbours. If I
had designed the house to the required height and the minimum setbacks it would
have greater negative impact than the proposed design.
Here are the responses to each objection:
1. Increased shadow dimension and time in shadow
As demonstrated on page 2 of the accompanying document, the proposed
design actually results in a smaller overshadowing area (8.76m2) than if the
house was designed to the maximum 6m height with the rear boundary minimum
setbacks. Please note. If this is not acceptable, the setback of the upper story
could be reduced by 75mm which would eliminate the increased shadow length
of 120mm.
2. Increased visual pollution by way of larger and closer building imposing on the
landscape
As demonstrated on page 3 of the accompanying document, the proposed
design also results in a reduced visual impact than if the house was designed to
the maximum 6m height with the rear boundary minimum setbacks. The
diagrams show that any persons in the rear courtyard of the rear property (or
looking through windows) would actually see the same (or in most cases) less of
the upper story in spite of the increased height because of the increased
setbacks and the absence of eaves.
3. Increased intrusion on privacy, by way of more elevated and closer sight lines
This is addressed by using obscured glass to 1.6m on all windows that overlook
neighbouring properties as per the R-Code requirements. The increased height
of the windows is also somewhat offset by the increased setbacks.
92