DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MEETING

TUESDAY 16 APRIL 2019

ATTACHMENT TO ITEM DV19.35

LOT 77 (NO.23) ORREL AVENUE, FLOREAT - CARPORT AND MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING

FRONT FENCE

The Town of Cambridge does not warrant the accuracy of information in this publication and any person using or relying upon such information does so on the basis that the Town of Cambridge shall bear no responsibility or liability whatsoever for any errors, faults, defects or omissions in the information.

Tuesday, 19 March 2019

1:1500

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING REV DATE NOTES

STAGE

SCALE

DRAWING No.DRAWN

M. GROVE

23 ORREL AVE, FLOREAT

PROPOSED NEW CARPORT S

23 ORREL AVE, FLOREAT

PLAN & ELEVATION

SITE PLAN, GROUND PLANS x2

TENDER

AS NOTED

A-001DWA

4 19.04.2018 EAVE ADJUSTED

5 20.06.2018 EXISTING FENCE

6 02.10.2018 POSTS UPDATED

7 19.02.2019 UPDATED

CLIENT

PROJECT

DRAWING REV DATE NOTES

STAGE

SCALE

DRAWING No.DRAWN

M. GROVE

23 ORREL AVE, FLOREAT

PROPOSED NEW CARPORT S

23 ORREL AVE, FLOREAT

ELEVATION

ELEVATIONS x2

TENDER

AS NOTED

A-002DWA

3 19.04.2018 EAVE ADJUSTED

4 20.06.2018 EXISTING FENCE

5 02.10.2018 POSTS UPDATED

6 19.02.2019 UPDATED

....... f ."

1

THE

1

I

CARPORT CO.

15 Qct{)be.r ’2018

Planning Services

Town of Cambridge

PO Box 15

FLOREA T WA 6014

Dear Sir/Madam,

APPUCATJON ’fOR .DEV~J.QPMENT APPROVAL J

<PROPOSED CAR.pORT A:r~l T 1.7iNO. 23) ORRH..AVf:NUE, H-GREAT

J ..act ,on beha.lf .of The carport Co. .as t:hek ,pJaJ<lning consultant :and rete.r to the Application for

Development Approval for the proposed carport at Lot 77 (No. 23) Orrel Avenue, Floreat. In assessing

the application it is requested that the Town give due consideration to the following key points:

PROPERTY DETAILS

The subject site is zoned ’Residential’ with a density coding of ’R12.5’ being applicable under the Town

of Cambridg’e Local Planning Scheme- N~. 1. The. subject site. iSi irregular in, shap.fC, with" an are-a, of

approximately 936m~and it srelativeJ’{ftat throug.hout.

The subject site is located to the south of The Boulevard and to the north of Cambridge Street. The

subject site is bounded by Lissadell Street to the west, Orrel Avenue to the north and by residential

,p.r;o,perties to:tfue east<!. ’50Ll~.

9-RQPOSAl

The ~p.plica o.n ’seeks the Town’s developm.ent :approval for a ’carport <3t Lot 77 (No. 23’) Onel v:e.nue,

Floreat. The proposed carport is located along the north-eastern side of the primary street setback area

in front of the existing dwelling, with access being via an existing driveway and crossover.

,. .~..

PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

The Town of Cambridge’s considered a previous development application, for two proposed carports at

the: subject site. One’ prop 5e. cal’-po’rt was lo~ated along the north-eastern side oJ the pri,rnary street

setback area iA- fron-t of the e)(~ting dwell.it:lg, aM otle proposed. <i:arpott wa.s located al Ag the sooth-

western side of the secondary street setback area, with access to both carports being via existing

driveways and crossovers.

On 18 September 2018, the Town resolved to refused the development application for two carports, for

the following reasons:

1. The {J.f.oposaJ does not satisfy the r.equi ment5 oJ-Gau5 39 of the Town PJannjng Scheme NO.1

and is considered to be incompatible with the existing form of development in the area;

2. The proposa1 would have a negative impact on future development within the area, and would

be inconsistent with the prevailing streetscape, and therefore is not in accordance with orderly and proper planning in the locality;

3. The proposaf is net consjdere to meet tne Design Principfes, of part 52.!]. tSight Lines) of the

Residential Design Codes of Western Austrafia, and is not considered to arrow safe egress of the

site; and

4. The proposal is not considered to meet the Design Principles of part 5.3.4 (Design of Parking

Spaces) of the Residential Desig\Codes of Western Australia as the single carport parking bay in ;Rot Gonsi.dered to ’be conveniently accessed due to the’size of the parki1’lg,bayprovided.

With .(-es~ect w the .abuve-ment.i.oned ..f-eason Tn. .r-ef.usal, -a .f.Iew deve.lopme’ftt application has been

prepared which comprise the following details:

. The proposal now relates to one carport. The proposed carport is located along the north-

eastern side of the primary street setback area in front of the existing dwelling. The carport to

the south-western side of the secondary street setback area has been removed from the

propo<Sa’I.

. The proposed street setback of the carport has increased from 0.888m to 2m from Orrel

Avenue’,

TOWN OF CAMBRIDGE LOCAL PLANNING SCHEME NO.1

The subject site is zoned ’Residential’ under the Town of Cambridge’s operative Local Planning Scheme

No,l’(LPS1).

Development associated with a ’Dwelling (Single)’ is a ’P’ use under the ’Zoning Table’ of LPS1, meaning

thaHhe-u5e ispermitted by the Scheme,

It is contended that the proposed development of the subject site, being a proposed carport to an

existing single house, is consistent with the ’Residential’ zone under LPSl for the following reasons:

.

.

.J. .,

. The proposed development wiJl. prrvlIide f(j)r a Vlarriety. of !rousing type.s. and si71e~ to. meet the

cw;rent a,~d future needs Gf the cummun.ity;

. The proposed development is complimentary to the existing residential development on the

subject site and surrounding properties; and

. The ,proposed development will c.ompJement the eX4s,tin,g single house.

Determination of Non-Complying Applications for Planning Approval

111 ;ac,cor arlce .with ’Gause 39 JDetermirrati n ’Of Non’-,CGlmplying Applicilti ns for Pl nningiApproval’ of

LPS1, the Council may approve a non-complying application. The proposed development is considered

to be in keeping with the orderly and proper planning of the locality as it is providing roof cover over the

existing car parking spaces. In addition to this, due to the open nature of the carport, the proposed

development does not resu+t ~n any adverse bu+l-rl- ng btJ’lk on the srreetscape. J1(ccord~ngfy, the proposal’

is considered to be in keeping with the Town’s Local Planning Policy 3.1 - Streetscapes, which aims to

create and preserve neighbomhoods tl:la,t are attr:active!, sate arid, offer high amel’li!)l fo~ fes.idents and

pedestrians. The. ~rop.osed. devetopment pWMides for varying btil.ding setba~kSi whi.c~p,t;ovides fur;. an.

improved quality of streetscape. In light of this the proposed development is considered to be in

keeping with the orderly and proper planning of the locality.

’’further to the a-bove, t’he proposeo ca’rpo-f’t wHl not have an adverse effect on the occupiers of the

dwelling, rather it would improve the occupiers’ amenity by providing roof cover to the existing car

parking spaces. The prposed development w l .not result i:n iaJily iadverse impact ,on the a.djoining

.pmperties or locality, :as the ,open n’ature of the ’Site ,ensur-es that the pJ\op.osal \,(joe’s not jntrudeon the

adjoining properties. In light of this, the proposed carport is not considered to adversely affect the .

future development of the locality.

RESIDENTIAL DESiGN. CODES OF WESTERI\J AUSIRAUA.

It is imper,a,tive to. oote tha-t, Pal’t 2 ’R.-Codes ApprQ\! k Pwce.ss’ of t~ R"Codes,,, ot)tf e~ that the.. R,-Codes

comprises. tw.o fOf’ms of asse,5sment being:the Deemed-to-camply.-prov1Sons and the!Des’ign Principle~,..

In accordance with Clause 3.3 ’Supporting Information Requirements’ of the R-Codes, where a

component of the proposal proposes to apply one or more design principle(s), it is necessary to assess

that component oj the design against the releJlant design princ(pJe(s). Additional supportin.g information

shall include:

.(a) J.dentjfiootiofJ of all.design -elements that me not deemed-to-cQ.Fl?’{’JJy; and

(b) Wdtten justification ,as to h.ow th.e l:JppJic.atlO!Jf pf.G.p.Ds.aJ meets the .,designprJn ples .:an.d

objectives of the R-Codes and any relevant scheme and local planning policy objectives and

requirements.

SETBACK OF GARAGES AN CARPORTS I STREET SET8ACK

The proposed carport complies with the Deemed-to-comply provIsions of Clause 5.2.1 ’Setback of

Garages and Car.ports;’ Cl.5: whichl prov;des: fo" carpoFts. witfnirl’ the str.eell setback (fJtrea. iirJ> acc rd01’lce

wjth clause 5:1.4 C2.1ar prov ded that the’ w.fdth of ute’ C’arpof:t does. not exc:eed 5’0 per cent of tbe’

frontage at the building line and the construction allows an unobstructed view between the dwelling and

the street, right-of-way or equivalent. With respect to Clause 5.1.2 ’Street Setback’ C2.1iii of the R-

.,. ".

Codes, as the subject site has an applicable density code of R12.5, the minimum setback of the carport

provided under the Deemed-to-comply provisions is 2m (as per the carport requirements under Local

Planning Policy 3~1 ’Streetsc.ap:e’).

As. indicated on the pLans, the prop.osed carport is setback 2m from arrel Avenue, whereby the -carp..ort

posts are located outside of the l.5m x l.5m visual truncation areas, which is in accordance with the

provisions of AS2890.1.

The 2m street setback to the carport is consistent with the streetscape as it provides for the stepping

back of development as viewed from arrel Avenue, whilst maintaining privacy and open space for the

:dw.ecJ1irrg. ’fheproposed setback ’de>esnot undu1y impact upon the :site plan:ning Tequir~ments, as it is

providing roof:CG~er to the exi5tin,g<Gar parking’.Spaoes\on"5ite. The proposed building mass is minimtsed

due to the open nature of the carport, therefore reducing the impact of the structure on the arrel

Av.eooe, wit-hout.t .str-uct1;lre ta.J<1-Ag .up .the f.a des of .the site with blank walls.

It is also noted that both arrel Avenue is listed as access roads under the Perth Metropolitan Area

Functional Road Hierarchy; therefore the proposal does not result in unsafe access to and from the site.

In addition to,this, the proposed street setback to’ the carport,. pr vides articul’atiun to the: dwelling as,

view from the be>th stree.ts. a’nd the adjoining. properti.es, due to’ the ranging setback$, of the 6:arport and

the existing dwelling.

In light of the a;bove, the pmposed devel pmef-l;t is cou-sider-eo to’ CQ,t;’Glplyr with. ctause 5.1.2 ’Str;eet

Setback’ and Clause 5.2.1 ’Setback of Garages and Carports’ of the R-Codes.

CONCLUSIONt.

The location .of the proposed .c-arport provides :cover OVEr thE-,existing car parking sp’aces ,on-:site, which

does not result in any adverse impact on the streetscape.

fin ’ondustO’fl, the proposal ,complies with the ’Town’s .tocal ’P,lanning’Policy ’No. 3.l ’$treetscape’, the

Town of Cambridge Local PTannfng Scheme No~ 1, the R-Codes-.and ttie Austrafian Standards..

,If you have any quest ons or need’ me to clarity anything for you, do not hesitate to contact me.

Kin regards,

~’~ to ~ \ 4-;’-L.~

Stephanie Cohen-Radosevich

Planning Consultant