Council Minutes - Town of Cambridge

COUNCIL MINUTES
28 JUNE 2011
concern for the adjoining landowner to the north in their submission. These windows are also
not classified as major openings as a void are is not considered to be a habitable room. In
any case, the setback from the subject windows to the northern side boundary is 6.9 metres,
which would be a complaint privacy setback if the windows were to a habitable room such as
a living room or bedroom.
Overall, it is considered that the proposed variation to the windows to the living room
complies with the performance criteria for the following reasons:-
direct overlooking of active habitable spaces or outdoor living areas of the adjoining
dwelling has been minimised by building layout and design of major openings.
Building height
Proposed
Acceptable development provision
Wall height 6.378 metres (north side) 6.0 metres
Performance criteria:
Building height consistent with the desired height of buildings in the locality, and to recognise the
need to protect the amenities of adjoining properties, including, where appropriate:
adequate direct sun to buildings and appurtenant open spaces;
adequate daylight to major openings to habitable rooms; and
access to views of significance.
The proposed variation to the wall height is not considered to have an adverse impact on the
streetscape or surrounding amenity as the wall height variation only occurs in the front northeastern
corner of the dwelling where the land slopes down. There a numerous two storey
dwellings along Gregory street of similar scale. The proposed dwelling is compliant with the
overall height requirements to the top of the pitched roof. The amenity of the adjoining
property to the north will be protected in terms of the access to northern light as the shadow
of the proposed dwelling will be cast on the adjoining property to the south.
Overall, it is considered that the proposed wall height variation complies with the
performance criteria for the following reasons:-
adequate direct sun available to buildings and appurtenant open spaces of adjoining
properties; and
adequate daylight available to major openings to habitable rooms of adjoining
properties.
POLICY/STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS:
There are no policy or statutory implications related to this report. The proposal was
assessed against the provisions of the Residential Design Codes (R Codes), Town Planning
Scheme No.1, and the Town Planning Scheme Policy Manual.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications related to this report.
H:\CEO\GOV\COUNCIL MINUTES\11 MINUTES\JUNE 2011\B DV.DOCX 47