4 ORDINARY MEETING 1...2020/02/26 · 4 Agenda – Ordinary Meeting 26 February 2020 - #6278402...

4

Agenda – Ordinary Meeting 26 February 2020 - #6278402

ORDINARY MEETING

26 FEBRUARY 2020 1

MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR MULTIPLE DWELLINGS (8 UNITS) – 30 LILY STREET, CAIRNS NORTH – DIVISION 5 Keanu Johnston | 8/7/4666 | #6299312 PROPOSAL: MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE (DEVELOPMENT

PERMIT) FOR MULTIPLE DWELLINGS (8 UNITS) LANDOWNER: MIHAVEN DEVELOPMENT PTY LTD APPLICANT: MICORP TOWN PLANNING PO BOX 7777 CAIRNS QLD 4870 LOCATION OF SITE: 30 LILY STREET, CAIRNS NORTH

PROPERTY: LOT 4 ON RP701208 ZONE: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LOCAL PLAN: NOT APPLICABLE PLANNING SCHEME: CAIRNSPLAN 2016 V2.1 REFERRAL AGENCIES: STATE ASSESSMENT AND REFERRAL

AGENCY NUMBER OF SUBMITTERS: NOT APPLICABLE STATUTORY ASSESSMENT DEADLINE: 4 MARCH 2020 APPLICATION DATE: 16 OCTOBER 2019 DIVISION: 5 APPENDIX: 1. PLAN(S) & DOCUMENT(S) 2. CONCURRENCE AGENCY CONDITIONS & REQUIREMENTS 3. THIRD PARTY ADVICE

5


LOCALITY PLAN

RECOMMENDATION That Council refuse the development application for a Material Change of Use (Development Permit) for Multiple Dwelling (8 Units) over land described as Lot 4 on RP701208, located at 30 Lily Street, Cairns North as compliance with the relevant assessment benchmarks is not able to be achieved by imposing development conditions, in accordance with section 60 (2) (d) of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld). Specifically, the reasons for refusal are: 1. Impact on Residential Amenity

The proposed Multiple Dwelling development does not appropriately respond to the immediate residential development in the neighbourhood. The proposal constitutes infill development that presents an unacceptable interface to adjoining lots and the streetscape. Accordingly, the proposed development does not comply with:

a. Medium Density Residential Zone Code – the Purpose in section 6.2.12.2 (2), 6.2.12.2 (3) (b), (c), and the Performance Outcomes in PO2, PO3, PO5, PO6 and PO7;

b. Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code – the Purpose in

section 9.3.15.2 (1), 9.3.15.2 (2) (a), (d), (e), (g), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO6 and PO7;

c. Building Height Overlay Code – the Purpose in section 8.2.3.2 (2) (c), (d),

(f), (h), (j), 8.2.3.2 (5) (c), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO4, PO6, PO7 and PO8; and

6


2. Overdevelopment of Site

The proposed Multiple Dwelling development constitutes urban development that does not appropriately respond to the constraints and shortfalls of the subject site, ultimately resulting in a scale and built form that is overbearing in nature and not in accordance with the anticipated character of development in the neighbourhood. Accordingly, the proposed development does not comply with:

a. Medium Density Residential Zone Code – the Purpose in section 6.2.12.2

(2), 6.2.12.2 (3) (b), (c), (d), and the Performance Outcomes in PO2, PO3, PO5, PO6 and PO7;

b. Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code – the Purpose in

section 9.3.15.2 (1), 9.3.15.2 (2) (a), (d), (e), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO6 and PO7;

c. Building Height Overlay Code – the Purpose in section 8.2.3.2 (1), 8.2.3.2

(2) (c), (d), (f), (h), (j), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO4, PO6 and PO8; and

3. Lack of Landscaping and Recreational Opportunity

The proposed Multiple Dwelling development seeks concessions on the provision of suitable landscaping and deep planting opportunity, as well as communal and private open space. As such, there is an imbalance between the built and natural form, as well as a lack of opportunity for residents’ recreational opportunity. Accordingly, the proposed development does not comply with:

a. Medium Density Residential Zone Code – the Purpose in section 6.2.12.2

(2), 6.2.12.2 (3) (e), and the Performance Outcomes in PO3 and PO7; b. Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code – the Purpose in

section 9.3.15.2 (1), 9.3.15.2 (2) (d), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO6, PO10 and PO12;

c. Building Height Overlay Code – the Purpose in section 8.2.3.2 (1), 8.2.3.2

(2) (d), (e), (f), (l), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO4, PO6, PO11, PO15 and PO21; and

d. Landscaping Design Code – the Purpose in section 9.4.6.2 (1), 9.4.6.2 (2)

(a), (c), (d), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1 and PO2.

7


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council is in receipt of a Development Application for a Material Change of Use (Development Permit) for Multiple Dwellings (8 Units) upon land at 30 Lily Street, Cairns North, formally described as Lot 4 on RP701208. The subject site is identified within the Medium Density Residential Zone of the CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1. The proposed development for Multiple Dwellings is identified as Code Assessable. As such, the application is bound to Code Assessment in accordance with section 60 of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld), and has been assessed against the Medium Density Residential Zone Code, Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code, applicable overlay codes and development codes of the CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1. An assessment against the applicable benchmarks indicated non-compliance with a number of Acceptable Outcomes, Performance Outcomes, Overall Outcomes and Purpose Statements of the relevant codes. An Information Request was issued to the applicant in an attempt of rectifying identified issues. In its current form, the development is still considered to fall short of achieving compliance with the intent of the relevant assessment benchmarks. The significant non-compliances with the assessment benchmarks support the refusal of the application for the proposed development. The proposed development seeks to provide higher density development that has not been appropriately designed with the shortfalls of the subject site in consideration. The subject site has a total site area of 556m². The proposed development seeks to establish a total site coverage of 63% (in lieu of the prescribed 40%), presenting a significant imbalance between the built and natural form. The lower level is dominated by car parking/hardstand, with no provision of communal open space, and limited landscaping and deep planting opportunity along the site boundaries. The shortfall in site width (13.5m in lieu of the prescribed minimum of 15m) results in concessions sought for non-compliance with minimum boundary setbacks. The development seeks to be sited 710mm (outermost projection) and 1.5m (wall) from the front boundary (McLeod Street frontage) in lieu of the prescribed 6m, as well as 900mm (outermost projection) and 1.5m (wall) from the northern side boundary in lieu of the prescribed 3m. The development is considered to result in an unacceptable interface to adjoining residential development and the streetscape. On the balance of the assessment, and in accordance with section 60 (2) (d) of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld), officers are of the opinion that the development is unable to demonstrate compliance with the assessment benchmarks through the imposing of reasonable and relevant development conditions. The evident constraints with regard to site characteristics, development bulk and impact on the amenity of adjoining properties would ultimately result in a different development altogether where pursuing compliance with development conditions.

8


Officers therefore recommend the application be refused. It should be noted that the use rights associated with Multiple Dwellings is supported in the Medium Density Residential Zone. This site is capable of accommodating an appropriately designed unit development that seeks to address the provisions of the Scheme. The Applicant has been afforded the opportunity to amend the design to address the concerns raised by Officers but has elected to proceed to a decision based on the current development plans. TOWN PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Background The subject site does not have an overly complex history. Historically, the subject site was improved by a single detached dwelling. On 20 January 2009, there is evidence of approval for the removal/demolition of the dwelling house due to irreparability due to fire. A valuation letter dated 10 May 2010 confirms that the site was vacant upon inspection. The subject site has been notably vacant since the removal/demolition of the dwelling house. With regard to zoning, the subject site has been predominantly zoned for a Medium Density Residential designation (20-year period). Specifically, the subject site has been zoned: • Planning Scheme for Part of the City of Cairns – Medium Density Residential

Zone (400 persons per hectare). • CairnsPlan 2005 – Residential 3 (400 persons per hectare). • CairnsPlan 2009 – Residential 3 (300 persons per hectare). • CairnsPlan 2016 – Medium Density Residential Zone. Site Description The subject site is located on a corner allotment, with frontage to Lily Street (Access Road) of approximately 13.5m and McLeod Street (Collector Road) of approximately 40.6m. The subject site has an area of 556m², within a predominantly residential context established to the south and west, and mixed use to the immediate east and north. The subject site is identified within the Medium Density Residential Zone of the CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1. The subject site is also identified within the extents of the following overlays –

9


Overlay Details Acid Sulfate Soils Overlay Land at or below 5m AHD Airport Environs Overlay Aviation Facility - Redden Creek PSR

Aviation Facility - Redden Creek SSR Wildlife Hazard Zone - 3km Wildlife Hazard Zone Light Intensity Zone - B PAN-OPS Area - Within PANS-OPS Area Obstacle Limitation Surface - 30-40m AHD Aus Noise Exposure Forecast - 20 to 25 ANEF Aus Noise Exposure Forecast - 25 to 30 ANEF

Building Height Overlay Precinct 3 Flood and Inundation Hazards Overlay Flood Inundation (100 year ARI)

Sub-precinct Zone 2 - CBD & Environs Transport Network Overlay Road Hierarchy

Pedestrian and Cycle Network The subject site is currently vacant, however was historically improved by a single detached dwelling. Topographically, the site is generally level at 2.75m AHD – 3m AHD, with a light fall to the McLeod Street frontage. Both the Lily Street and McLeod Street frontage exhibit notably wider road reserves, allowing for informal parking arrangements along both frontages. As it currently stands, the McLeod Street frontage is unsealed, loose gravel and the Lily Street frontage is fully sealed. There are two (2) street trees along the McLeod Street frontage identified within the road reserve. There is a single street tree within the verge along the Lily Street frontage. It is also noted that both frontages have a footpath and kerb and channel for the entirety of the property boundary. McLeod Street and Lily Street are identified as Local (Council) Roads. Sheridan Street is identified as a State-controlled Road, of which the site is identified within 100m of the signalised Lily Street – Sheridan Street intersection. The subject site is within an established area, and as such, has access to all necessary infrastructure networks. It is noted that there is an existing sewer line that traverses the centre of the site, running parallel to Lily Street. The subject site is located within the mapped Urban Footprint of the Far North Queensland Regional Plan 2009 – 2031 area. Refer to extracts from CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1 mapping and Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning mapping below.

10


Extract from CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1 mapping

Extract from the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning

mapping Proposal The proposal seeks to establish a Multiple Dwelling development on land currently identified as vacant. The development presents as a three-storey building of eight (8) individual residential units comprising internally of the following specifications – • Two (2) bedrooms;

11


• One (1) bathroom and ensuite (off main bedroom); • Combined living / dining / kitchen area; • Laundry; and • 9m² patio. The development seeks to establish residential units on the first and second levels, providing 12 parking spaces at ground level in accordance with Table 9.4.7.3.b of the Parking and Access Code, which prescribes the following for a Multiple Dwelling use (where a site is located within the mapped Building Height Overlay) – • 1 space per 1 or 2 bedroom unit; or • 1.5 spaces per 3 or more bedroom unit; and • 1 space per 10 units for visitors. The development is proposed to be accessed via two (2) vehicular access/egress points proposed from McLeod Street as well as a pedestrian access point from Lily Street. It is noted that both Lily Street and McLeod Street exhibit a notably wider road reserve/carriageway, allowing for parking to occur along the site frontages. Although no reliance is to be placed on on-street parking, the formalised and informal parking arrangement along both McLeod Street and Lily Street provides additional opportunity for parking associated with the development. It is noted that there is an existing sewer line that traverses the centre of the site, running parallel to Lily Street. The proposal seeks to establish an easement over the infrastructure, as well as removable paving to facilitate access/removal for maintenance purposes. The development does not propose permanent structures over the easement area (removable paving as car parking spaces). The subject site is identified within 100m of the intersection of a State-controlled Road, being Sheridan Street. In accordance with Schedule 10, Part 9, Division 4, Subdivision 2, Table 4, Item 1 of the Planning Regulation 2017 (Qld), the application was referred to the State Assessment and Referral Agency (SARA). On 23 January 2020, under section 56 (1) (a) of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld), the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning advised that it had no requirements relating to the application. In accordance with section 34 of the Development Assessment Rules, Council sought third party advice from Ergon Energy with regard to Ergon infrastructure (overhead network) and the potential encroachment within an ergon exclusion zone associated with the infrastructure. On 18 February 2020, Ergon Energy advised that the development is at extremely high risk of being built within the statutory clearance exclusion zone along the McLeod Street frontage. Ergon Energy stated that the applicant must engage an electrical contractor or Ergon Energy to undertake a detailed assessment of the power line, clearances and building plans. Application Summary On 16 October 2019, the development application for a Material Change of Use (Development Permit) for Multiple Dwellings (8 Units) was received.

12


On 25 October 2019, a Confirmation Notice was issued to the applicant under Part 1 of the Development Assessment Rules. On 8 November 2019, an Information Request was issued to the applicant under Part 3 of the Development Assessment Rules. On 27 November 2019, an Information Response was received from the applicant ending Part 3 of the Development Assessment Rules and commencing Part 5 of the Development Assessment Rules. On 6 January 2020, the applicant agreed to an extension to the Decision Making Period for an additional ten (10) business days from 9 January 2020 to 23 January 2020. On 10 January 2020, a Missed Referral Notice was issued to the applicant in accordance with Part 7 of the Development Assessment Rules. On 14 January 2020, a Confirmation Notice was received from the Department of State Development, Manufacturing, Infrastructure and Planning advising the application had been properly referred under Part 2 of the Development Assessment Rules. On 21 January 2020, the applicant agreed to an extension to the Decision Making Period for an additional fifteen (15) business days, from 21 January 2020 to 12 February 2020. On 7 February 2020, the applicant agreed to an extension to the Decision Making Period for an additional fifteen (15) business days, from 12 February 2020 to 4 March 2020. Statement of Reasons The following information is provided in accordance with section 63 of the Planning Act 2016. REASONS FOR DECISION The proposed development is recommended for refusal based on the following: Assessment Benchmarks 1. The proposed development has been assessed in accordance with the relevant

Assessment Benchmarks and is considered inconsistent with the applicable provisions of CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1.

a. The proposed Multiple Dwelling development does not appropriately respond

to the immediate residential development in the neighbourhood. The proposal constitutes infill development that presents an unacceptable interface to adjoining lots and the streetscape. Accordingly, the proposed development does not comply with:

13


i. Medium Density Residential Zone Code – the Purpose in section 6.2.12.2 (2), 6.2.12.2 (3) (b), (c), and the Performance Outcomes in PO2, PO3, PO5, PO6 and PO7;

ii. Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code – the Purpose in

section 9.3.15.2 (1), 9.3.15.2 (2) (a), (d), (e), (g), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO6 and PO7;

iii. Building Height Overlay Code – the Purpose in section 8.2.3.2 (2) (c), (d),

(f), (h), (j), 8.2.3.2 (5) (c), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO4, PO6, PO7, PO8; and

b. The proposed Multiple Dwelling development constitutes urban development

that does not appropriately respond to the constraints and shortfalls of the subject site, ultimately resulting in a scale and built form that is overbearing in nature and not in accordance with the anticipated character of development in the neighbourhood. Accordingly, the proposed development does not comply with:

i. Medium Density Residential Zone Code – the Purpose in section 6.2.12.2

(2), 6.2.12.2 (3) (b), (c), (d), and the Performance Outcomes in PO2, PO3, PO5, PO6 and PO7;

ii. Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code – the Purpose in

section 9.3.15.2 (1), 9.3.15.2 (2) (a), (d), (e), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO6 and PO7;

iii. Building Height Overlay Code – the Purpose in section 8.2.3.2 (1), 8.2.3.2

(2) (c), (d), (f), (h), (j), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO4, PO6 and PO8; and

c. The proposed Multiple Dwelling development seeks concessions on the

provision of suitable landscaping and deep planting opportunity, as well as communal and private open space. As such, there is an imbalance between the built and natural form, as well as a lack of opportunity for residents’ recreational opportunity. Accordingly, the proposed development does not comply with:

i. Medium Density Residential Zone Code – the Purpose in section 6.2.12.2

(2), 6.2.12.2 (3) (e), and the Performance Outcomes in PO3 and PO7; ii. Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code – the Purpose in

section 9.3.15.2 (1), 9.3.15.2 (2) (d), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO6, PO10 and PO12;

14


iii. Building Height Overlay Code – the Purpose in section 8.2.3.2 (1), 8.2.3.2 (2) (d), (e), (f), (l), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1, PO2, PO4, PO6, PO11, PO15 and PO21; and

iv. Landscaping Design Code – the Purpose in section 9.4.6.2 (1), 9.4.6.2

(2) (a), (c), (d), and the Performance Outcomes in PO1 and PO2. 2. In accordance with section 60 (2) (d) the Planning Act 2016 (Qld), the development

is non-compliant with the relevant Assessment Benchmarks and is unable to be conditioned to comply without resulting in substantially different development.

ASSESSMENT BENCHMARKS The proposed development was assessed against the following assessment benchmarks of CairnsPlan 2016.

Assessment Benchmarks

Zone Medium density residential

Overlays

Acid sulfate soils Airport environs Flood and inundation hazards Transport network

Development codes Multiple dwelling and short-term accommodation Environmental performance Excavation and filling Infrastructure works Landscaping Parking and access Vegetation management

Purpose and Overall Outcomes Assessment The following discussion addresses the proposed development in relation to the applicable codes. During the assessment against CairnsPlan 2016 v2.1, Officers have considered the relevant Purpose Statements and Overall Outcomes.

Medium Density Residential Zone Code Purpose and Overall Outcomes

The proposed development does not comply with the following Purpose statement of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code 6.2.12.2: (2) The local government purpose of the code is to promote and retain a mixed residential density character and amenity, with access to centres, major transport facilities, open space and recreation activities. In addition to the above, the proposed development does not comply with the following Overall outcomes of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code: (b) development provides a high level of amenity taking into account impacts

15


such as traffic, noise, dust, odour, and lighting; (c) a medium residential density, scale and character of the area is achieved; (d) development reflects and responds to the natural features and constraints of the land; (e) community facilities, open space and recreational areas and appropriate infrastructure to support the needs of the local community are provided. The proposed development is not considered to promote or retain a suitable or acceptable residential character or amenity for the Medium Density Residential Zone. The Overall Outcomes indicate that development is to provide a high level of amenity. The proposed siting and bulk of the building is not considered commensurate to the adjoining allotment (28 Lily Street) or the existing residential context. The development has potential to present externally as overbearing in nature, with specific reference made to the significant concessions sought on boundary setbacks. The subject site is identified to exhibit a number of constraints, particularly relating to lot size and lot width, that render the proposal inappropriate. The shortfalls sought have ultimately meant the built form would dominate the subject site, and would not allow for the provision of prescribed communal open space, with reliance placed upon nearby facilities to achieve the communal open space requirement. In addition, the development seeks relaxation on private recreational space (dimensions of balconies, as compliant balconies would result in a near built to boundary outcome), as well as a lack of landscaping and deep planting opportunities.

Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code Purpose and Overall Outcomes

The proposed development does not comply with the following Purpose statement of the Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code 9.3.15.2: (1) The purpose of the Multiple dwelling and short-term accommodation code is to ensure that Multiple dwellings and Short-term accommodation uses are appropriately located, designed and operated. In addition to the above, the proposed development does not comply with the following Overall outcomes of the Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code: (a) development is compatible with and complementary to surrounding development, with regard to scale, bulk, and streetscape patterns; (d) the design of development creates a pleasant living environment and is appropriate for the tropical climate of the region; (e) the impacts of a development on adjoining premises are managed; (g) infill development is encouraged, whilst maintaining the existing character of residential areas. The intent of the use/development code is to provide higher density residential development that is appropriately designed with consideration to impacts both on and off site. The development is not considered to have been designed with the limitations of the site (particularly lot size and width) taken into consideration, and as such, negatively impacts adjoining properties, the streetscape and the neighbourhood. The development is not consistent with regard to scale, bulk and/or streetscape patterns. As a result, the development is likely to dominate and overlook adjoining properties and the streetscape, diminishing privacy and residential amenity.

16


The balance of the built and natural form and lack of recreational areas is not considered to provide a pleasant living environment for residents of the development or neighbouring properties. It is not considered that the impacts on adjoining premises can be appropriately managed without a redesign of the development.

Building Height Overlay Code Purpose and Overall Outcomes

The proposed development does not comply with the following Purpose statement of the Building Height Overlay Code 8.2.3.2: (1) The purpose of the Building height overlay code is to enable increased building height and development opportunities and ensure tropical urbanism and high quality design outcomes are achieved. In addition to the above, the proposed development does not comply with the following Overall outcomes of the Building Height Overlay Code 8.2.3.2 (2) and 8.2.3.2 (3): (c) development provides for an appropriate interface to surrounding areas. The Cairns city centre contains the highest and most intense form of development within the region; (d) development is set back from street frontages and property boundaries to: (i) maintain the character and amenity of the streetscape and surrounding area; (iii) achieve tropical urbanism outcomes through design and siting; (iv) provide appropriate separation between buildings for privacy and amenity, and to allow for the penetration of breezes and sunlight; (vii) provide for deep landscaping; (viii) maintain appropriate spaces between buildings on the same site or adjoining sites; (e) development demonstrates tropical urbanism through: (i) providing a high standard of design reflective of the qualities of good urban places; (ii) buildings and structures by their design and setting reflect the concept of a ‘city in a rainforest’; (iii) appropriate use of materials and landscaping; (f) development provides appropriate space between buildings on the same site and adjoining sites to: (ii) avoid oppressive relationships between buildings; (iii) facilitate deep landscaping and reflect the concept of a ‘city in a rainforest’; (v) provide privacy and a high standard of amenity for residents and occupants; (vii) achieve tropical urbanism outcomes through design and siting; (h) development is designed to respect: (ii) the transitional nature of the area from low residential densities to medium and higher densities; (j) development in residential areas is of a scale, use, type and orientation that does not adversely affect the amenity of the area; (l) development provides landscaping in both the horizontal and vertical plane to: (i) achieve the concept of a ‘city in a rainforest’; (ii) enhance the visual quality, amenity and identity of the area. At a high level, it is not considered that the development ensures tropical urbanism and high quality design outcomes are achieved. Planning Scheme Policy – Tropical Urbanism states that development that expresses tropical urbanism incorporates (particular elements selected): (c) sufficient space around and between buildings; (f) generous outdoor living spaces with large window and balcony openings; (h) high quality landscaping; (i) quality public and private spaces that proliferate and enliven the urban form; and (j) passive design that responds to the tropical climate. Lack of acknowledgement of Tropical Urbanism principles, coupled with the non-

17


compliances with the Medium Density Residential Zone Code and the Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code, reflects a development that does not achieve the intent of most of the Overall Outcomes of the Building Height Overlay Code.

Landscaping Code Purpose and Overall Outcomes

The proposed development does not comply with the following Purpose statement of the Landscaping Code 9.4.6.2: (1) The purpose of the Landscaping code is to ensure that landscaping is provided to enhance the tropical amenity and character of the region. In addition to the above, the proposed development does not comply with the following Overall outcomes of the Landscaping Code: (a) the landscape character of the region is retained, promoted and enhanced through high quality landscape works; (c) the visual quality, amenity and identity of the region is enhanced; (d) attractive streetscapes and public places are created through landscape design; Non-compliance with the Medium Density Residential Zone Code, Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code and the Building Height Overlay Code ultimately results in an imbalance between the built and natural form, with a development that lacks suitable landscaping and deep planting opportunity. The lack of suitable area does not allow for appropriate landscaping to provide aesthetic value to the streetscape or public places, nor does it appropriately provide reprieve from the built form.

Performance Outcome Assessment The following discussion addresses the proposed development in relation to the applicable codes listed above. Where the proposal is not considered to meet the Acceptable Outcomes or Performance Outcome (or conditions cannot be applied to achieve compliance), the assessment against the Performance Outcome is detailed below.

Medium Density Residential Zone Code Performance Outcome PO2

Performance Outcome PO2 states that the site coverage of all buildings and structures is to remain in keeping with the residential character and amenity of the area. The acceptable outcome indicates a benchmark of 40% site coverage where not for a Dwelling House or Dual Occupancy. The proposed development seeks to establish a total site cover of 63%, seeking a 23% concession. Such a relaxation is not consistent with Multiple Dwelling development, nor is it consistent with development in the Medium Density Residential Zone. For comparison, the proposed site coverage exceeds the prescribed acceptable outcomes for zones with a greater anticipated residential density (notably the Tourist Accommodation Zone). The exceedance, coupled with the reduced setbacks sought, is considered to negatively impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties and will result in an overbearing structure to the public realm. As such, the proposed development is not considered to be in keeping with the residential character and amenity of the Medium Density Residential Zone.

18


Performance Outcome PO3

Performance Outcome PO3 states that development is to remain consistent with the purpose and overall outcomes sought for the zone. Refer to the preceding assessment against the Medium Density Residential Zone Purpose and Overall Outcomes.


Performance Outcome PO5 states that buildings are to be set back to maintain the residential character and amenity of the area and achieve separation from neighbouring buildings and frontages. Refer to assessment against Performance Outcome PO2. The development does not achieve a suitable setback (from wall or outermost projection) to neighbouring buildings and/or frontages. The development seeks to establish a front boundary setback to the McLeod Street frontage of 710mm to the balcony and 1500mm to the wall. Furthermore, the development seeks a side (north-east) boundary setback of (approximately) 900mm to the outermost projection of the eaves and 1500mm to the wall. It is noted that the adjoining property (28 Lily Street) has been plotted with a near built to boundary setback, meaning building separation between habitable spaces is extremely minor. Reference is made to Multiple Dwelling development in the immediate area (378 McLeod Street, 323-329 McLeod Street, 34-40 McLeod Street and 243 McLeod Street for example) which predominantly exhibit setbacks of 2m or greater to the property boundary of an allotment improved by lower density residential development.


Performance Outcome PO6 states that development is located, designed, operated and managed to respond to the characteristics, features and constraints of the site and its surrounds. Whilst it is acknowledged the development seeks to deliver a higher density residential development, the development has not appropriately addressed the characteristics, features and constraints of the site and its surrounds. With regard to the site size, the development gives preference to the built form, and makes no attempt to provide communal open space for residents, suitable landscaping or deep planting opportunity. The ground level is dominated by car parking, with two (2) vehicular access points that further reduce opportunity for landscaping. The building substantially encroaches within the front (McLeod Street) frontage (710mm in lieu of the prescribed 6m) as well as side boundary (900mm in lieu of the prescribed 3m), as the building has not been designed in response to the reduced width of the allotment. The building does not appropriately acknowledge the location of the adjoining dwelling, with a building separation of roughly 900mm (based off plans provided).

19



Performance Outcome PO7 states that development does not adversely affect the residential character and amenity of the area in terms of traffic, noise, dust, odour, lighting or other physical or environmental impacts. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is considered to negatively impact upon the residential character and amenity of the area with regard to other physical impacts.

Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code Performance Outcome PO1

Performance Outcome PO1 states that a site is to have a sufficient area and frontage to accommodate aspects of development (specifically, buildings, structures, setbacks, access, parking, manoeuvring, pedestrian access, landscaping, recreational areas and facilities). The code indicates a benchmark of 800m² as an acceptable outcome. The site exhibits a notable shortfall with this regard (556m² in lieu of the prescribed 800m²). As a result, the development seeks multiple concessions with regard to setbacks (front boundary relaxation and side boundary relaxations), non-compliant landscaping along all property boundaries, lack of suitable deep planting areas and a shortfall with regard to suitable recreational areas (reduced patio dimensions and no provision of communal open space). Each concession is arguably the result of an overdevelopment of the subject site. It is considered that the number of concessions are unable to be resolved through appropriate conditioning without resulting in significant design alterations.


Performance Outcome PO2 states that development is to be designed to maximise the separation between buildings, provide adequate landscaping, provide open space for recreational opportunity and reduce the bulk of the building. Please refer to preceding assessment. The proposed building setbacks, reduced width of the allotment (Lily Street frontage) of approximately 13.5m, as well as the location of the existing dwelling house on the adjoining allotment, results in a development that has not demonstrated a suitable separation between buildings on adjoining lots, nor does the development provide adequate space for landscaping, open space or recreational opportunity. The development is reliant upon nearby facilities to achieve a communal open space, and exhibits minor shortfalls on private open space dimensions.


Performance Outcome PO6 states that development is to be sited so the setback from boundaries maintains the character and amenity of the streetscape and surrounding area, retains daylight access for adjoining premises, provides privacy and amenity for residents and occupants on site and adjoining premises and provides for appropriate landscaping. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is considered overbearing in nature, resulting in impacts on amenity, daylight access for adjoining premises, privacy and opportunity for appropriate landscaping. The development does not acknowledge the guidance material of Figures 9.3.15.3.c, and in turn does not achieve the listed requirements to an acceptable standard.

20



Performance Outcome PO7 states that development is to be designed to provide amenity for residents whilst maintain the visual and acoustic privacy of adjoining sensitive land uses. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is considered to negatively impact upon amenity for residents and adjoining sensitive land uses.


Performance Outcome PO10 states development is to provide accessible and functional communal recreation area for the benefit of residents. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is reliant upon nearby facilities to achieve the communal open space requirement. No communal recreational space for sole use or benefit of the residents has been proposed.


Performance Outcome PO12 states that landscaping is to contribute to establishing an attractive and safe streetscape and a high standard of amenity and privacy for adjoining premises and for residents with regard to the provision of suitable landscaping. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is considered overbearing in nature, which in turn negatively impacts upon the streetscape and amenity for adjoining premises. The overdevelopment of the site does not allow for the opportunity of suitable landscaping.

Building Height Overlay Code Performance Outcome PO1

Performance Outcome PO1 states that development is to remain consistent with the purpose and overall outcomes sought for the overlay area. Refer to the preceding assessment against the Building Height Overlay Purpose and Overall Outcomes.


Performance Outcome PO2 states that the site of which the development is taking place upon is of suitable area, dimension and shape to achieve appropriate development outcomes (specifically aspects of character, amenity, separation, landscaping, parking, access, manoeuvrability, recreation areas, infrastructure and services). Please refer to preceding assessment. The plethora of concessions indicates an overdevelopment of the subject site which, in turn, does not achieve the benchmark requirements for appropriate development outcomes.


Performance Outcome PO4 states that development ensures that on-site there is sufficient space outside of and around the building to maintain view lines and vistas, provide appropriate areas for deep landscaping, maintain privacy and amenity for occupants of the site and adjoining sites, provide for adequate access to sunlight and ventilation, provide adequate separation between buildings and ensure buildings maintain a moderate overall width. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development does not appropriately utilise the subject site to allow compliance with the listed requirements to an acceptable standard.

21



Performance Outcome PO6 states that development is to be set back from all site boundaries to maintain the character and amenity of the streetscape and surrounding area, maintain view lines and vistas, maintain privacy and amenity for residents and occupants, maximise the availability of light and ventilation, avoid a visually overbearing built form, provide appropriate landscaping and achieve tropical urbanism outcomes. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is considered overbearing in nature, resulting in impacts on privacy and amenity, light and ventilation permeability, the opportunity for landscaping as well as shortfalls on tropical urbanism outcomes.


Performance Outcome PO7 states that development is to be designed to respect development on adjoining sites and the transitional nature of the area. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is not considered to have been designed commensurate of adjoining sites or the combined low-medium and medium density residential context.


Performance Outcome PO8 states that development is to be designed and sited to ensure that buildings are moderate in width to avoid a visually overbearing built form, does not result in a wall of buildings, maintains view lines and vistas, maintains the privacy and amenity for residents and occupants on the site and adjoining sites, and maintains light and ventilation Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is not considered to have acknowledged the core elements of Planning Scheme Policy – Tropical Urbanism.


Performance Outcome PO11 states that development is to provide an appropriate, accessible and functional communal recreation area for the benefit of residents and occupants. Please refer to preceding assessment. The development is reliant upon nearby facilities to achieve the communal open space requirement. No communal recreational space for sole use or benefit of the residents has been proposed.


Performance Outcome PO15 states that development is to provide a high standard of design that achieves tropical urbanism outcomes, positively contributes to the image of the region, displays the qualities of good urban places, reflects the concept of a city in a rainforest, uses appropriate materials and provides high quality landscaping. The development is subjectively non-compliant with the display of qualities of a good urban place. Furthermore, the development is not considered to display or have acknowledged key items of Planning Scheme Policy – Tropical Urbanism which outlines the qualities of a good urban place.

22



Performance Outcome PO21 states that development is landscaped both horizontally and vertically to reflect the concept of a city in a rainforest. The development is not considered to display or have acknowledged core elements of Planning Scheme Policy – Tropical Urbanism.

Landscaping Code Performance Outcome PO1

Performance Outcome PO1 states that the development is to provide landscaping that contributes to and creates a high quality landscape character for the site, street and local areas of the region by (a) promoting the region’s character as a tropical environment; (b) softening the built form of development; (c) enhancing the appearance of the development from within and outside the development and makes a positive contribution to the streetscape; (d) screening the view of buildings, structures, open storage areas, service equipment, machinery plant and the like from public places, residences and other sensitive development; (e) where necessary, ensuring the privacy of habitable rooms and private outdoor recreation areas; (f) contributing to a comfortable living environment and improved energy efficiency, by providing shade to reduce glare and heat absorption and re-radiation from buildings, parking areas and other hard surfaces; (g) ensuring private outdoor recreation space is useable; (h) providing long term soil erosion protection; (i) providing a safe environment; (j) integrating existing vegetation and other natural features of the premises into the development; (k) not adversely affecting vehicular and pedestrian sightlines and road safety. The proposed development is considered to represent a significant imbalance between the built and natural form, with concessions sought for landscaping, deep planting opportunity and communal recreational areas. As such, the landscaping provided is not considered to achieve a high quality landscape character. Lack of suitable area for landscaping is not considered to provide aesthetic value to the streetscape or public places, nor does it appropriately provide reprieve from the built form.


Performance Outcome PO2 states that landscaping associated with the development is to contribute to a sense of place, is functional to the surroundings, enhances the streetscape and visual appearance of the development and reflects the concept of a city in a rainforest. Please refer to preceding assessment. The proposed landscaping is considered to represent a significant imbalance between the built and natural form, lacking contribution to a sense of place, functionality or opportunity for high aesthetic value.

Code Assessment In accordance with section 60 if the Planning Act 2016 (Qld), for any Code Assessable application, the Assessment Manager, after carrying out the assessment – (a) must decide to approve the application to the extent the development complies with

all of the assessment benchmarks; and

23


(b) may decide to approve the application even if the development does not comply with some of the assessment benchmarks; and

(c) may impose development conditions of an approval; and (d) may, to the extent the development does not comply with some or all of the

assessment benchmarks, decide to refuse the application only if compliance can not be achieved by imposing development conditions.

The proposed development has been recommended for refusal in accordance with section 60 (2) (d) of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld) as conditions are unable to be lawfully imposed on the Decision to achieve compliance with the applicable assessment benchmarks. In this instance, conditions relating to compliance with relevant Performance Outcomes (particularly, an amendment to design) is likely to result in a substantially different built form and layout. It is acknowledged that section 60 (2) (b) of the Planning Act 2016 (Qld) affords the Assessment Manager an opportunity to approve an application despite non-compliances with applicable Assessment Benchmarks. Given the concessions sought against the Medium Density Residential Zone Code, Multiple Dwelling and Short-term Accommodation Code, applicable development and overlay codes, it is considered that the development has not appropriately complied with the intent or outcomes of the individual benchmarks. ATTACHMENTS Appendix 1 : Plan(s) & Documents(s) Appendix 2 : Concurrence Agency Conditions & Requirements Appendix 3 : Third Party Advice

Keanu Johnston Planning Officer Action Officer

Peter Boyd Manager Strategic Planning & Approvals

Kelly Reaston General Manager Planning & Environment

24


APPENDIX 1: Plan(s) & Document(s)

25


26


27


28


29


30


31


32


33


34


APPENDIX 2: Concurrence Agency Conditions & Requirements

35


36


37


38


APPENDIX 3: Third Party Advice

39


4 ORDINARY MEETING 1...2020/02/26 · 4 Agenda – Ordinary Meeting 26 February 2020 - #6278402...

Documents

Transcript of 4 ORDINARY MEETING 1...2020/02/26 · 4 Agenda – Ordinary Meeting 26 February 2020 - #6278402...