· notice of panel meeting . notice is hereby given in accordance with section 56a(19) of the ....

Notice of Panel Meeting

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN in accordance with Section 56A(19) of the Development Act 1993, that a meeting of the

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL

of the

CITY OF WEST TORRENS

will be held in the George Robertson Room, Civic Centre 165 Sir Donald Bradman Drive, Hilton

on

TUESDAY, 12 FEBRUARY 2008 at 5.00 PM

Trevor Starr Chief Executive Officer City of West Torrens Disclaimer Development Assessment Panel Please note that the contents of this Development Assessment Panel Agenda have yet to be considered and deliberated by the Development Assessment Panel and as a consequence, officer recommendations may be adjusted or changed by the Development Assessment Panel in the process of making the formal Development Assessment Panel decision.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008

I N D E X

1. MEETING OPENED ............................................................................................. 1

2. PRESENT ............................................................................................................ 1

3. APOLOGIES ........................................................................................................ 1

4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES .......................................................................... 1

5. DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS ............................................................................. 1

6. REPORTS OF MANAGER URBAN PLANNING ................................................. 2 6.1 3/54a George Street, THEBARTON .......................................................... 2 6.2 6A Norman Street, UNDERDALE ............................................................ 42 6.3 30 Norma Street, MILE END .................................................................... 56 6.4 33 Capper Street, CAMDEN PARK ......................................................... 77 6.5 28 Daly Street, KURRALTA PARK .......................................................... 96 6.6 2 Knight Street, WEST RICHMOND ...................................................... 115 6.7 257 Marion Road, MARLESTON ........................................................... 128 6.8 181 Anzac Highway Kurralta Park ........................................................ 149 6.9 621 Burbridge Road, WEST BEACH .................................................... 161 6.10 13 Long Street, PLYMPTON ................................................................. 178 6.11 91 Halsey Road, FULHAM ..................................................................... 193 6.12 1-17 Cook Street, UNDERDALE ............................................................ 206

7. SUMMARY OF COURT APPEALS ................................................................. 252

8. MEETING CLOSE ........................................................................................... 254

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 1 1. MEETING OPENED

2. PRESENT

3. APOLOGIES

4. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 15 January 2008 be confirmed as a true and correct record. 5. DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS

The following information should be considered by Development Assessment Panel Members prior to a meeting: Action to be taken prior to consideration of a matter Sections 2(4)(5) of the Minister's Code of Conduct - Section 21A of the Development Act 1993 requires that:

"If you consider that you have, or might reasonably be perceived to have an interest in the matter before the panel, you must clearly state the nature of that interest in writing to the presiding member before the matter is considered.

If you consider that you have a personal interest which may be in conflict with your public duty to act impartially and in accordance with the principles of the Act, you must declare a conflict of interest as above."

Action to be taken after making a declaration of interest: Section 2(6) of the Minister's Code of Conduct - Section 21A of the Development Act 1993 requires that:

"If you have an interest in a matter, you must not partake in any of the assessment processes involving the matter. You must leave the room at any time in which the matter is discussed by the panel including during the hearing of any representations or during any vote on the matter. You must not vote on the matter and you must not move or second any motion or participate in any discussion through the consensus process."

If an interest has been declared by any member of the panel, the presiding member must record the nature of the interest in the minutes of meeting. The following disclosures of interest have been made in relation to:

Item Panel Member

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 2 6. REPORTS OF MANAGER URBAN PLANNING

6.1 3/54a George Street, THEBARTON Application No. 211/1436/2006 Appearing before the Panel will be: Representors: Elizabeth O’Dea, Jade Flavell and Emily Trott of The Wheatsheaf Hotel,

Greg Kleynjans (represented by Botten Levinson) of 1/54, 2/54 & 4/54 George Street, Thebarton, June Lucas of 50 George Street, Thebarton, and Maddy Newman of 49 Maria Street, Thebarton wish to appear in support of the representation.

Applicant/s 54A Pty Ltd of 3/54A George Street, Thebarton wishes to appear to

respond to representations. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Licensed café/restaurant and takeaway shop. APPLICANT 54A Pty Ltd APPLICATION NO 211/1436/2006 LODGEMENT DATE 12 December 2006 ZONE Light Industry APPLICATION TYPE Consent PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 3 REFERRALS Environmental Health Unit, Traffic Engineer ASSESSING OFFICER Maria Fantasia DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

31 March 2005

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE with a RESERVED MATTER BACKGROUND A development application was lodged with Council dated 12 December 2006 for the construction of a ‘Café style art gallery’ for a tenancy at 54 George Street, Thebarton. The application included supportive letters from the Visual Arts Coordinator and Fringe Benefits Coordinator of the Adelaide Fringe. A preliminary assessment of the application revealed a number of issues to be addressed, most particularly, intention of the zone, car parking provisions, the Disability Discrimination Act and hours of operation. A meeting was held on 28 March 2007 with the Manager of the proposed development, Mr Leigh Champion and Council’s Planning Department, to further discuss the issues pertaining to the proposed development including proposed licence conditions. In April 2007, the Applicant questioned the ‘existing use rights’ of the tenancy subject to this development, citing ‘The Deli’ had a history as a mixed business/deli/take away store. Council’s investigations provided the following advice: A delicatessen is a “shop” by virtue of Schedule 1 of the Development Regulations 1993. A “shop” is defined as premises used primarily for the sale by retail, rental or display of goods,

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 3 foodstuffs, merchandise or materials; and can include a restaurant; a retail showroom or personal service establishment. However a “shop” is distinguished from a “restaurant” by virtue of a separate definition of “restaurant” which means land used primarily for the consumption of meals on the site. Council therefore acknowledges that the existing use rights of the site are that of a delicatessen (shop), for the sale of foodstuffs and general merchandise and materials. Whilst provision may be made for some seating (in the order of 8-10 seats) for customers waiting to collect take away foods, no meals are to be consumed on the site. Council’s acknowledgement of the existing use rights is fundamental to the assessment of this application. “The use of the site as a delicatessen (shop) does not imply an existing approval for the operation of a café/restaurant on the site. As discussed at our previous meeting and during telephone conversations it is understood that the test of the appropriateness of the site as a café/restaurant with provision for sit down dining and consumption of meals on the site will be explored more fully in the progression of the assessment of DA 211/1436/2007 (sic). Similarly, progression of the Liquor Licence application will be dealt with by Council in association with DA 211/1436/2006.” In May 2007, the Applicant requested the development application be put on hold pending further planning advice being sought from a Planning Consultant. In October 2007, amended plans and a 'Heads of Agreement' were submitted by Nolan Rumsby Planners as part of the development application for public notification. While the development application was publicly notified as a ‘Café style art gallery’ with the applicant as Mr Leigh Champion, the amended plans and supporting documentation submitted that the proposed development was for a ‘Proposed licensed café/restaurant and takeaway shop’ with the applicant as 54A Pty Ltd. The response to representations has requested that the applicant be known as 54A Pty Ltd and the proposed development be submitted as a ‘Proposed licensed café/restaurant and takeaway shop’. Background documentation and correspondence is provided for the Panel's information (Refer Attachment 1). SITE AND LOCALITY The subject site is Unit 3 Strata Plan 6549 in the area named Thebarton, Hundred of Adelaide and contained within Certificate of Title Volume 5014, Folio 96. The street address for the property is 3/54A George Street, Thebarton. The subject allotment is a central tenancy in a group of shops in a single building at 54A George Street, Thebarton on the Albert Street corner. The subject tenancy is regular in shape, approximately 226m² in area with a four (4) metre frontage to George Street, an 8.6 metre width at the rear and a depth of approximately 33 metres. The subject site is located in the Light Industry Zone, as detailed in the City of West Torrens Development Plan, and currently includes four (4) separate building tenancies, three (3) with associated rear yards and the subject tenancy with a rear service laneway. The submitted plans indicate the subject tenancy is abutted by a guitar shop immediately to the east (corner of Albert Street), a barber shop immediately to the west and a butcher shop also further west, although submitted documentation claims the butcher shop is now vacant. To the west, north and south of the Light Industry Zone is the Residential Zone (Policy Area 40) with a Neighbourhood Centre Zone to the west, and the General Industry and District Commercial Zone to the east. Port Road is located approximately 190 metres to the east with Henley Beach Road approximately 530 metres to the south and South Road approximately 560 metres to the west.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 4 In the immediate locality The Wheatsheaf Hotel is situated diagonally across George Street to the southeast, The Squatters Arms Hotel is located 170 metres east on the corner of Port Road and George Street, residential premises surround the general neighbourhood although are not directly abutting and a range of office/warehouses, workshops, distribution warehouses, a depot and other development also located in the area. George Street connects Port Road and South Road and is used as a major bus route for commuters in the western suburbs. While kerbside parking is restricted in George Street because of its connectivity between two arterial roads, a greater amount of street parking is available in the local road network around George Street. The site and locality plan are provided.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 5

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 7 PROPOSAL The proposed development includes a variation to the existing use of the subject land from a ‘shop’ to a ‘licensed café/restaurant and takeaway shop’ for up to 50 patrons. The existing delicatessen/takeaway café, at 117m², will continue to trade as it currently does from Monday to Friday from 7.00am to 5.00pm. The licensed component to be known as ‘The Deli’ adds an additional 99m² to the rear of the premises and is to serve as an after-hours restaurant/ after hours café. It is also intended to provide a venue for the display and sale of local artwork/music and exposure to local musicians similar to a traditional wine bar, and to provide a venue for a three week period in March during the Fringe Festival each year, whereby it is proposed the patronage will increase to 100 persons. The following hours of operation for ‘The Deli’ component are sought:

· Sunday to Wednesday – midnight (except after a public holiday Sunday, where 1.00am closure applies)

· Thursday – 1.00am (the following morning) · Friday and Saturday – 2.00am (the following morning)

It is also proposed that the venue will serve breakfasts and light lunches on the weekends from 10.00am. It is proposed that patron numbers will be limited to 24 patrons on Saturdays until 6.00pm and Sundays until 4.00pm due to the off-street car park arrangement at AK Andrewartha Pty Ltd at 64 George Street, Thebarton (the discussion under Car Parking will explain the reasons for this.) It is also proposed to enter into a car parking agreement with AK Andrewartha Pty Ltd to enable the development at 3/54A George Street, Thebarton to use the premises at 64 George Street, Thebarton (50 metres west of the subject site) as their car parking for ‘The Deli’ (restaurant/café dining). According to a report provided by Frank Siow & Associates (Traffic and Parking Consultants) this would satisfy the car parking requirement of the proposed development. Relevant documentation and proposed plans are provided. (Refer Attachment 2) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 3 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations. During the Category 3 public notification period held in relation to the proposal, four (4) representations were received from the following persons: · Greg Kleynjans - 1, 2, 4/54 George Street, Thebarton SA 5031

(against) · Elizabeth O’Dea, Jade Flavell, Emily Trott - The Wheatsheaf Hotel, George Street,

Thebarton SA 5031 (against) · Maddy Newman - 49 Maria Street, Thebarton SA 5031 (in

support) · Julie Lucas - 50 George Street, Thebarton SA 5031 (in

support) The four (4) representors have indicated that they wish to be heard by Council in relation to their submission.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 8 The following concerns were raised by two (2) representors against the proposed development: · The lack of car parking, especially during the Fringe/Festival period. · The nature of the proposal, whether it is an entertainment venue or a restaurant/café? · The potential for noise nuisance during extended trading hours and impact on neighbouring

properties. · Access to the property. The following reasons were given by two (2) representors in support of the proposed development: · The proposed development is a much-needed facility to service the area. · The proposed development is an opportunity to support local artists in a pleasant

environment. In response, the applicant has provided the following: · The proposed development has been aligned with the available car parking at 64 George

Street, Thebarton. The car parking formula, except during the Fringe/Festival period, attempts not to impose on the available kerbside parking in the neighbouring local road network, supported by a Traffic Report, prepared by Mr Siow of Frank Siow & Associates.

· The proposed development includes the existing delicatessen/takeaway shop and an

additional licensed café/restaurant. The proposed development is not intended to be an ‘entertainment venue’ given the limit of 50 patrons (except during the Fringe/Festival period). Any entertainment will be in the form of background music in the style of a traditional wine bar.

· As the proposed development includes only background music in the form of light acoustic

music, it is proposed that there will be no noise nuisance from the subject tenancy. It is proposed that the development will conform with the requisite legislative requirements regarding noise emissions.

A copy of the representations and the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 3. REFERRALS The proposed development was referred internally to the Environmental Health Unit for assessment of the existing ‘shop’ and the Traffic Engineering Department for assessment of the proposed car park at 64 George Street, Thebarton. ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the General Industry Zone as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1, 5, 7, 13 Principles of Development Control 1, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 134, 135,

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 9 Zone

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 3

In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use and Zoning Objective 1 of the General Industry Zone seeks a “zone primarily accommodating industrial development” with Principle of Development Control 3 of the zone stipulating that “shop or group of shops with a gross leasable area of greater than 250 square metres” is a non-complying form of development. The subject land supports an existing ‘shop’ with a total floor area of 117m², which does not exceed the 250m² threshold therefore is exempt from being non-complying. Council Wide PDC 135(a) supports development of this sort as it allows for shops of less than 250m2 providing convenience goods for the local population in industrial, commercial or residential zones. It is acknowledged that the subject land use is being extended to include a restaurant/after hours café, the activity which generally falls under the land use categorisation of ‘shop’. However, as acknowledged by Council’s staff in correspondence to the applicant dated 11 April 2007, “a ‘shop’ is distinguished from a ‘restaurant’ by virtue of a separate definition of ‘restaurant’ which means land used primarily for the consumption of meals on a site”. Therefore, the proposed addition of the restaurant/after hours café should be assessed as defined in the Development Act 1993 as ‘restaurant’ and not as ‘shop’ and it is considered that the proposed development is a consent-on-merit form of development and appropriate in the locality. Surrounding Uses The surrounding land uses consist of hotels, car yard, offices/warehouses, storage, warehouse distribution centres, courier depot, churches and the like with residential land uses at a greater distance from the subject land. Car parking Provisions Council Wide PDC 25 expects that new development should enable all visiting vehicles to be accommodated on the site unless a) designated spaces are available on an adjoining or nearby property at all times and access is safe and convenient, or b) it can be demonstrated that users of the development have safe, close and convenient access to frequent and regular public transport at all times. In regards to car parking rates, Council Wide PDC 26 requires the rate of 5 to 7 spaces for ‘shops’ with lower rates appropriate for smaller centres. In the absence of a car parking rate for ‘restaurants’ in Council’s Development Plan, we can use Planning SA’s Parking Bulletin, which gives the car parking rate for ‘restaurants’ as 1 space per 3 seats (patrons). To put the proposed development into context, it must be noted that Council’s investigations of the existing use rights of the ‘shop’ at 3/54A George Street, Thebarton, revealed the subject site ie the ‘shop’, had a car parking requirement of eight (8) spaces but had been operating successfully without imposition on George Street or the surrounding local road network without those car parking spaces. Council confirmed this represented a parking “credit” of eight (8) spaces for the existing use of the ‘shop’.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 10 As the ‘shop’ (delicatessen/takeaway) component will continue to operate during Monday – Friday 7.00am to 5.00pm and will not be changed, a car parking assessment is only required for the restaurant/after hours café component of the proposed development. Taking into account the car parking “credit” of eight (8) spaces, the applicant sought further advice from Frank Siow & Associates in regards to the required amount of car parking for the proposed development. The advice suggests the following:

· It concurs with Council’s view that the existing ‘shop’ is in parking “credit” of eight (8) car parking spaces;

· In terms of the parking assessment for the restaurant/after hours café component, the proposed 50 patrons would require 17 parking spaces, based on the parking rate of 1 space per 3 seats;

· Assuming the “credit” of eight (8) spaces due to existing use rights of the ‘shop’, the proposed development requires the provision of an additional nine (9) car parking spaces only;

· The subject land ie 3/54A George Street, Thebarton, has entered into a car parking agreement with the owner of 64 George Street, Thebarton, to secure 13 off-street parking spaces on the premises at 64 George Street, Thebarton, which is located 50 metres west of the subject land being developed;

· The Traffic and Parking Consultant considers that the 13 off-street parking spaces provide adequate parking for the restaurant/after hours café component of the proposed development in accordance with parking provisions as outlined by Planning SA’s Parking Bulletin.

· The proposed after hours café would also be open for weekend lunches from 10am. There will be a limit of 24 seats available to patrons which according to Planning SA’s Parking Bulletin rate of 1 space per 3 seats, requires eight (8) car parking spaces and is already satisfied as the ‘shop’ is in “credit” of eight (8) parking spaces.

Further to the car parking assessment, the Applicant’s Traffic Consultant undertook a parking survey in the immediate area during the likely peak parking periods of the proposed restaurant/after hours café (Thursday evening, Friday evening and Saturday evening) to ascertain parking demands at these times, with particular regard given to The Wheatsheaf Hotel diagonally across the road from the subject land. The observations noted that during those peak times, very little on-street parking occurred in George Street and the section of Albert Street between George Street and Chapel Street with only two (2) vehicles parked in George Street and four (4) vehicles parked in Albert Street during this time. The consultant suggests Albert Street, with its wide carriageway and predominantly non-residential land-uses usually closed after business hours, could accommodate 14 – 16 vehicles on-street during these after-business hours without impacting negatively on adjacent land uses. Also on Albert Street, between George Street and Maria Street and adjacent to The Wheatsheaf Hotel, it was noted during the traffic survey (peak times) that on-street parking demands were higher with nine parked vehicles making use of Albert Street and some patrons of The Wheatsheaf Hotel parking in a private car park immediately opposite the hotel on George Street. It was also noted that approximately 40 private off-street car parks exist in the immediate locality of Albert and George Street, most left unoccupied after hours. The traffic report concludes that there is adequate parking available for the existing ‘shop’ and proposed restaurant/after hours café even during the three week Fringe Festival considering the provision of 13 off-street car parks at the nearby 64 George Street and the ample availability of on-street car parks after business hours in the surrounding local road network. The traffic consultant suggests the parking required during the Fringe Festival would be akin to higher parking demands experienced during Easter and Christmas periods when parking demands for retail uses is not normally provided for in those trading periods.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 11 The proposed development was also referred internally to Council’s Traffic Engineer and some concerns were raised in regards to the design and manoeuvrability of the 13 space off-street car park. It is noted that the car park at 64 George Street, Thebarton, is an existing car park several decades old that does not satisfy the current Australian Standards in regards to space sizes, disabled access, manoeuvrability, provision of sight lines etc. However, this in itself should not be the reason for not granting consent to the proposed development. Based on the findings of the traffic survey and the assessment of the parking demands for the restaurant/after hours café component of the proposed development as calculated by the applicants Traffic Consultant, and the confirmation by Council that the ‘shop’ component of the proposed development is in “credit” of eight (8) car park spaces, the car parking provisions appear satisfactory. Public Transport Access The Applicant has endeavoured to promote the use of public transport knowing the proposed development is in close proximity to Adelaide’s CBD and the newly extended tramline as well as being situated on a major bus route to the western suburbs and the city. Disabled Access The proposed development is an existing ‘shop’ (delicatessen/takeaway) with an existing entry point. A disabled public toilet within the proposed development is included to meet the Disability Discrimination Act 1992, to be further assessed during the Building Rules Consent stage should the development application be granted consent. Waste Storage The applicants report does not mention where waste will be stored or how it will be disposed of but it is assumed that the rear service laneway will be used for storage and disposal of waste during appropriate business hours. Stormwater It is proposed that stormwater disposal from the additional building at the rear of the subject tenancy will connect with the existing stormwater disposal arrangements. Environmental Health Assessment It appears that an assessment of the existing delicatessen/takeaway shop was requested by Council’s Planning Department of the Environmental Health Unit in April 2007. Noise Impacts The proposed development aims to include entertainment in the form of live and light acoustic background music in the front dining room of the establishment during evening hours. It is suggested that the front dining room, being a room acoustically insulated, will minimise noise impacts on land uses along George Street. The outside courtyard dining area will also accommodate dining most likely to be seasonal but definitely to be used during the three week Fringe Festival period. The restriction on placement of speakers (internally only) and the use of various measures including acoustic insulation within the building will ensure noise transmission from the subject site conforms with the requirements of the Industrial Noise Policy of the Environment Protection Act. Significant Trees There are no significant trees impacted on by the proposed development.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 12 Signage, Lighting and Security It is proposed that the 13 off-street car park at 64 George Street, Thebarton, will be signposted with an A-frame sign to direct traffic for ‘The Deli’ to the car park. The car park is to be line-marked and security lit for use by patrons to 64 George Street, Thebarton, as well as for use by patrons to ‘The Deli’ after hours for so long as the approved land use at 3/54A George Street, Thebarton, is carried out in accordance with the proposed development approval. The proprietors of 3/54A George Street, Thebarton, will be expected to secure by padlock, chain or other device the car park entry after closure and arrange for the removal of any vehicles from the car park after hours, and ensure the car park is open during normal business hours for the patrons of AK Andrewartha Pty Ltd. SUMMARY It is recognised that the ‘shop’ is an existing land use and has been in operation for many years without providing for off-street car parking. Council confirmed with the applicant that in fact the ‘shop’ was in “credit” of eight car parking spaces. It is also acknowledged that the Light Industry Zone as outlined in Council’s Development Plan –Consolidated 31 March 2005, encourages small scale activity industrial in nature that does not impact adversely on neighbouring land uses. While ‘shop or shops with a gross leasable area of greater than 250 square metres’ is listed as non-complying development in the Light Industry Zone, it is reiterated that the existing shop in this development is less than 250m² and that the additional restaurant/after hours café should be assessed as ‘restaurant’ as defined by the Development Act 1993. The proposed development has thus been assessed as a consent-on-merit form of development. The proposed development aims to provide a local restaurant/after hours café for Thebarton residents in an area where currently already exists two (2) hotels providing after hours beverages/entertainment ie The Wheatsheaf Hotel and The Squatters Arms Hotel. As the locality is on a major bus route, is in close proximity to the Adelaide CBD and in particular, to the Adelaide Fringe Festival headquarters on North Terrace, the proposed development aims to participate in the activities and entertainment the Fringe Festival has to offer by showcasing local artwork and music during the 3 week festival. The proposed restaurant/after hours café seems a natural and logical extension of the existing ‘shop’ and can easily be accommodated within the existing building. The pressing issue is that of car parking and impacts on the locality. Car parking requirements have been addressed with the provision of 13 off-street car parks at the nearby 64 George Street, Thebarton. Any binding agreement should be dealt with by way of a Land Management Agreement. Any overspill of car parking has been determined to be easily accommodated by the numerous kerbside car parking spaces available after hours when most of the industrial/warehouse/office complexes in the area are closed. The impacts on neighbouring properties will be covered by the license issued by the Liquor License Board, which will require that entertainment noise associated with the premises be low key in nature and comply with EPA requirements. Traffic noise from patrons arriving at or leaving the premises will have minimal impact on the locality as a major part of the surrounding area is used for industrial activity and is closed after business hours. It is considered that the application demonstrates sufficient consistency with the requirements of Council’s Development Plan and therefore warrants consideration for consent.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 13 RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993 resolves to GRANT Development Plan Consent for Application No. 211/1436/2006 by 54A Pty Ltd for the construction of a licensed café/restaurant and takeaway shop and associated carparking (at 64 George Street, Thebarton) at 3/54A George Street, Thebarton (CT 5014/96) subject to the following conditions of consent (and any subsequent or amended condition that may be required as a result of the consideration of reserved matters under Section 33(3) of the Development Act): Reserved Matters: The following information shall be submitted for further assessment and approval by the City of West Torrens as reserved matters under Section 33(3) of the Development Act 1993: 1. Entering into a Land Management Agreement with the proprietor of 3/54A George Street,

Thebarton and the owner of AK Andrewartha Pty Ltd (64 George Street, Thebarton) with regards to the car parking arrangement in relation to Development Application 211/1436/2006 (Proposed licensed café/restaurant and takeaway shop).

Conditions: 1. The development must be undertaken and completed in accordance with the plans

submitted with the application, stamped as approved, together with information detailed in this application except where varied by any condition(s) listed below.

2. Noise from the premises (including live or recorded entertainment, singing, patron noise or similar) when assessed at the nearest noise sensitive location shall be less than 8dB(A) above the level of background noise in any octave band of the sound spectrum.

3. The premises shall be closed to the public from no later than 12.00 midnight Sundays to Thursdays, 2.00am the mornings following Fridays and Saturdays and not reopen to the public before 9.00am on any day.

4. The prime use of the premises shall be that of a Restaurant with any entertainment being ancillary to that use.

5. The premises shall be set up for dining purposes at all times except for private functions.

6. There shall be no live entertainment after 12.00 midnight on any day.

7. The premises shall not be used or advertised as a nightclub, dance club, karaoke bar, discotheque, rock band venue or similar.

8. There shall be no loudspeakers place don or in the fascia of the premises, balcony or in any adjacent outdoor area.

9. Loudspeakers are to be directed away from any entrance to or exit from the premises and be directed into the premises proper.

10. No garbage or refuse (including empty bottles and cans) is to be moved from inside the premises to outside storage bins or be available for collection between the hours of 11.00pm and 7.00am of the following morning.

11. Any lights on the subject land must be directed and screened so that overspill of light into the nearby premises is avoided and minimal impact on passing motorists occurs.

12. The car park at 64 George Street, Thebarton, is to be line marked, security lit, and maintained to provide and hours of use for patrons to ‘The Deli’ must be clearly signposted at all times for as long s the approved use of the subject 3/54A George Street, Thebarton is lawfully carried out in accordance with its development consent.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 14 13. All stormwater runoff from this site is to be collected and directed through the site’s

stormwater detention mechanisms. Notes 1. It is highlighted that any existing stormwater drainage connection(s) not required on the

approved plans shall be removed to Council’s requirements and any new or modified stormwater drainage connection(s) shall be constructed to Council’s requirements. New stormwater drainage connection(s) must be located a minimum of 500mm from any existing or proposed verge features (i.e.: crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles).

An “Application to Connect a Stormwater Drain(s) Across Council Land” is required to lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services Department prior to the undertaking of any works. Council’s stormwater connection design details are contained within this application.

2. It is highlighted that any new or modified underground consumer mains connection(s) shall

be constructed to Council’s requirements. An “Application for Permission to Lay Underground Consumer Mains within Council Land” is required to lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services Department prior to the undertaking of any works. Relevant requirements and design details are contained within this application.

3. The cost of rectifying any conflict with existing Council infrastructure arising out of this development will be borne by the applicant.

4. Your attention is drawn to the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 which may prescribe requirements for people with disabilities additional to those contained within the Building Code of Australia.

5. Any access over or works undertaken on Council owned land (including but not limited to works relating to reserves, crossovers, driveways, landscaping, footpaths, street trees and stormwater connections) will require the approval of the Council’s Infrastructure Services section. Further information and/or specific details can be obtained by phoning Council on 8416 6333.

6. All earthworks must be confined to and contained entirely within the property boundaries and must not encroach on or over the roadside verge/reserve.

7. Where this decision notice is granting Development Plan Consent, the applicant is advised that full Development Approval must be obtained within 12 months or the consent will lapse.

8. When Development Approval has been granted, the development must be:

(a) Substantially commenced within twelve (12) months of the date of the Approval, otherwise approval will lapse and (unless Council has extended this period), a new development application shall be required, and

(b) Substantially or fully completed within three (3) years from the date of Approval, otherwise Council may apply to the Court to require the removal or demolition of any building work or reinstatement of any land.

9. Any request for an extension of time for Development Plan Consent or Development Approval must be lodged with the Council prior to the above-mentioned periods.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 15 10. Pursuant to Section 86(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, you have the right of appeal to

the Environment, Resources and Development Court against either 1) a refusal of consent or 2) any condition(s) which have been imposed on a consent.

Any such appeal must be lodged with the Court within two (2) months from the day on which you receive this notification or such longer period as allowed by the Court.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 42 6.2 6A Norman Street, UNDERDALE Application No. 211/1305/2007 Appearing before the Panel will be: Representors: Theo & Maria Christopoulos of 21 Pearse Street Underdale, wishes to

appear in support of the representation. Applicant/s Chloe Stephenson of Hickinbotham Homes wishes to appear to respond

to representations. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Construction of two storey dwelling APPLICANT Construction Services Australia PTY LTD APPLICATION NO 211/1305/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 25 October 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA 39 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION 2 REFERRALS Nil ASSESSING OFFICER Donald R Lussier DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

11 October 2007

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is located in a Residential Zone in the suburb of Underdale. The land fronts Norman Street to the north, and abuts group dwellings on the east. The locality consists of varying allotment sizes, dwelling densities and dwelling styles.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 45 PROPOSAL It is proposed that the construction of two storey dwelling occur on the subject allotment. The following development statistics are applicable to the development application. Table 1: Development Data SITE AREA (allowable 340) 386m2 FRONTAGE (allowable 10m) 10.2m DEPTH 20.2m CARPARKING SPACES 1 Single Car Garage & 1 Visitor space SITE COVERAGE (maximum 50%)

134m2 (35%)

OPEN SPACE (minimum 20%) 79.6m2 (20.5%) SETBACK (Front) 6.0m

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 2 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations. Representations were received from the following people: · Theo & Maria Christopoulos The representor Theo & Maria Christopoulos wish to speak. The following main concerns were raised: · Maintain the integrity of their privacy by having windows of the proposed second floor

windows be frosted up to 1.7m. A copy of the representor concerns and the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 2 ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone Policy Area 39 as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1,10,25,27,28,30, Principles of Development Control 3,79,82,85,88,89,94,95,98,99,101,102,103,104

105,106,114,115,116,122,126,129, Zone

Objective 1,2,3 Principles of Development Control 1,2,5,7,14

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 46 Policy


In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use and Zoning The proposed is a second storey dwelling. This type of development is considered appropriate for the locality as it provides the area with a range of housing styles in accordance with Council's Development Plan Council Wide Residential Objective 30 (b) and Residential Zone Objective 1, 2 and 3. In addition, the development is in keeping with the character statement of the Residential Zone Policy Area 39 which suggests that the area "continue to develop as a medium density and infill development. Siting & Setbacks The proposed front setback of the development is 6.0m which would compliment as it would be setback in line with abutting neighbours. Doing so complies with Design Technique 92.2 and would be in keeping with Principle of Development Control (PDC) 92 as it would provide a non- intrusive approach to implement a second storey dwelling to the streetscape, thus reducing the visual impact from the street. Side setbacks to the east and west are at 2.0m with a single storey garage sited on the eastern boundary 6.39m in length. The rear setback is 7.8 metres from the rear boundary. The setbacks are in keeping with PDC 95 and all of the associated Design Techniques. It is considered that the side garage on boundary is in keeping with PDC 97. Overlooking and Overshadowing, & Privacy (POS) The proposed second storey dwelling creates a maximum wall height of 5.0m. The siting of these walls is 1 metre in keeping with Private Open Space provisions of the Development Plan, in particular PDC 104(b) which seeks to minimise the overlooking from adjacent buildings and PDC 105(b) which seeks that POS not be significantly shaded by the associated dwelling and adjacent development during the winter. It is necessary that natural sunlight access to adjacent properties not be significantly blocked. The proposed meets PDC 115, Design Technique (DT) 115.1 and DT 115.2 which seeks that natural sunlight to adjoining property maintain 50% of sunlight to adjacent properties POS or to 25m2 with minimum dimension of 2.5m (whichever is lesser) is not reduced to less than two consecutive hours). It is considered that the proposal will not obstruct the natural sunlight or create shadows to adjacent developments to the extent of affecting sunlight beyond the scope of the provision (less than two hours on the day of June 21st). Direct overlooking to neighbouring properties has been reduced as the proposal depicts that all second storey windows (except the front elevation) will be obscured to 1.7m above the FFL of the second floor. In doing so, the development guarantees visual privacy for the neighbouring allotments and satisfies PDC 99 and the associated Design Techniques. It is considered that the proposed is in keeping with the relevant provisions in Councils Development Plan for overlooking, overshadowing and privacy provisions. Colours and Materials The proposed dwelling will be constructed of brick veneer, timber frames with a tiled roof. These materials are acceptable in the locality.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 47 Visual Impact on Neighbouring Developments or Streetscape The proposal is slightly behind the street frontage of the neighbouring allotments, thus the visual impact from the street will be reduced. The proposal will also use a portico, eaves, and a single car garage slightly in front of the rendered double storey wall. Doing so enhances the streetscape and minimises the bulk of the two stories, both which satisfy PDC 88, 89, and 87. Site Coverage and Open Space The proposed site coverage (Table 1) is in keeping with PDC 98 and Design Technique 98.1.The proposed development also conforms to Council's Development Plan for Private Open Space provisions in particular PDC 103 and the associated Design Technique 103.2. Site Area and Frontage The proposed dwelling is within the acceptable block size and frontage requirements for the Residential Policy Area 39 found in Design Technique 2.1. SUMMARY It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the majority of the Development Plan provisions, and is considered to warrant Development Plan Consent based on an "on-balance" assessment. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act, 1993, resolves to GRANT Development Plan Consent for the construction of a two storey dwelling (DA211/1305/2007) at 6A Norman Street Underdale SA 5032 (CT 5996/661) subject to the following conditions: 1. The development must be undertaken and completed in accordance with the plans and

information detailed in this application except where varied by any condition(s) listed below. 2. The finished floor level shall be 100.250 as per the Site Plan prepared by M.R. Herriot, File

No. 0709-011, dated October 2007. 3. The construction of a drainage system and the position and manner of discharge of a

stormwater drain must not:- a) Result in the entry of water into a building; or b) Affect the stability of a building; or c) Create unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the site or within the building; or d) Flow or discharge onto the land of an adjoining owner; and not flow across footpaths or public ways.

4. Retaining walls must be designed to accepted engineering standards, and not of timber

construction if retaining a difference in ground level exceeding 200 mm. 5. All driveways, parking and manoeuvring areas must be formed, surfaced with concrete,

bitumen or paving, and be properly drained. They must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council thereafter.

6. All planting and landscaping must be completed within 3 months of the commencement of

the use of this development and must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council. Any plants that become diseased or die must be replaced with suitable species.

7. The upper level windows of the dwelling (excluding the front elevation) must be provided with fixed obscure glass to a minimum height of 1.7 metres above the upper floor level to minimise the potential for overlooking of adjoining properties. The glazing in these windows is to be maintained at all times to the reasonable satisfaction of Council.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 48 NOTES: 1. If you are building up to a common boundary, you are strongly encouraged to consult with

the adjoining property owner before commencing any work.

Section 5 of the Fences Act, 1975 requires you to give formal notification to, and consult with, the adjoining property owner if you are replacing an existing fence or building a freestanding wall along the common boundary that would, for all purposes, be a dividing fence. A wall that forms part of a building to be located along the boundary is excluded from this formal requirement.

2. Any existing crossing places not providing vehicle access shall be considered redundant

and must be closed off to the satisfaction of Council. Any new or modified crossing places shall be constructed to Council’s requirements. New vehicle crossing places must be located a minimum of 500mm from any existing or proposed verge features (i.e.: crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles). An “Application to Construct a Vehicular Crossing Place(s) Across Council Land” is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works.

3. Any redundant stormwater discharge pipes shall be removed to the reasonable satisfaction of Council. New stormwater drainage connection(s) must be located a minimum of 500mm away from any existing or proposed verge features. (i.e. crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles) An “Application to Connect a Stormwater Drain(s) Across Council Land” is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works.


5. Any access over or works undertaken on Council owned land (including but not limited to works relating to reserves, crossovers, driveways, landscaping, footpaths, street trees and stormwater connections), will require the approval of the Council’s Infrastructure Services section. Further information and/or specific details can be obtained by phoning Council on 8416 6333.

6. Prior to the commencement of construction of the development herein approved, it is recommended that the applicant employs the services of a licensed Land Surveyor to carry out an identification survey of the subject land and to peg the true boundaries, to ensure that building work will be either on the true boundaries or the specified distance from the true boundaries of the subject land, as the case may be.

7. Once development approval is granted, the development must be: a) Substantially commenced within twelve (12) months from the date of the decision of

this Consent or Approval, otherwise this Consent or Approval will lapse at the expiration of twelve (12) months from this date (unless Council extends this period), and a new development application shall be required;

b) Fully completed within three (3) years from the date of the decision of this Approval, otherwise this Approval will lapse at the expiration of three (3) years from this date (unless Council extends this period) and a new development application shall be required; and


c) Any request for an extension of time must be lodged in writing with the Council prior to the expiry of the above-mentioned periods.

8. Pursuant to Section 86(1)(a) of the Development Act, 1993, you have the right of appeal to

the Environment, Resources and Development Court against either 1) a refusal of consent or 2) any condition(s) which have been imposed on a consent. Any such appeal must be lodged with the Court within two (2) months from the day on which you receive this notification or such longer period as may be allowed by the Court. The Environment, Resources and Development Court is located in the Sir Samuel Way Building, Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 (Postal Address: GPO Box 2465, Adelaide SA 5001).

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 56 6.3 30 Norma Street, MILE END Application No. 211/1390/2007 Appearing before the Panel will be: Representors: Lindy McAdam of 30A Norma Street Mile End, wishes to appear in support

of the representation. Applicant/s Sally Timms of AV Jennings wishes to appear to respond to

representations. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL 2nd storey addition and alterations to existing dwelling. APPLICANT A.V. Jennings APPLICATION NO 211/1390/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 15 November 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA 40 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS Nil ASSESSING OFFICER Donald Lussier DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

11 October 2007

RECOMMENDATION REFUSE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is located in a Residential Zone of Mile End which consists of mainly small narrow allotments with small single detached dwellings and close side setbacks to each other. Diverse housing densities are found to the east, west and south. The subject land is located south of Henley Beach Road. This major public transport access is located in a District Centre Zone consisting mostly of commercial land-uses north of the subject allotment.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 59 PROPOSAL It is proposed that a second storey addition and alterations be made to the existing dwelling. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 2 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations. Representations were received from the following people: · Lindy McAdam The representor Lindy McAdam wishes to speak. The following main concerns were raised: · Overlooking and loss of privacy to rear yard · Overshadowing and reduction of sunlight caused by the proposal A copy of the representor concerns and the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 2 ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Policy Area 40 as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1,10,25,27,28,30, Principles of Development Control 3,79,82,85,88,89,94,95,98,99,101,102,103,104

105,106,114,115,116,122,126,129, Zone


Policy

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 1,3,4

In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use and Zoning The proposal seeks to build a second storey onto the existing building. This type of development is considered appropriate for the locality as it provides the area with a range of housing styles in accordance with Council's Development Plan Council Wide Residential Objective 30 (b) and Residential Zone Objective 1, 2 and 3. In addition, the development is in keeping with the character statement of the Residential Zone Policy Area 40 which "has the greatest potential for redevelopment…..due to the close proximity …to centres and public transport".

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 60 The proposed will compliment the diverse character of the area and is infill development envisaged by the Policy Area Character Statement. Setbacks The proposed second floor addition is to be setback 16.3 metres from the rear boundary and complies with Design Technique 95.6. The proposed side setbacks are 1.8m from the east and 1.985m from the west. Design Technique (DT) 94.2 seeks wall heights of 6m be setback a minimum of 2m from side boundaries. This may be considered at variance with the Development Plan but should rest on the minimisation of overlooking, visual impacts and the allowance of natural daylight to neighbouring properties which would be in keeping with Principle of Development Control (PDC) 94. Overlooking, Overshadowing, & Privacy OVERSHADOW The proposed second storey addition creates a maximum wall height of 5.8 metres. To continue from the previous point, the siting of these walls must not be contradictory to Private Open Space provisions of the Development Plan. In particular PDC 104(b) seeks to minimise the overlooking from adjacent buildings and PDC 105(b) which seeks that POS not be significantly shaded by the associated dwelling and adjacent development during the winter. NATURAL LIGHT It is necessary that natural sunlight access to adjacent properties not be significantly blocked. The proposed should meet PDC 115, DT 115.1 and DT 115.2 which seeks that natural sunlight to adjoining property maintain 50% of sunlight to adjacent properties POS or to 25m2 with minimum dimension of 2.5m (whichever is lesser) is not reduced to less than two consecutive hours). As shown on the sunlight diagrams the adjacent properties will not be overshadow for less than two hours on the day of June 21st. OVERLOOKING & VISUAL PRIVACY Direct overlooking to neighbouring properties has been reduced as the window schedule suggest most windows to be obscure glazing to 1.7 metres above the FFL of the second floor. The rear window does not achieve this yet is not necessary as this window is on the staircase. The proposed balcony at the rear will pose the possibility of intrusion to the east and west neighbours POS. The proposal does show wingwalls of 2m in height by 1metre in length (as shown on plan 5 of 8) though when viewing angles were calculated (shown on plan 1 of 8 attachment 3) the line of sight projected is 135 degrees. This viewing angle reduces the POS that is completely private of the eastern and western neighbour to approximately 45m2. When total usable POS is calculated for the neighbouring lots, it is calculated that 75 % of the neighbours, both east and west, would become viewable by a person standing on the proposed second floor balcony, and is at variance with PDC 99 and DT 99.3. It is considered that the proposal is currently at variance with overlooking and intrusion of privacy principles of Council's Development Plan. Colours and Materials Materials used on the proposal will be custom-orb cladding in colorbond finish with a colorboond steel roofing 27 degree pitch. Such materials are appropriate in the locality. Visual Impact on Neighbouring Developments or Streetscape The proposed development is in keeping with Council Wide Principle of Development Control 95. With regard to the existing nature of the close proximity of the allotments, the 5.8 m high side walls would not appear overly dominating to neighbouring allotments rear yards as it will be located adjacent to existing structures on the adjacent western and eastern allotments. The proposal is to have little impact on the street scape as it will be located approximately 16 metres

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 61 from the street in which the proposed would be partially blocked by the existing structure's steep roof pitch. Site Coverage and Private Open Space The proposal will not dramatically affect existing site coverage and open space, as the proposal will build upon the single storey component of the existing dwelling. SUMMARY The proposal does adhere to the some of Council's Development Plan desire to obtain mixed housing styles. The proposal also meets relevant plan provisions with regard to land-use overshadowing, visual impact, natural light provisions, private open space and site coverage for the subject allotment. With the above alone it would be considered appropriate for this development to be allowed plan consent, unfortunately, the proposal does fall short on overlooking and visual privacy mostly with regard to the proposed second storey balcony. Privacy is considered of the upmost importance when assessing a second storey addition. Perhaps the amendment or removal of the second storey balcony would create less of an impingement onto the neighbouring properties POS. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act, 1993, resolves to REFUSE Development Plan Consent for the construction of a second storey addition and alterations be to the existing dwelling (DA211/1390/2007) at 30 Norma Street, Mile End SA 5031 (CT 5266/289) for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development is contrary to

· Council Wide Principle of Development Control 99 and Design Technique 99.3 Reason: The proposed second floor balcony enables a 135 degree line a sight which

creates a large viewable area comprising of 75% of the eastern and western neighbour Private Open Space.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 77 6.4 33 Capper Street, CAMDEN PARK Application No. 211/1342/2007 Appearing before the Panel will be: Representors: James Stevenson & Kate Muecke of Unit 4 / 37 Capper Street Camden

Park, wishes to appear in support of the representation. Applicant/s Dennis Dargen of Home-style Living Outdoors wishes to appear to respond

to representations. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Construction of Verandah to north side of dwelling 200mm

from boundary. APPLICANT Homestyle living outdoors APPLICATION NO 211/1342/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 2 November 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA 39 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS Nil ASSESSING OFFICER Donald R Lussier DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

11 October 2007

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE BACKGROUND The subject land has had recent development applications submitted to Council. Application 211/389/2006 to construct a single storey dwelling was given Development Approval on 30 June 2006 and was a Category 1 Development. Development Application 211/1251/2007 the construction of a fence (varying in height from 2.1 to 2.4m) along northern property boundary, in-ground pool and modification to existing rear portico was given Development Approval on 8 January 2008 as a category 1 development. Currently, construction of all structures is occurring on the subject land. SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is located in a residential neighbourhood on the eastern side of Capper Street. There are five group dwellings adjoining the subject land to the north with additional medium density development on the north and south of Capper Street. The majority of the locality is single storey dwellings on larger allotments with small front setbacks. The site currently consists of a detached, single storey dwelling with the associated pool, carport, and high fence on the north boundary, all under construction.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 80 PROPOSAL It is proposed that a verandah be constructed on the north side of dwelling, 200mm from boundary. The following development statistics are applicable to the development application. SITE COVERAGE 390m2 47% OPEN SPACE 338m2 40%

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 2 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations. Representations were received from the following people: · James Stevenson & Kate Muecke The representor James Stevenson wishes to speak. The following main concerns were raised: · Reduction of natural light · Possible noise of pool pumps (pool is not the subject of this application) A copy of the representor concerns and the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 2 ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Policy Area 39 as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1,25,30, Principles of Development Control 85,92,95,98, 142

Zone


Policy


In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 81 Bulk and Scale The height of the proposed verandah is 2.7m to the gutter. The boundary fence adjacent to the proposed verandah will be 2.4m as approved by a previous development application. The structure has no walls and is proposed to carry a small pitched roof. Setbacks The proposed verandah will be located 200mm from the north boundary fence. This 200mm, is deemed acceptable in this locality in accordance with Council Wide PDC 142. Overshadowing The proposed verandah is located on the northern aspect. It is expected that western sunlight will be impacted by the proposed structure but will not unduly impact the neighbouring properties as sunlight will still reach the neighbouring allotments and will be in keeping with Principle of Development Control 115.1. Colours and Materials The structure is constructed of timber posts and a roof structure using Firmlok beams. A planning condition will be attached to the approval to ensure the structure will be constructed of colorbond steel or painted in a non-reflective colour within two months of erection to the reasonable satisfaction of council. Visual Impact on Neighbouring Developments The structure adds 10.3m of length of structures over 2.0m along the north boundary. The total length of structures taller than 2.0 metres built on, or abutting the northern boundary, will become a total length of 25.5m. This may be considered excessive. Design Technique 95.3 suggests that boundary walls do not exceed 40% of the total boundary. In its current form, the proposed would increase the amount of boundary development to 44%. Site Coverage and Open Space The proposed verandah is measures 26.78m2 in area and does not greatly influence site coverage and Private Open Space (POS). Site coverage is increased by 26.78m2 to a total of 47%. This is at slight variance with Council's Development Plan Design Technique 98.1 but is deemed acceptable as a minor excedence. POS remains unchanged as Council's Development Plan allows for up to 30% of POS to be covered by a roof. Stormwater A planing condition will be attached to the approval to ensure stormwater from the proposed verandah will be discharged away from the neighbouring properties and to ensure that no unhealthy or dangerous conditions occur on any site. Energy Conservation The proposed structure will assist in shading the northern side of the dwelling. SUMMARY It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the majority of the Development Plan provisions. The shortcomings of the proposal (setback to north boundary, length along the boundary) are considered to be acceptable in the context of the subject locality. On balance it is considered that the application warrants provisional Development Plan Consent.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 82 RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act, 1993, resolves to GRANT Development Plan Consent for the construction of a verandah to north side of dwelling 200mm from boundary (DA211/1342/2007) at 33 Capper Street, Camden Park SA 5038 (CT 5392/472) subject to the following conditions: 1. The development must be undertaken and completed in accordance with the plans and

information detailed in this application except where varied by any condition(s) listed below.

2. The structure approved herein must not be clad and therefore kept as an open sided

structure at all times. 3. The structure must be either constructed of colorbond steel or painted in a natural and non-

reflective colour within 2 months of its erection. The colorbond finishes or paintwork must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council at all times.

4. The construction of a drainage system and the position and manner of discharge of a

stormwater drain must not:- a) Result in the entry of water into a building; or b) Affect the stability of a building; or c) Create unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the site or within the building; or d) Flow or discharge onto the land of an adjoining owner; and not flow across footpaths or public ways

Notes: 1. If you are building up to a common boundary, you are strongly encouraged to consult with

the adjoining property owner before commencing any work. Section 5 of the Fences Act, 1975 requires you to give formal notification to, and consult with, the adjoining property owner if you are replacing an existing fence or building a freestanding wall along the common boundary that would, for all purposes, be a dividing fence. A wall that forms part of a building to be located along the boundary is also subject to this formal requirement

2. Once development approval is granted, the development must be:

a) Substantially commenced within twelve (12) months from the date of the decision of this Consent or Approval, otherwise this Consent or Approval will lapse at the expiration of twelve (12) months from this date (unless Council extends this period), and a new development application shall be required;

b) Fully completed within three (3) years from the date of the decision of this Approval, otherwise this Approval will lapse at the expiration of three (3) years from this date (unless Council extends this period), and a new development application shall be required; and


Pursuant to Section 86(1)(a) of the Development Act, 1993, you have the right of appeal to the Environment, Resources and Development Court against either (1) a refusal of consent or (2) any condition(s) which have been imposed on a consent. Any such appeal must be lodged with the Court within two (2) months from the day on which you receive this notification or such longer period allowed by the Court. The Environment, Resources and Development Court is located in the Sir Samuel Way Building, Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 (GPO Box 2465, Adelaide SA 5001).

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 96 6.5 28 Daly Street, KURRALTA PARK Application No. 211/546/2007 Appearing before the Panel will be: Representors: Andrew & Lynette Smart of 26A Daly Street, Kurralta Park wishes to

appear in support of the representation. Applicant/s Building Design Studio of 36 Glen Osmond Road, Parkside wishes to

appear to respond to representations. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Construction of two double storey dwellings to the rear of

the existing dwelling including associated vehicle parking areas, landscaping and attached carports abutting side allotment boundaries

APPLICANT Building Design Studio APPLICATION NO 211/546/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 16 May 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA Policy Area 40 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS Nil ASSESSING OFFICER Tim Hicks DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

19 April 2007

RECOMENDATION REFUSE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is 28 Daly Street, Kurralta Park. The allotment has a frontage to Daly Street of 18.2 metres and a depth of 49.36 metres. The total area is 898 square metres. The land currently accommodates a single dwelling. The land is located in the Residential Zone (Policy Area 40) and abuts similarly zoned land residential land parcels. A number of adjoining allotments in the vicinity have previously been divided into smaller parcels and accommodate unit dwelling developments of similar density to that currently proposed.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 99 PROPOSAL The application seeks Development Plan Consent to develop two attached two storey dwellings to the rear of the existing dwelling. An access driveway from Daly Street was initially proposed between the existing dwelling and the south side allotment boundary but the proposal has since been amended to relocate the driveway to the northern side of the existing dwelling due to the constraint presented by an existing significant tree at the front of the site. Additional application details are summarised as follows: Existing Front Dwelling SITE AREA Approx 334 m2 FRONTAGE Approx 12.7 m DEPTH Approx 24 m CARPARKING SPACES 2 (one undercover carport space, 1 open

stacked visitor space behind garage SITE COVERAGE 38.9% PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 75sqm (approx 22.4%) SETBACKS Front – 6 m (proposed carport), 7 m (dwelling)

Rear – 2.5m minimum North side boundary – 0m (proposed carport), 3.8m (existing dwelling wall) South side boundary – 0m (to proposed common land boundary), 3.1m (to existing allotment boundary)

Proposed North Rear Dwelling SITE AREA Average (including 50% driveway area) =

282m2. Excluding access driveway area = 189m2.

FRONTAGE 9.1m (to common access driveway) DEPTH 20.75m (excluding common land) CARPARKING SPACES 2 (one covered, one stacked uncovered) SITE COVERAGE 34% PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 31% SETBACKS (BOTH STOREYS) Front – 35m

Rear – 6m North side – carport 0m, dwelling wall 3.2m (2nd storey wall height of 6m)

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 100 Proposed South Rear Dwelling SITE AREA Average (including 50% driveway area) =

282m2. Excluding access driveway area = 189m2.

FRONTAGE 9.1m (to common access driveway) DEPTH 20.75m (excluding common land) CARPARKING SPACES 2 (one covered, one stacked uncovered) SITE COVERAGE 34% PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 31% SETBACKS (BOTH STOREYS) Front – 35m

Rear – 6m South side – carport 0m, dwelling wall 3.2m (2nd storey wall height of 6m)

NATURE OF DEVELOPMENT The proposal is a merit form of development as it is not listed as a complying or a non complying form of development in the Residential Zone Development Plan provisions or in Schedule 4 of the Development Regulations 1993. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 2 form of development pursuant to the Residential Zone Development Plan provisions. Two representations were received and the issues raised are summarised below: Andrew & Lynette Smart

· The driveway would cause noise problems being adjacent to their entertaining area. · Loss of privacy. · The second stories proposed will cause loss of sunlight. · Loss of amenity and lifestyle. · Obscured glass proposed is not defined. · The upper level balcony above their entertaining area is an invasion of privacy. · The representation would be overcome by not building two dwellings to the rear of the

property, changing the driveway, removing the carport and redesigning the proposal to a single storey dwelling.

Marie Cantin

· The development will affect privacy. · Suggests modifying the design to have the four windows facing west on the first floor of the

dwelling being glazed and to have a small lattice installed on the top of the back fence.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 101 The applicant’s response to the representations is summarised as follows:

· The windows that face Ms Cantin’s property will have obscure glazing to a height of 1.7 m above floor level.

· A section of lattice can be erected above the new 1.8 m high colourbond fence. · The driveway cannot be on the northern boundary, although this was the first choice,

because a significant tree prevents it. Two dwellings will be serviced by the driveway so a maximum of 4 dwellings would use it.

· There would be no loss of privacy as all windows include obscure glass. · The fence on the boundary will be replaced by a 1.8 m high fence to protect the privacy at

the developer’s cost. · Overshadowing would only be affected around midday as morning and afternoon sun

would be unaffected.

A copy of the representor concerns and the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 2 ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone (Policy Area 40) as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1, 6, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 97 Principles of Development Control 1, 3, 4, 13, 23, 24, 29, 32, 34, 42, 43, 44, 45,

48, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130 ,131, 132, 133, 136, 271, 274, 283, 284, 285

Residential Zone

Objective 1, 2, 3 Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 14, 15

Policy Area 40

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use and Zoning The residential development proposed is consistent with the land use intended for the area as per relevant Residential Zone Development Plan provisions.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 102 The proposed dwelling density is consistent with the higher density residential development anticipated for Policy Area 40 of the Residential Zone. Siting The proposed rear dwellings generally conform to Development Plan setback criteria. The second storey walls are setback further than two metres from the side property boundaries and six metres (rather than eight metres as per the relevant Council Wide Design Technique) from the rear allotment boundary. Bulk and Scale The proposed rear dwellings are relatively bulky in size and scale although the attached side carports and front porch/balconies will assist to reduce the visual bulk when viewed from a distance. Overlooking and Overshadowing The proposed six metre wall height of the south rear two storey dwelling is setback approximately 3.2 metres from the south allotment boundary. Although this setback conforms to relevant side setback design technique provisions it is of concern in relation to the potential overshadowing impact during winter over the private open space area of the adjoining dwelling to the south. Potential overrlooking concerns in relation to second storey windows will be able to be addressed via the imposition of a standard condition upon any planning consent issued requiring fixed opaque glass to a height of 1.7 metres above second storey ground level, as proposed by the applicant. The proposed front balconies for the rear dwellings may result in some level of overlooking to the adjoining existing dwellings to the north and south and also to the existing dwelling private open space area. Colours and Materials Colourbond custom orb roof sheeting is proposed for the rear dwellings. Render is proposed over rear dwelling walls however detailed colour and material information has not been provided to Council. Visual Impact on Neighbouring Developments or Streetscape The proposed rear dwellings generally conform to side and rear setback provisions as detailed above. The walls of the dwellings will be visible from adjoining dwellings however in the subject Policy Area 40 taking into account the nature of infill development that may be anticipated any visual bulk impact is not expected to cause an undue loss of amenity to adjoining landowners. Enhanced dwelling design including additional break up of visual mass by the use of additional pergola attachments, quoins and/or wall features would nevertheless be preferred. Site Coverage and Open Space Overall, the proposal reasonably conforms to site coverage and open space provisions as relating to Policy Area 40 as summarised above.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 103 Carparking Provisions The proposed rear dwelling car parking is expected to be functional and provide sufficient space for vehicles to enter and exit in a forward gear. The proposed hammerhead driveway includes a six metre width at the front of the site adjoining Daly Street to provide for a vehicle passing area as promoted by relevant Devleopment Plan provisions. A wider driveway width between the dwelling and the south side boundary would be preferred, however, to provide additional space for landscaping as specified by relevant provisions. Acoustic design provisions also promote an additional setback to common driveways for bedrooms and it is noted that the existing front dwelling will include two bedrooms abutting the proposed access driveway. A carport forward of the existing front dwelling is also proposed abutting the south side boundary. Relevant provisions promote carports and garaging behind the main face of dwellings. The carport may potentially be relocated further back on the front dwelling site area however this would reduce the amount of private open space available for the existing front dwelling. Stormwater The proposal includes standard 1000 litre tanks per dwelling and a stormwater collection arrangement including two sumps and piping of the stormwater to the street. Additional measures would be preferred to enhance the merit of the proposal and better satisfy relevant Development Plan stormwater provisions. Energy Conservation The proposed rear dwellings do not demonstrate any particular merit in relation to their orientation, with no north facing windows and large unscreened western and eastern facing windows. SUMMARY The proposed dwellings generally conform to relevant dwelling density and setback criteria. They do not however demonstrate any particular merit with regard to energy efficient design, stormwater, hammerhead driveway, visual bulk, overlooking and overshadowing development design provisions. Based on an on balance assessment the proposal is recommended for refusal. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act, 1993, resolves to REFUSE Development Plan Consent for the Construction of two double storey dwellings to the rear of the existing dwelling including associated vehicle parking areas, landscaping and attached carports abutting side allotment boundaries at 28 Daly Street, Kurralta Park (CT 1375/181). Reasons for refusal: The application does not meet Objectives and Principles relating to energy efficient design, stormwater, hammerhead driveway, visual bulk, overlooking and overshadowing development design provisions

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 115 6.6 2 Knight Street, WEST RICHMOND Application No. 211/1087/2007 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Change in use from dwelling to consulting rooms including

construction of consulting room building, carparking and landscaping

APPLICANT Mrs Efstathia Cossey APPLICATION NO 211/1087/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 20 September 2007 ZONE Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond) POLICY AREA Retail Policy Area 13 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS Internal – Traffic Engineering & Stormwater Engineering ASSESSING OFFICER Tim Hicks DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

9 August 2007

RECOMMENDATION REFUSE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is 2 Knight Street, West Richmond. The land is a regular shaped parcel with a frontage to Knight Street of 19.81 metres and a depth of 43.76 metres. It is 867 square metres in area. The land currently accommodates a dwelling. The land is located in the Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond Zone) and abuts similarly zoned land properties to the north, east and south. The land abuts Residential Zoned properties to the west.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 118 PROPOSAL The application seeks Development Plan Consent to demolish the existing dwelling and construct an office building with associated on-site parking area and landscaping. Additional application details are summarised as follows:

· The proposed office use is for an accounting practice. · Proposed hours of operation are Monday – Friday, 8.30am – 5.30pm & Saturday, 9.00am –

3.00pm for July only. · Two clients are expected at any one time and a maximum of 3 clients is anticipated. · Two full time staff will be employed at the premises during the week. Three part time staff

will be employed in addition. · An 80cm x 60cm sign is proposed in the front garden. · A secure front fence, sensor lighting and a security system is proposed. · The proposed building consists of red brick walls and a colourbond roof. · The proposed new building area is 229.83 square metres in area (240sqm including the

verandah). · The proposed new building has a minimum front boundary building setback distance of 6

metres, an east side boundary setback distance of 2 metres, a west side boundary setback distance of 7.5 metres and a south rear boundary setback distance of 13.5 metres.

· Nine designated on-site parking vehicle parking spaces are proposed. NATURE OF DEVELOPMENT The proposal is a merit form of development as it is not listed as a complying or a non-complying form of development in the Neighbourhood Centre Development Plan provisions or Schedule 4 of the Development Regulations 1993. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 2 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations. A representation was received from Keith Melville. The issues raised in the representation are summarised as follows: · The proposal does not comply with the City of West Torrens Development Plan. · Figure NCe(R)/1 shows an intensive landscaping area and carparking access area along

the western boundary of the Neighbourhood Centre Zone. The location of the proposed consulting rooms within the area allocated in the concept plan for landscaping and carparking will compromise the viability of the Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond) Zone.

· The representor (owner of the adjoining shop development on the corner of Marion Rd and Knight St) is intending to redevelop his adjoining property in the near future and it would seem logical to locate the landscaping and vehicle access/parking for the proposed Knight Street development along the eastern boundary of the property at 2 Knight Street to provide for the possibility of sharing the vehicle access required by both the proposed development and the redeveloped property at 146 Marion Road.

· Council should be supportive of a proposal to redevelop the site at 146 Marion Road as the current usage is non-complying and ‘tired’.

· A reversal of the proposed design with the building being instead constructed adjoining the western property boundary would be consistent with the Development Plan and the integrity and relevance of the Neighbourhood Centre Zone provisions.

The applicant’s response to the representation is summarised as follows:

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 119 · The proposal will not compromise the viability of the Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond)

Zone. · The proposal meets the zone objective by providing facilities to serve the daily and weekly

needs of the surrounding population. · Carparking will be predominantly provided to the rear of the building with some along the

side. Access will be via Knight Street, a side street as required. · The development provides a small scale low traffic generating development that will have

little impact on the residents of Knight Street. · The six metre front setback distance satisfies setback requirements. · The development satisfies height restrictions. · The development does not meet the landscaping requirement in its entirety but does

provide a landscaped buffer sufficient for this type of development. · The development will not impact on the adjoining properties as will be low traffic

generating. · Side street access should form part of the Marion Road facing properties land holding and

not part of the subject land at 2 Knight Street as implied by Mr Melville. Any redeveloped Marion Road site should satisfy car parking and side street access requirements in its own right and not rely on adjoining properties to facilitate this.

· Overall, the development satisfies all Devleopment Plan requirements except that relating to landscaping.

· To implement the zone concept plan it would mean the Marion Road facing properties between Trennery and Passmore Streets would not have to satisfy parking and landscaping requirements, rather only rely on adjoining properties to facilitate this.

· If 2 Knight Street remained as a residential property surely any redevelopment at 146 Marion Road would still require parking and landscaping along its western boundary.

A copy of the representor concerns and the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 2 REFERRALS A full copy of the relevant reports are attached, refer Attachment 3 ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond) Zone as described in the City of West Torrens Development Plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 31, 32, 33, 34, 37, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 97

Principles of Development Control 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 161, 163, 166, 167, 271, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285,

Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond) Zone

Objective 1,2, Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15,

16, 17

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 120 In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use and Zoning NC Zone Objective 1: Expansion of the centre to function as a neighbourhood centre and provide a range of retail, service, office, community, commercial and entertainment facilities to serve the daily and weekly needs of the surrounding population. NC Zone Objective 2: A desired character distinguished by: (a) distinctive retail and commercial precincts; and (b) the concentration of retailing on the western wide of Marion Road. NC Zone PDC 1 Shops selling primarily food and other convenience goods, service, office, community, commercial and entertainment facilities to service the daily and weekly needs of the surrounding population should be the primary uses in this zone. NC Zone PDC 2 Development should generally locate in accord with the intended usage of each policy area defined on Policy Area Map WeTo/25 and Fig NCe(R)/1, and expressed below. NC Zone PDC 4 A range of office, service, commercial, community and entertainment facilities, retail showrooms and small-scale, low traffic-generating retail outlets should be located in Policy Area 14. NC Zone PDC 5 The retail focus of the centre, in terms of the major proportion of gross leasable floor space dedicated for retail purposes, should be located between Trennery and Passmore Streets. NC Zone PDC 6 Development should be undertaken in accordance with Fig NCe(R)/1. NC Zone PDC 7 Buildings should be located close to Marion Road with parking to the rear. CW Objective 37: Neighbourhood centres to include shopping facilities that provide mainly 'convenience' goods to serve the day-to-day needs of the neighbourhood, and a limited range of more frequently required 'comparison' goods as well as a narrow range of facilities. There are not likely to be administrative facilities in neighbourhood centres. CW Objective 41: The orderly redevelopment of older centres along the lines of the desired future character of each centre. CW Objective 42: The encouragement of investment. CW Objective 43: Safe access and convenient use of centres in an attractive environment. CW Objective 44: The upgrading of present centre facilities to provide a more attractive inner urban area in terms of both living and employment. CW PDC 163 Offices should be located in centre zones except for office components of commercial and industrial developments, and offices of 250 square metres or less which may be located in the commercial and industrial zones. The proposed office land use is broadly an appropriate land use that is envisaged by relevant Development Plan provisions for the Neighbourhood Centre Zone. The Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond) Zone includes a concept plan, Fig NCe(r)/1, which provides additional direction as to the form of development envisaged in the area. The concept plan promotes shopping related development to the west of Marion Road and a mix of retail,

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 121 office and commercial development to the east of Marion Road. The Concept Plan also promotes the integration of vehicle movement throughout the zone, with the development of rear access roads between residential streets to serve parking demand for shop and office building development fronting Marion Road. The provisions recognise that there is a lack of a major supermarket in the area and promote the development of a large supermarket module between Trennery and Passmore Streets. The applicant argues that the proposed office use should be supported by Council as it is broadly consistent with relevant land use provisions, as it generally satisfies other relevant provisions and as the land may not be redeveloped at all if the currently proposed development cannot proceed. The applicant has previously been advised by Council Officers prior to public notification that the proposals lack of specific compliance with the intent of Policy Area 13 for shop land uses may not, by itself, be significant enough to result in a refusal decision by Council if the proposal can be demonstrated to satisfy enough other relevant Development Plan provisions during an ‘on-balance’ assessment of the proposal. Taking into account, however, the nature of the representation received from the adjoining landowner and the degree of variance of the proposal with NC Zone Objective 2, PDC 2, PDC 4, PDC 5 and PDC 6 (all of which reference the concept plan for the zone which promote shopping development in the subject Policy Area and a landscaping and car parking area in the vicinity of the subject land), it is considered that the proposal does not exhibit sufficient merit to warrant Development Plan Consent in its current form. Interface Issues CW PDC 8 Commercial, retail or industrial development should be sited, designed and/or managed so as to not unreasonably interfere with noise-sensitive development within the locality. CW PDC 155 Centres should have minimal adverse impacts on residential areas. CW Objective 97: The amenity of localities not impaired by the appearance of land, buildings and objects. CW PDC 275 Non-residential buildings and structures should be set-back from side or rear boundaries with the residential zone: (a) a minimum of three metres; and (b) an additional 0.6 metres for every metre of vertical wall height of the building or structure above four metres. CW PDC 275 Non-residential buildings and structures should be set-back from side or rear boundaries with the residential zone: (a) a minimum of three metres; and (b) an additional 0.6 metres for every metre of vertical wall height of the building or structure above four metres. CW PDC 276 An intensively landscaped area of at least three metres width should be provided between non-residential development and the boundary of the residential zone, such area containing trees which have the capacity to grow to a height which screens development as viewed from the residential zone. CW PDC 277 The walls and roofs of buildings facing towards the residential zone should not incorporate highly reflective materials which will create glare. CW PDC 278 Solid fencing should be provided between development and the boundary of the residential zone which: (a) is of sufficient height to form a visual barrier; and (b) is of sufficient mass and is adequately sealed to minimise noise intrusion into the residential zone.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 122 CW PDC 279 Noise generating activities within a development which have the potential to cause annoyance to residents in the residential zone should be conducted as far as possible away from the boundary with the residential zone and be shielded from the residential zone by the building or major parts thereof. CW PDC 280 Air-compressors, pumps and similar noise generating plant and equipment should be designed and located to minimise noise intrusion into adjoining residential development. CW PDC 281 Development should be designed so as to minimise intrusion into the residential zone of: (a) dust or fumes; or (b) strong or unpleasant odours. CW PDC 283 A minimum of 10 percent of a development site should be landscaped. NC Zone PDC 14 Landscaping of at least three metres in width should occur in accordance with Fig NCe(R)/1. The proposal incorporates a landscaping strip of approximately 0.3 metres in width along the western side and southern rear property boundaries. This width does not conform to the landscaping widths specified above. The proposal does not incorporate any other particular methods to reduce potential interface impacts upon adjoining residential properties. Standard 1.8 metre high colourbond fencing is expected to be provided between the subject land and adjoining residential properties. Carparking / Movement of People & Goods NC Zone PDC 12 Vehicle access should be primarily from side streets. CW PDC 23 Development should provide orderly, safe and convenient access for vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. CW PDC 24 Vehicular access points onto public roads should be located and designed in such a way as to minimise traffic hazards and queuing on public roads. CW PDC 29 Vehicle access and parking should conform with the standards specified in Australian Standard 2890.1-1993 and AS 2890.2-1989, titled "Off-street Parking". CW PDC 35 Wherever possible industrial or commercial development should not rely for access on a residential street and should, as far as possible, avoid, eliminate or reduce use of residential streets by heavy or service vehicles. CW PDC 36 Development should provide on-site parking to accommodate all vehicles which are expected to visit the site. This requirement may be reduced where: (a) designated parking spaces are available for the development on an adjoining or nearby site at all times when it is required, and access from these parking spaces to the development is safe and convenient; or (b) it can be demonstrated that users of the development have safe, close and convenient access to frequent and regular public transport at the times of operation of the development. Table 2 – Office Parking Ratio – 4/100sqm The proposed access point is from a side street (Knight Street). The provision of nine designated parking spaces to service the office building area of 229sqm is expected to reasonably satisfy parking demand generated by the proposal.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 123 Council’s Traffic Engineer has advised that the proposed on-site parking arrangement will work satisfactorily however a disabled parking space would be required as close as possible to the main public entrance. The proposed design would be able to be easily altered to satisfy this requirement. Stormwater Council’s stormwater engineer has advised that driveway and parking areas must be hard standing in nature. Stormwater quality improvement methods would be required to be installed. The engineer has advised that water sensitive design methods should ideally be incorporated. These matters could be addressed via the imposition of a condition on any planning consent issued (to be addressed prior to issue of Development Approval). SUMMARY The proposed office development is broadly consistent with uses desired in centre zones, however does not sufficiently conform to more detailed objectives and principles relating to the concept plan designated for the Neighbourhood Centre (Richmond) Zone. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act, 1993, resolves to REFUSE Development Plan Consent for the Change in use from dwelling to consulting rooms including construction of consulting room building, carparking and landscaping at 2 Knight Street, West Richmond (CT 5075/512). Reasons for refusal: Zone Objectives: 2 Zone Principles of Development Control: 2, 4, 5, 6, 14 Reason:

The proposal does not conform to concept plan Fig NCe(R)/1 which promotes shop development to the west of Marion Rd and which seeks to provide for the redevelopment of the land for the future development of a supermarket with landscaping and service car parking to the rear of the zone in the vicinity of the subject land.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 128 6.7 257 Marion Road, MARLESTON Application No. 211/1150/2007 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Two storey dwelling with associated garage and free-

standing garage at the rear of existing dwelling. APPLICANT Daniel Walter Jones APPLICATION NO 211/1150/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 25 September 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA Policy Area 40 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS Internal – Engineer and Traffic ASSESSING OFFICER Maria Fantasia DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

9 August 2007

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land consists of one allotment on one (1) Certificate of Title with an area of approximately 853m2. The land is located on the eastern side of Marion Road, approximately 530 metres from the intersections of Marion Road and Richmond Road. The allotment has frontage to Marion Road and supports an existing dwelling towards the front of the allotment. The site is served by one access point from Marion Road. The character along this section of road consists primarily of single detached dwellings on the eastern side of Marion Road, industrial land use on the western side of the road, some commercial activity located in close proximity to the south and office/warehouse development approximately 200 metres to the north. The subject land and locality are shown on the maps below.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 131 PROPOSAL Planning consent is sought for the construction of one (1) two-storey dwelling with associated garaging to be located at the rear of the existing dwelling and a garage for the existing dwelling. Refer to Attachment 1. Visitor car parking is to be provided for the existing and proposed dwellings at the rear of the existing dwelling with the rubbish collection and letterbox area to be located adjacent the proposed entry driveway. No cosmetic or structural changes are proposed to the existing dwelling. Existing outbuildings and structures are to be removed to enable the construction of the shared access driveway. There are no significant trees on the allotment. Please note: A development application for land division (Community Title) is under assessment concurrently with this proposed development. The following development statistics are applicable to the development application. Existing single-storey dwelling Proposed two-storey dwelling SITE AREA 359m² 379m² FRONTAGE 13.29 metres 18.29 metres DEPTH 25.8 METRES 20.7 METRES

CAR PARKING SPACES 2 (1 under cover, 1 visitor) 2 (1 under cover, 1 visitor) SITE COVERAGE 39% 34% OPEN SPACE 23% 30% SETBACK Front – 7 metres (existing)

Back – 8 metres Side – 1 metre (south) SIDE – 4.16 METRES (NORTH)

Front – 25.8 metres (from Marion Road boundary) Back – 4 metres (garage) 7.2 metres (ground floor) Back – 8 metres (upper floor) Side – 3.5 metres (south) Side – 1.3 metres (north)

NATURE OF DEVELOPMENT The proposal is neither listed as a ‘complying’ nor a ‘non-complying’ form of development in the West Torrens (City) Development Plan and the Development Regulations 1993. The proposal therefore requires assessment on its merits against all relevant West Torrens (City) Development Plan provisions. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 2 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations. Representations were received from the following people: · E A Hawke - 255 Marion Road, Marelston SA 5033 · David DeSavi and Rocco Genovese and Others - 58 Boss Avenue, Marleston SA 5033

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 132 The representors have indicated that they do not wish to be heard by Panel in relation to their submission. The following main concerns were raised: · Overlooking from upstairs windows and balcony over neighbouring properties. · The impact of overlooking on neighbouring private open space. · The window treatment of upper storey windows, in particular the height of upper storey

windows from the Finished Floor Level (FFL). A copy of the representor concerns is contained in Attachment 2. In response, the applicant has raised the following additional points: · The applicant is willing to plant a sizeable tree on the northern boundary to afford some

protection to the neighbouring property. Alternatively, the applicant is prepared to erect wooden slats/non-transparent trellis on the right side of the balcony to offer protection to private open space and block any perceived view.

· The upper storey windows will be 700mm from the floor level and the window will be obscured for the bottom 1050mm of the window, effectively giving an obscurity to 1.7 metres above FFL.

· The top section of the window, which measures 400mm, will be an awning type window openable to a 45°, which will given the height from the FFL and the angle, restrict any views over neighbouring private open space.

A copy of the applicant’s response is contained in Attachment 3. REFERRALS The application was referred to the Commissioner of Highways for comment pursuant to Section 37 of the Development Act 1993 and Schedule 8 of the Development Regulations 1993 as the proposed development was considered by Council Planning Staff to have the potential to change the nature of vehicle movement through an existing vehicle access point between the subject site and Marion Road. A full copy of Transport SA’s report is contained in Attachment 4. The application was referred to the Council’s Engineering and Traffic Departments for comment. An assessment of stormwater disposal required that the Finished Floor Levels be appropriate to address the 1 in 100 year flood effect as nominated within the Keswick and Brown Hill Creek flood plain mapping. It is suggested and supported by the Engineering Department the FFL’s be included by way of condition. An assessment of the manoeuvrability and car parking spaces at the rear of the proposed development was determined it to be satisfactory. The Engineering comments are included in Attachment 5. ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential – Policy Area 40 as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 133 The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1, 2, 5, 11, 16, 17, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 97 Principles of Development Control 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 46, 48, 49, 53, 54, 55,

56, 76, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 106, 114, 115, 121, 123, 124, 125, 126, 128, 135, 139, 140, 271

Zone

Objective 1, 2, 3 Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 3, 7, 14

Policy Area

Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 3, 4

In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use and Zoning The subject site is located in the Residential Zone – Policy Area 40. Objective 1 of the Residential Zone seeks a “safe, pleasant, convenient and distinctive living environment for all residents provided by a range of housing together with local community facilities that complement the living environment” and includes low to medium density housing of one to three storeys in height. Similarly, Council Wide Objective’s 25 and 27 allow for “a compact urban area” whilst encouraging the retention of existing housing stock, while Council Wide PDC 48 affords higher dwelling densities in areas close to centres and public transport. The proposed development includes the retention of the existing dwelling on the subject site and the construction of a two-storey dwelling at the rear of the allotment. The residential land use proposed is consistent with the residential character of the locality in terms of its siting, scale, appearance and height, which also satisfies the desired outcomes of Residential Policy Area 40. Surrounding Uses The surrounding area includes predominantly residential land use immediately to the north, south and east, with industrial land use to the immediate west (across Marion Road) and further north towards Richmond Road, as well as local centre land uses further south along Marion Road. The built form in the area is predominantly of single storey dwellings, however the size, scale and setbacks of the proposed development is consistent with the planning requirements of residential zones and the policy area. The development would introduce additional residential accommodation within an established residential area.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 134 Topography It is noted from a site inspection that the site is generally flat. The site levels provided on the Siteworks and Drainage Plan indicate that the proposed finished floor levels would be 100.30m for the new dwelling at the rear of the subject site and 100.20m for the new garage to the existing dwelling, which is considered acceptable. While these levels are not shown on the site and elevation plans, they will be included by way of a condition should consent be granted. Siting and Setbacks Principle of Development Control 84 states that building height should maintain a compatible scale with adjacent development while Principle of Development Control 94 calls for progressive increase in setbacks as height of development increases so as to (a) minimise the visual impact of buildings from adjoining properties; (b) minimise the overshadowing of adjoining properties; and (c) maintain adequate daylight to adjoining dwelling. Principle of Development Control 95 further requires two-storey components of buildings to be set back eight (8) metres from the rear boundary. In relation to setbacks for hammerhead developments and two-storey developments, the planning provisions stipulate that allotments with an area 300m² - 450m² should have a setback at least 5.5 metres from the street boundary and at least six (6) metres from the rear boundary. The front setback for the existing dwelling is seven (7) metres from Marion Road with the side setbacks approximately one (1) metre from its southern boundary, 4.16 metres from the northern boundary and greater than 20 metres from the rear boundary. The front, side and rear setbacks for the existing dwelling satisfy the relevant planning provisions pertaining to distances from boundaries. More consideration must be given for the proposed two-storey dwelling to be sited at the rear of the subject site. The proposed dwelling is to be setback approximately 20.7 metres from Marion Road, which satisfies the 5.5 metre requirement. The majority of the ground level of the two-storey dwelling is to be set back 7.2 metres from its rear boundary with the garage component set back four (4) metres from the rear boundary. This generally satisfies the six (6) metre setback requirement. The upper level of the two-storey component of the dwelling is to be set back eigth (8) metres, which again satisfies PDC 95. PDC 94 specifically refers to setbacks for dwellings not sited on side boundaries stating they should be set back two (2) metres from side boundaries if the maximum wall height is six (6) metres, and if the sidewalls are greater than six (6) metres in height, should be set back two (2) metres plus the increase in wall height above six (6) metres. The total height of the single storey garage component of the proposed dwelling is 2.7 metres with the two-storey dwelling component being 5.6 metres. The setback for the garage component from the northern boundary is 1.3 metres and the setback for the two-storey dwelling component is 3.5 metres from the southern boundary and 4.7 metres from the northern boundary. The proposed setbacks satisfy the planning provisions pertaining to distances from boundaries. Overshadowing Given acceptable height, scale and bulk of the proposed dwelling and the generous distances from all boundaries it is considered that overshadowing will not become an issue.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 135 Bulk and Scale The residential zone affords two and three-storey developments that are complimentary to adjacent development. Whilst residential development in the locality of the subject site is predominantly single-storey dwellings, this in itself does not prevent two-storey development from being considered for the area. The proposed development is a compact two-storey dwelling with generous setbacks from all boundaries, which protects any view over the private open space of neighbouring properties and diminishes any overlooking or overshadowing impacts whilst also satisfying the desired outcome of Policy Area 40 for infill development. Overlooking and Overshadowing Council Wide Principal of Development Control 99 stipulates that direct overlooking into neighbouring private open space should be minimised by way of screening devices, window treatment, landscaping, adequate separation and building layout. While a concern was raised in regards to overlooking the private open space immediately abutting the north boundary of the subject site, the proposed solution to this issue was to include mature tree plantings in the landscape strip along the northern boundary and/or non-transparent wooden slats/trellis to the northern side of the balcony area to reduce any viewing over the property to the north. The representor was satisfied that this treatment would address the overlooking issue. Another point of concern was the window treatment to bedrooms at the rear of the proposed two-storey dwelling. The applicant has suggested that obscure glazing will be included to a height of 1.7 metres to all upper level windows in bedroom areas, and the upper portion of the window will be an awning-type window operable to a 45° angle. The height and angle of this portion of the window from the upper storey will make any overlooking difficult. Colours and Materials The colours and materials for the proposed two-storey dwelling and garage to the existing dwelling have not been nominated but can be stipulated to be consistent with the character of the locality to the satisfaction of Council by way of condition. Visual Impact on Neighbouring Developments or Streetscape The subject site is located in Policy Area 40, which offers the greatest potential for infill development and increased housing densities with allotment sizes of 270m² permitted. The subject site is approximately 853m², which potentially could be subdivided into three allotments in accordance with relevant planning provisions from Council’s Development Plan. However, this would involve demolishing the existing dwelling and the applicant has indicated a desire to retain the existing housing stock and build a new dwelling to the rear of the subject site, thus reducing the potential density that could be supported on this allotment. It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the infill development possibilities afforded by Policy Area 40 and with its generous setbacks from all boundaries including Marion Road, and compact design, will not reduce residential amenity by way of visual bulk and scale for neighbouring properties and the streetscape. Site Coverage and Open Space Council Wide PDC 98 provides that the site coverage of a site should provide for parking areas, private open space areas, storage and clothes drying areas as well as be inclusive of setback areas. Council Wide PDC 101 calls for private open space behind the building line, which excludes storage areas, outbuildings, carports and roofed pergolas and is connected to living areas and of an appropriate dimension and gradient.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 136 Design techniques for both PDC’s suggest that each dwelling should not exceed 50% site coverage and should provide a minimum of 20% of site area as private open space inclusive of 40m2 of area with a minimum width of 5.0 metres behind the main building line. The site coverage for the existing dwelling equates to 39% of the site with 23% of private open space at the rear of the dwelling with minimum dimensions being 6.7 metres x 9.6 metres. The site coverage for the proposed two-storey dwelling equates to 34% of the site with 30% private open space at the rear of the dwelling with minimum dimensions being 7 metres x 12 metres. The planning requirements for site coverage and open space are considered to be satisfactory for both the existing and proposed dwellings. Domestic Storage Given that the open space provisions are generous it is considered that there is ample space to provide a domestic storage outbuilding in the rear yards if required without compromising the open space requirements. Bin storage areas have been provided at the front of the subject site. Car parking Provisions The dwellings have both been provided with one undercover car park and one visitor car park at the rear of the subject site. The driveway satisfies the requirements stipulated by the Department of Transport, Energy and Infrastructure (DTEI) in that it is 6 metres wide for a distance of 6 metres into the property, which also satisfies Council Wide PDC 53. Stormwater Comments received from Council’s Engineering Department stipulates that the subject site is located within the 1 in 100 year flood zone and therefore requires that the finished floor levels are in accordance with those stipulated in the Site and Drainage Plan to accord with planning provisions from Council’s Development Plan regulating flood prone areas. Finished Floor Levels can be stipulated by way of condition should this development be granted consent. Significant Trees There are no significant trees in the area of the proposed development. Nor are there any street trees impacted on by the proposed development and the widening of the driveway. Landscape Assessment While a 4.16 metre driveway is included in the proposed development with a six (6) metre wide entry at the junction with Marion Road to accord with DTEI requirements, not a great deal of landscaping has been included along this proposed access way. It has been suggested to the applicant that additional landscaping may be required in particular along the northern boundary of the existing dwelling to afford it improved amenity value. Also, it may be necessary to provide better landscaping and/or fencing around the front of the existing dwelling with particular attention paid to the entry of the dwelling to improve its amenity value and outlook. SUMMARY The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the intention of the Residential Zone and in particular, Policy Area 40. The development includes retention of the existing housing stock as well as the construction of a new two-storey dwelling and associated garage at the rear of the subject site, along with a new garage for the existing dwelling at the rear of the subject site. Planning provisions for the Residential Zone – Policy Area 40 encourage infill development in this zone as long as the development is complimentary to existing development in the immediate locality. Considering that the subject site could potentially be developed as three (3) dwellings, the proposed development whereby the existing house is to be retained and a new dwelling of compact proportions is to be constructed at the rear of the site resulting in two (2) dwellings, is considered to be an appropriate form of development.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 137 The issues raised during the public notification period have been addressed and the applicant genuinely offers a solution to any overlooking concerns by way of slat/trellis treatment to the north side of the balcony, mature landscaping along the northern boundary, and obscure glazing to 1.7 metres from finished floor levels for upper storey windows. Having regard to the relevant provisions of the Development Plan, it is considered that the proposed development warrants Development Plan Consent. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993, resolves to GRANT Development Plan Consent to Daniel Jones for the construction of a two-storey dwelling and associated garage and free-standing garage at the rear of the existing dwelling at 257 Marion Road, Marleston (being described in CT 5743/393) subject to the following conditions (and any subsequent or amended conditions that may be required): 1. Development is to take place in accordance with the supporting documentation and plans

relating to this Development Application except as modified by any conditions attached to this Decision Notification.


stormwater drain must not: a) result in the entry of water into a building; or b) affect the stability of a building; or c) create unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the site or within the building; or d) flow or discharge onto the land of an adjoining owner; and not flow across footpaths or

public ways. 3. Landscaping must be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans. All planting must

be completed within 3 month of the commencement date of the use of the development and must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council. Any plants that become diseased or die must be replaced with suitable species.

4. The Finished Floor Level (FFL) of the proposed free-standing garage servicing the existing

dwelling must be a minimum of 100.20m in accordance with the Highgrove Design Siteworks & Drainage Plan Job No: HG0099 Rev- dated July ’07.

5. The Finished Floor Level (FFL) of the proposed new two-storey dwelling and attached

garage must be a minimum of 100.30m in accordance with the Highgrove Design Siteworks & Drainage Plan Job No: HG0099 Rev- dated July ’07.

6. Total build up of the site level above existing ground level must not exceed 400mm at any

point. 7. All driveways, parking and manoeuvring areas must be formed, surfaced with concrete,


8. The northern side of the balcony at the front of the new two-storey dwelling will be affixed

with non-transparent material to afford protection to privacy to neighbouring properties.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 138 NOTES: 1. If you are building up to a common boundary, you are strongly encouraged to consult with

the adjoining property owner before commencing any work.

Section 5 of the Fences Act 1975 requires you to give formal notification to, and consult with, the adjoining property owner if you are replacing an existing fence or building a freestanding wall along the common boundary that would, for all purposes, be a dividing fence. A wall that forms part of a building to be located along the boundary is also subject to this formal requirement.

2. Any redundant stormwater discharge pipes shall be removed to the reasonable satisfaction of Council. New stormwater drainage connection(s) must be located a minimum of 500mm away from any existing or proposed verge features. (i.e. crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles) An “Application to Connect a Stormwater Drain(s) Across Council Land” is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works. Council’s stormwater connection design specifications are contained within this application.


4. Any new or modified underground consumer mains connection(s) shall be constructed to Council’s requirements. An “Application for Permission to Lay Underground Consumer Mains within Council Land” is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services Department prior to the undertaking of any works. Relevant requirements and design details are contained within this application.

5. Any access over or works undertaken on Council owned land (including but not limited to works relating to reserves, crossovers, driveways, landscaping, footpaths, street trees and stormwater connections), will require the approval of the Council’s Infrastructure Services section. Further information and/or specific details can be obtained by phoning Council on 8416 6333.

6. Prior to the commencement of construction of the development herein approved, it is recommended that the applicant employs the services of a licensed Land Surveyor to carry out an identification survey of the subject land and to peg the true boundaries, to ensure that building work will be either on the true boundaries or the specified distance from the true boundaries of the subject land, as the case may be.

8. Once Development Approval (viz both Development Plan Consent and Building Rules

Consent) is issued, Council requires one business day’s notice of the following stages of building work:

· Commencement of building work on site

· The commencement of placement of any structural concrete.

· The completion of wall and roof framing prior to the installation of linings.

· Completion of building work 9. Where this decision notice is granting Development Plan Consent, the applicant is advised

that full Development Approval must be obtained within 12 months or the consent will lapse.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 139 10. Once development approval is granted, the development must be:




11. Pursuant to Section 86(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993, you have the right of appeal to

the Environment, Resources and Development Court against either 1) a refusal of consent or 2) any condition(s) which have been imposed on a consent. Any such appeal must be lodged with the Court within two (2) months from the day on which you receive this notification or such longer period as may be allowed by the Court.

The Environment, Resources and Development Court is located in the Sir Samuel Way Building, Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 (Postal Address: GPO Box 2465, Adelaide SA 5001).

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 149 6.8 181 Anzac Highway Kurralta Park Application No. 211/861/2007 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL To construct four (4) single storey dwellings, with

associated car parking and landscaping.

APPLICANT Pasquale Lopresti APPLICATION NO 211/861/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 26 July 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA Policy Area 41 APPLICATION TYPE Consent (on merit) PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 1 – Notification not required REFERRALS Council (Internal) – Landscape & Engineering ASSESSING OFFICER Planning Consultant DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

19 April 2007

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is located at 181 Anzac Highway, Kurralta Park, Certificate of Title Volume 5365 Folio 487. The subject land, has a frontage of 18.21 metres to Anzac Highway, and a depth of 60.35 metres, resulting in an area of some 1098 square metres. The land is presently developed with a detached dwelling and associated outbuildings. The existing buildings on site are not identified as being of any heritage significance. The land is not identified as being located on flood prone affected land as detailed in the 1 in 100 year ARI flood inundation footprint within the Development Plan. No significant trees are found on site. Trees on the site are under the measurement threshold of 2.0 metres circumference for significant trees. These trees may be removed without approval. The locality is characterised by a mix of residential forms of development with a predominance of single storey multi unit residential flat buildings and group dwellings in this location close to the Kurralta Park Shopping Centre. The locality is also well served by public transport with bus routes along Anzac Highway into the City, and the tram line within walking distance to the east of the subject land within 500 metres.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 152 Proposal The applicant seeks Development Plan Consent to construct four (4) single storey dwellings in a group dwelling arrangement (freestanding and not attached), served by a common driveway to Anzac Highway. Each dwelling is to have its own site with access to the common driveway. Each dwelling is to be provided with two car parking spaces, one of which is contained within a carport structure adjacent to the dwelling. The dwellings are in a conventional style, with concrete tiled simple pitched hipped roofs, portico feature to the main entrance. Dwellings are to be of masonry construction with a rendered finish. A colour scheme has not been provided. The proposal displays the following key ‘development statistics’: Dwelling 1 Dwelling 2 Dwelling 3 Dwelling 4 Overall Site Area 274.5 m2 274.5 m2 274.5 m2 274.5 m2 1098 m2 Site Coverage

125 m2 115 m2 115 m2 127 m2 482 m2 or 44%

Private Open Space

90 m2 or 32.7%

51 m2 or 18.6%

51 m2 or 18.6%

44 m2 or 16.0%

236 m2 or 21.5%

Each dwelling is to be provided with a 1000 litre rainwater tank. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION As this is a Category 1 form of development, no notification is therefore required. REFERRALS Engineering Stormwater detention measures will be required to be undertaken to restrict the total discharge from the total site to a maximum of 20 litres per second during a 20 year ARI storm event. The applicant will be required to reinstate kerb and channel associated with the closure of the existing and the establishment of the new driveway crossover. Such works will be at the applicant’s costs according to Council’s specifications. The proposal displays finished floor levels at 300 mm above the highest adjacent street water table level. This will need to be increased to 350 mm in order to achieve suitable freeboard allowance. The subject land is not located within the flood plain. Department for Transport Energy & Infrastructure As the proposed development would alter the position and nature of existing access arrangements to an arterial road, the application was referred to the Transport Services Division of the Department for Transport Energy & Infrastructure. A copy of the response received is provided as an attachment to this report.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 153 ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone, and more particularly within Residential Policy Area 41, as identified with in the West Torrens (City) Development Plan (consolidated 19 April 2007). The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1,2 , 5, 6, 25, 26, 30, 97 Principles of Development Control 3, 4, 7, 13, 14, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 86, 87,

88, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 110, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 122, 123, 126, 127, 129, 130, 271, 274, 283, 284, 285

Residential Zone

Objective 1, 2 Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 7, 14, 15

Residential Zone (Policy Area 41)

Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 3, 6

In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use The proposal is for residential dwellings as anticipated and provided for within a Residential Zone and Policy Area. Desired Future Character The following statement of desired future character is provided for Residential Policy Area 40. In Policy Area 41, residential flat buildings have been developed on large sites fronting Anzac Highway. Infill opportunities for high density housing development exist and should be encouraged , along Anzac Highway. Interface issues between residential and the impacts of Anzac Highway as an arterial road should be managed sensitively, and should allow for residential development to be orientated to address the street frontage. The Policy Area clearly anticipates the opportunity for infill development at higher densities on larger sites along Anzac Highway. In comparative terms, this Policy Area provides the greatest potential for redevelopment within the Council area The proposal is considered consistent in these regards, in so far as it would provide for four dwellings of a design, form and appearance that would complement and reinforce the existing character of the locality. Density Principle of Development Control 2 for the Policy Area provides by way of Design Technique, a minimum site area per dwelling of 270 square metres. The proposal satisfies this minimum providing an average site area of 274 m2.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 154 The proposed dwelling density is considered to be generally consistent with that displayed within the locality, which includes residential flat buildings and other more compact forms of dwellings, below this figure of 270 m2. Once again, the character statement for this Policy Area clearly identifies the opportunity for higher densities, no doubt in order to take advantage of the proximity to the shopping centre and access to public transport. Form & Appearance The front dwelling is set back at 5.5 metres which is comparable to the adjoining residential flat building to the north east. A 2.0 metre high masonry fence is proposed to the front of this dwelling in order to provide for acoustic protection. This set back is considered sufficient given the character of the existing streetscape and represents an efficient use of land. Suitable space is to be provided to the front of buildings for landscaping that would significantly enhance the current streetscape. Side set backs generally satisfy Development Plan requirements with a 1.0 metre set back provided to side property boundaries, other than for the limited extent of on boundary construction to the rear of the site. The buildings are of single storey construction and of a suitable bulk and scale, which would not dominate surrounding space or be prominent in the existing streetscape. The proposed dwellings would sit comfortably within the existing streetscape. The dwelling style is reflective to an extent of the architecture that predominates this locality, being of a traditional design with hipped pitched roofs, and gable ends, with a distant frontage and presentation to the street. Materials and finishes together with architectural detailing is considered satisfactory. These dwellings are modest in size and presentation and will provide residential accommodation at the more affordable end of the market. Site Coverage & Open Space In terms of site coverage, the proposal displays a building area (typically about 44%) which is less than that identified as a maximum by Design Technique 98.1 being 55%. Suitable space is therefore provided for open space and landscaping. Each dwelling is to provide private open space in excess of the minimum area required by Council wide Design Technique 103.2 being 35 square metres. These areas of private opens pace enjoy a northern orientation for good solar access. Habitable rooms such as the family and meals area relate well to the private open pace with sliding doors proposed. This relationship will assist in ensuring that this space is usable and enhances the level of amenity to be enjoyed by future residents. Car Parking & Access Each dwelling is to be provided with two car parking spaces, one of which is located under a carport structure. The visitor parking space is provided in a ‘tandem’ arrangement on the driveway. This provision is considered to be in accord with Council wide Design Technique 123.1.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 155 Adequate space is provided for the safe and convent maneuvering of vehicles on site. The location of proposed driveways has been arranged so as to avoid existing features such as stobie poles and street trees. The obsolete crossover will need to be reinstated at the cost of the Applicant. The arrangement of driveway enables vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward direction, as required. Some minor modification to the front driveway entrance will hover be required in order to satisfy the requirements of DTEI. Acoustic Privacy It is noted that a number of bedroom windows directly abut the common driveway which has the potential to result in noise intrusion and thereby impact on amenity. It is therefore considered appropriate for these windows to receive a level of acoustic treatment This may be achieved by providing a minimum landscaped width of 1.5 metres adjacent to these windows together with raising sill heights to 1.5 metres above finished floor level in accord with Design Technique 107.1. Environmental The proposal provides for rainwater tanks in accord with BCA requirements. The land is not subject to inundation from flood waters. In order to achieve suitable freeboard allowance in relation to the street watertable, finished floor levels are to be set to 350 mm above top of kerb. The proposal is currently proposed at 300 mm. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993 resolves to GRANT Development Plan Consent to Pasquale Lopresti to construct four (4) dwellings on the land located at 181 Anzac Highway, Kurralta Park subject to the following conditions: Conditions 1. The development must be undertaken and completed in accordance with the plans and

information detailed in this application except where varied by any condition(s) listed below. 2. The finished floor level for the approved dwellings must be a minimum of 350 mm above the

highest point of the watertable adjacent to the property. 3. A 1.5 metre wide landscaped garden area shall be provided adjacent to bedroom windows

which front onto the common driveway, together with sill heights raised to 1.5 metres above finished floor level to afford a suitable level of acoustic protection to these rooms.



5. Total build-up of the site level above existing ground level must not exceed 400mm at any

point.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 156 6. Retaining walls must be designed to accepted engineering standards, and not of timber

construction if retaining a difference in ground level exceeding 200 mm. 7. All driveways, parking and maneuvering areas must be formed, surfaced with concrete,


8. All planting and landscaping must be completed within 3 months of the commencement of the

use of this development and must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council. Any plants that become diseased or die must be replaced with suitable species.

9. A minimum 1000mm wide corridor between at least one side boundary and the dwelling shall

remain unencumbered with fixtures, (eg. Hot water systems, air-conditioning compressors etc.) so as to provide an unrestricted access to the rear of the property.

10. The driveway access to the site shall be widened to 6 metres for a distance of 5 metres from

Anzac Highway so as to provide sufficient width for the simultaneous two way vehicle movements.

11. The obsolete driveway crossover shall be reinstated to standard kerb, guttering and footpath

with all associated costs to be borne by the Applicant. Notes: 1. If you are building up to a common boundary, you are strongly encouraged to consult with the

adjoining property owner before commencing any work. 2. Section 5 of the Fences Act, 1975 requires you to give formal notification to, and consult with,

the adjoining property owner if you are replacing an existing fence or building a freestanding wall along the common boundary that would, for all purposes, be a dividing fence. A wall that forms part of a building to be located along the boundary is excluded from this formal requirement.

3. Any existing crossing places not providing vehicle access shall be considered redundant and

must be closed off to the satisfaction of Council. Any new or modified crossing places shall be constructed to Council’s requirements. New vehicle crossing places must be located a minimum of 500mm from any existing or proposed verge features (i.e.: crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles).

An “Application to Construct a Vehicular Crossing Place(s) Across Council Land” is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works. Council’s crossing place and reinstatement design details are contained within this application.

4. Any redundant stormwater discharge pipes shall be removed to the reasonable satisfaction of

Council. New stormwater drainage connection(s) must be located a minimum of 500mm away from any existing or proposed verge features. (i.e. crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles)

An “Application to Connect a Stormwater Drain(s) Across Council Land” is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works. Council’s stormwater connection design specifications are contained within this application.

5. The cost of rectifying any conflict with existing Council infrastructure arising out of this

development will be borne by the applicant.


6. Any access over or works undertaken on Council owned land (including but not limited to

works relating to reserves, crossovers, driveways, landscaping, footpaths, street trees and stormwater connections), will require the approval of the Council’s Infrastructure Services section. Further information and/or specific details can be obtained by phoning Council on 8416 6333.

7. Prior to the commencement of construction of the development herein approved, it is

recommended that the applicant employs the services of a licensed Land Surveyor to carry out an identification survey of the subject land and to peg the true boundaries, to ensure that building work will be either on the true boundaries or the specified distance from the true boundaries of the subject land, as the case may be.


a) Substantially commenced within twelve (12) months from the date of the decision of

this Consent or Approval, otherwise this Consent or Approval will lapse at the expiration of twelve (12) months from this date (unless Council extends this period), and a new development application shall be required;


c) Any request for an extension of time must be lodged in writing with the Council prior to the expiry of the above-mentioned periods. (PN26)

9. Pursuant to Section 86(1)(a) of the Development Act, 1993, you have the right of appeal to

the Environment, Resources and Development Court against either 1) a refusal of consent or 2) any condition(s) which have been imposed on a consent. Any such appeal must be lodged with the Court within two (2) months from the day on which you receive this notification or such longer period as may be allowed by the Court.

The Environment, Resources and Development Court is located in the Sir Samuel Way Building, Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 (Postal Address: GPO Box 2465, Adelaide SA 5001).

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 161 6.9 621 Burbridge Road, WEST BEACH Application No. 900/2007 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL To construct two (2) single storey detached dwellings APPLICANT Mr Maurice Russo – Russo Design APPLICATION NO 900/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 26 July 2007 ZONE Residential Zone POLICY AREA Policy Area 38 APPLICATION TYPE Consent on merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 1 ASSESSING OFFICER Sarah Smith DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

19 April 2007

RECOMMENDATION REFUSAL BACKGROUND This application was originally allocated to Maria Fantasia as the assessing officer. It was subsequently allocated to Sarah Smith. Maria Fantasia sent a request for further information letter to the applicant dated 21 August 2007. Just after this time Sarah Smith was allocated the file and undertook a re-assessment of the application following a phone conversation with the applicant regarding Maria’s letter. Part of this reassessment involved seeking verbal advice from the Manager of Planning and Council’s Policy Planner as it was felt the issues involved with this application were of a strategic planning nature. It was after these discussions and reassessment that the subsequent further information letter dated 9 October 207 was sent to the applicant (Attachment 1). The attached plans provided by the applicant are revised plans in response to Council’s request for further information dated 9 October 2007. The revised plans provided have not addressed Council’s concerns, and it is on this basis that the proposed development be recommended for refusal. SITE AND LOCALITY A Locality Map can be found in Figure 1 below. The subject site is located at 621 Burbridge Road West Beach. The total site comprises of 941.48 sq metres with a frontage of 21.04 metres to Burbridge Road and a depth of 39.88 metres and 45.92 metres. The rear boundary is 22.3 metres and is aligned on an angle. The site contains one single storey detached dwelling which will need to be demolished to enable the proposed development to be constructed. The site is located within a pocket of residential dwellings on the corner of Tapleys Hill Road and Sir Donald Bradman Drive. Airport land surrounds this pocket of dwellings with part of this land currently being used by a hockey club.


Figure 1: Locality Map Development within this pocket of land generally comprises of single storey detached dwellings on their original allotment. There are only three examples of land within this pocket subdivided into smaller allotments (similar to what is proposed in this application) (Refer to Figure 2 below):

· 623 & 623A Burbridge Road (adjoining subject site) – division approved 2002; · 15 & 15A Weston Street – division approved in 1999; and · 605A & 605B Burbridge Road – boundary realignment approved in 1994

Figure 2: Allotment sizes

Subject Site

Subject Site

623 & 623A Burbridge

15 & 15 A Weston

605A & 605B Burbridge


The subject site is located within the Residential Zone, Policy Area 38 and abuts the Adelaide Airport Zone (See Figure 3 below). Figure 3: Zone Map

Subject Site

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 164 PROPOSAL The proposed development includes the construction of two (2) single storey detached dwellings with associated fencing and landscaping. While the dwellings themselves are detached, the appearance from the front elevation gives the impression that they are attached, due to the location of the front porch wall. Each dwelling includes a double garage under the main roof. Copies of the revised plans for this development proposal are contained within Attachment 2. The following development statistics (refer to Table 1) are applicable to the development application. (Please note that the calculations provided on the revised plans are slightly inaccurate. The calculations provided below are taken from measuring the plan and using the dimensions on the Certificate of Title). Table 1: Development Statistics SITE AREA Guideline: 420sqm

· Residence 1: 483.55sqm · Residence 2: 452.90sqm

FRONTAGE Guideline: 12 metres · Residence 1:10.972 metres · Residence 2: 10.972 metres

DEPTH Residence 1: 45.99 metres & 42.67 metres Residence 2: 42.67 metres & 39.87 metres

CARPARKING SPACES Each dwelling will contain 2 covered car parking spaces

SITE COVERAGE Guideline: Allotments greater than 450sqm: 45%

· Residence 1: 49% · Residence 2: 52%

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE Guideline: 20% · Residence 1: 28% · Residence 2: 23%

SETBACK Front setbacks: · Residence 1: 7.8 metres · Residence 2: 7.8 metres

Side Setbacks: · Residence 1: 1.08 metres & 0.900

metres · Residence 2: 1.08 metres & 0.900

metres Rear Setbacks (shortest distance):

· Residence 1: 6.2 metres · Residence 2: 3.2 metres

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application is a Category 1 form of development pursuant to Section 38 and Schedule 9 of the Development Act and Regulations.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 165 REFERRALS No internal or external referrals were undertaken. ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone, Policy Area 38 as described in the City of West Torrens Development Plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1,2,,25,26,28, 30, Principles of Development Control 3,13,48,49,53, 54, 55, 79, 82,83, 84,86, 87,88,

92, 93,95, 97, 98, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 113, 114, 115, 112, 123, 113, 135

Zone


Policy

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 1,2,

In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. Land Use, Zoning and Policy Area Requirements The subject site is zoned Residential and is located within Policy Area 38. The character statement for Policy Area 38 is as follows: “Policy Area 38 is characterised by well maintained, single storey detached dwellings on large allotments set well back from the street. Policy Area 38 is reasonably homogenous and is mainly comprised of single detached housing of high quality. In comparison to the rest of West Torrens, this Policy Area is home to newer subdivisions and housing redevelopment and as a result, experiences high capital value compared to site value. Each dwelling has characteristic verandas, porches and entry doors all facing the street”. The proposed use of the land for residential development is appropriate within a Residential Zone, however the proposed style of development (two dwellings side by side) does not achieve the desired outcome of Policy Area 38 (Objective 1). Specifically, the proposed development does not give the impression of a single storey detached dwelling on a large allotment. Principle of Development Control 2 within the Policy Area provisions, recommends site areas and dimensions for the development of dwellings within the policy area. The proposed development meets the 420sqm site area requirement, however does not meet the 12 metre frontage requirement (shortfall of 1.028m). While the shortfall is only just over one metre, an extra metre for each site would allow a one metre side setback, a four metre front room, a one metre front entry, followed by a six metre double garage on the boundary (option for a single garage allowing an additional front room).

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 166 The garage would be setback from the front wall of the house making the overall appearance of the development more attractive and more inline with the character statement for the Policy Area. The 12 metre frontage requirement is the greatest minimum frontage requirement within the City of West Torrens Development Plan, and this has been done to ensure that the residential character of the Policy Area is maintained while allowing for infill development in appropriate locations. As the subject site meets the site area requirements for the construction of two dwellings on the site, a well designed hammerhead development would be a more desirable outcome, as this would give the impression of a single storey detached dwelling on a large allotment. This was discussed with the applicant, however they did not wish to entertain this idea. Surrounding Uses & Adjoining Development Surrounding the subject site are residential dwellings and vacant airport land (part of which is used by a Hockey Club). The residential dwellings are generally single storey and set on their large original allotments. Most dwellings are well maintained and attractive. Photos of some examples of development along Burbridge Road within close proximity to the Subject Site are contained in Figure 4 below. Adjoining the subject site on the western side are two double storey dwellings with similar allotment sizes to what is proposed in this application (See Figure 5). These dwellings were approved in 2001 under a different Development Plan (copies of the plans for these dwellings are contained in Attachment 3). Without undertaking a thorough assessment of the neighbouring development, it is obvious from the plans that the frontages do not meet the current Policy Area provisions, and the front elevations of these dwellings are dominated by double garages which is not encouraged in the current Development Plan (or 19 April 2007 Development Plan). While there can be argument over if these dwellings are attractive or not, the dwellings do not fit in with the desired character of development for Policy Area 38 (single storey detached dwellings on lage allotments) and should not set precedence for infill development within the Policy Area or within the surrounding locality.

Figure 4: Examples of development along Burbridge Road in close proximity to the Subject Site


Figure 5: Adjoining Development on Western Side of Subject Site Bulk and Scale The proposed development has a modern facade and a range of building materials are proposed for the front elevations. While the dwellings themselves are detached, the appearance from the front elevation gives the impression that they are attached due to the location of the front porch wall. This is not a desirable form of development as it makes the dwellings look bulky when viewed from the street and does not meet the Policy Area character statement (single storey detached dwellings on large allotments) The proposed garages are six metres in length, making them more than half of the allotment frontage which is discouraged in Principle of Development Control 90 and Design Technique 90.1. An attempt has been made by the applicant to reduce the impact of the double garages by making one panel a Perspex door and the other a western red cedar door. The garages are also set ½ metre forward of the front main wall of the dwellings which is discouraged in Design Technique 93.1. The garages are however setback one metre from the front porch wall, however the Design Technique notes that in these cases the garages should be in line with the main dwelling wall. The rendered front porch walls have a western red cedar screen with an associated planter box. This screen blocks the front door and does not make the entry point clearly visible as encouraged in Principle of Development Control 87. Setbacks Setbacks as proposed are appropriate and meet the Development Plan requirements.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 168 Visual Impact on Surrounding Developments and Future Development As mentioned earlier the surrounding development comprises of a pocket of residential dwellings. Majority are single storey set on large, original size, allotments. Should the proposed development proceed the development may set precedent for future development of this nature within the immediate residential pocket and further within the Policy Area. The development appearance, due predominately to the insufficient frontage width, is not appropriate within this Policy Area and should not proceed as proposed. Site Coverage and Open Space For allotments greater than 450sqm the site coverage guideline is 45%. The proposed allotments are just over 450sqm (Res 1: 483sqm, Res 2: 452sqm). The Guideline for allotments between 300sqm and 450sqm is 50%. The proposed development has the following site coverage calculations:

· Residence 1: 49% · Residence 2: 52%

Private Open Space guideline is 20%. Private Open Space provided for Residence 1 is 28%, for Residence 2: 23%. The greater site coverage is due primarily to a covered alfresco area at the rear. Given that the proposal includes a covered outdoor area upfront and the private open space requirement is achieved, the site coverage as proposed is considered appropriate. Site Area and Frontage Policy Area 38 requires a minimum site area of 420sqm and a minimum frontage of 12 metres. Proposal includes: Residence 1: Site Area 483.55sqm, Frontage: 10.972m Residence 2: Site Area 452.90sqm, Frontage 10.972m The proposed development meets the 420sqm site area requirement, however does not meet the 12 metre frontage requirement (shortfall of 1.028m). Public Transport Access There is a bus route that runs along Burbridge road. Significant Trees There are no significant trees located within the subject site or along the Council verge. Heritage The existing dwelling on the site is not listed in TableWeTo/3 (State Heritage Places) or We/To/4 (Local Heritage Places) within West Torrens Development Plan 19 April 2007. Land Division At the time of writing this report, no land division application had been lodged for the subject site. SUMMARY It is submitted that the development as proposed is not the best development outcome for the site and accordingly should be refused.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 169 The development of two dwellings on this lot can be achieved, however an alternative design solution is required that meets the minimum frontage and site area requirements. The achievement of these requirements will create a development which enhances the character of the area as an area with well maintained, single storey detached dwellings on large allotments set well back from the street. One of the key attributes that distinguishes the Policy Areas within West Torrens Council is the character of development – the built form, site areas and site frontages. The proposed development would be more suitable in either Policy Area 39 or 40 which encourage infill and smaller allotment sizes and allows for frontages of 10.972 metres. The development as proposed is not suitable for Policy Area 38 which is characterised by single storey detached dwellings on large allotments. While the shortfall is only just over one metre, an extra metre for each site would allow the one metre side setback, a four metre front room, a one metre front entry, followed by a six metre double garage on the boundary (option for a single garage allowing an additional front room). The garage would be setback from the front wall of the house making the overall appearance of the development more attractive and more inline with the character statement for the Policy Area. The 12 metre frontage requirement is the greatest minimum frontage requirement within the City of West Torrens Development Plan, and this has been done to ensure that the residential character of the Policy Area is maintained while allowing for infill development in appropriate locations. As the subject site meets the site area requirements for the construction of two dwellings on the site, a well designed hammerhead development would be a more desirable outcome, as this would give the impression of a single storey detached dwelling on a large allotment. RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act, 1993, resolves to REFUSE Development Plan Consent for the construction of two (2) detached dwellings with associated fencing and landscaping at 621 Burbridge Road, West Beach, SA 5038 (CT 5389/887). Reasons for refusal: Council Wide Objectives: Nil Principles of Development Control: 82, 87,90 Reasons:

· The proposed development is not compatible with the desired character for the locality. The building mass and proportion is not appropriate;

· The entry point to the dwellings are not clearly visible; · The proposed garages are dominant, comprising of more than 50% of the site frontage;

Zone Objectives: Nil Zone Principles of Development Control: 2 Reason:

· The proposed development is not in accordance with the Desired Future Character Statements for Policy Area 38.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 170 Residential Policy Area 38 Objectives: 1 Reason:

· The proposed development does not maintain and complement the character and built form of the existing streetscape.

Residential Policy Area 38 Principles of Development Control: 1,2 Reason:

· The proposed development is not consistent with the character statement of the policy area.

· The proposed development does not conform with the minimum frontage requirements.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 178 6.10 13 Long Street, PLYMPTON Application No. 211/1152/2007 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

Construction of carport (width: 4m, Length: 5.8m, Height: 2.88m + pitched roof) forward of dwelling; 6.045m front setback remaining and extension to side and rear of existing dwelling.

APPLICANT Molnar Constructions LTD APPLICATION NO 211/1152/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 25 September 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA 40 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS Nil ASSESSING OFFICER Andrew Robertson DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

9 August 2007

RECOMMENDATION APPROVE BACKGROUND Council has no record of previous applications for this site. SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is located at Allotment 230, 13 Long Street on an 813m2 allotment in the suburb of Plympton. It is a rectangular shaped allotment and has street frontage to Long Street along its northern boundary (18m) and a depth of 45m. The locality is residential with neighbouring allotments consisting of detached dwellings. Since the e-view image of 2006, there has been the construction of a dwelling adjoining the subject site to the east. This dwelling has a carport along the common boundary with the subject property. This carport is setback approximately 5m from the street and will be forward of the proposed carport. The topography is flat.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 181 PROPOSAL The development application proposes the following: · The application seeks to construct a carport (4m wide, 5.8m long, 2.88m high+ pitched roof)

forward of dwelling and a dwelling extension to side and rear of existing dwelling. · The proposed carport will be 5.4m forward of the dwelling; resulting in a 6.045m front

setback. · Material/colours are to match the associated dwelling.

The details of the existing and proposed structure are included as Attachment 1 and 2 respectfully.

CARPARKING SPACES 1 in proposed carport + 1 between front

and carport SITE COVERAGE 232m2 or 29% SETBACKS Front – 6.045 m Rear – 17m

West & east side boundaries – West unaffected, east is 5.8m along boundary

NATURE OF DEVELOPMENT The proposal is a merit form of development as it is neither listed as a complying nor a non-complying form of development in the Residential Zone provisions of the City of West Torrens Development Plan or Schedule 4 of the Development Regulations 1993. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Council officers allocated the proposal to public notification category 2 pursuant to Schedule 9, Part 1, 2 (1) (ca) (ii) of the Development Regulations 1993. No representations were received during the formal two week notification period. ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone (Policy Area 40) as described in the City of West Torrens Development Plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 97 Principles of Development Control 53, 92, 93, 142, 271, 274

Zone

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 2, 7, 14, 15

Policy

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 1, 3

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 182 In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings. APPEARANCE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS, AND SET-BACKS The application seeks to reduce the front building setback distance of the existing structure so as to come closer to the street frontage. This is at variance with Council Wide Principle of Development Control Design Technique 93.1 which seeks to have a ‘carport/garage 0.5 metres behind the main face of the associated dwelling’ or ‘in line with the main face of the dwelling. The view of the new carport from the east will be obscured by the adjacent dwelling to the east built in 2006/7. The adjacent building to east has a 2.0m high colourbond fence along the street boundary reducing the soft landscaping to the streetscape and resulting in the proposed carport becoming virtually undetectable. The view from the west is equally obscured due to the vegetation to the west of the proposed carport, in the subject property’s front garden. The carport is setback 6m from the front, offering further car parking space if required.

Taking into account the intent of the relevant principles, the proposal is considered to satisfy the principles for street appearance and amenity of its surroundings. Colours and Materials In favour of the proposed development is the use of complimentary colours and materials which will incorporate the structure into the existing built form. Doing so assists in meeting Council Wide Principle of Development Control 90, which envisages garages and carports with ‘building materials and detailing complimentary to those of the associated dwelling’. SUMMARY Overall, the proposed development will not affect the surrounding amenity. The streetscape will remain substantially unchanged due to the construction of the adjacent dwelling to the east and the existing vegetation to the west. The carport will still enable a further car parking space between the structure and the street, which will be enclosed behind the existing driveway gate. The development meets all of the relevant Principles of Development Control except the requirement for carports and garaging to remain behind the main front of the dwelling. RECOMMENDATION That the Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993, resolve to GRANT Development Plan Consent to Development Application 211/1152/2007 to construct a carport (width: 4m, Length: 5.8m, Height: 2.88m + pitched roof) forward of dwelling; 6.045m front setback remaining and extension to side and rear of existing dwelling. at 13 Long Street, Plympton (CT 5359/212) subject to the following conditions:- Conditions

1. The development must be undertaken and completed in accordance with the amended plans and information received by Council on 22 August 2007 as detailed in this application except where varied by any condition(s) listed below.


2. All driveways, parking and manoeuvring areas must be formed, surfaced with concrete, bitumen or paving, and be properly drained. They must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council thereafter.

3. The materials used on the external surfaces of the building and / or the colorbond finishes

or paintwork thereon must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council at all times. The external roof surface of the rear dwellings shall consist of concrete roof tiles.

4. The carport approved herein must not be clad and therefore kept as an open sided

structure at all times. 5. The construction of a drainage system and the position and manner of discharge of a


DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 193 6.11 91 Halsey Road, FULHAM Application No. 211/1096/2007 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Construct a carport/ sail (5.5m wide, 6m long, 2.4m high at

front; 3.2m high where attached to the existing dwelling) forward of dwelling

APPLICANT Alternative Design Studio

APPLICATION NO 211/1096/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 6 Sep 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA 38 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Category 2 REFERRALS None ASSESSING OFFICER Andrew Robertson DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

August 2007

RECOMMENDATION REFUSE SITE AND LOCALITY The subject land is located at Allotment 106, 91 Halsey Road, a 712m2 allotment in the suburb of Fulham. It is a rectangular shaped allotment and has street frontage to Halsey Road of 19.5m and a depth of 36.5m. The rear of the property adjoins the River Torrens Linear Park. The locality is residential with neighbouring allotments consisting of detached dwellings. The topography is generally flat.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 196 PROPOSAL The development application proposes the following: · The application seeks to construct a sail (5.5m wide, 6m long, 2.4m high at front; 3.2m high

where attached to the existing dwelling) forward of dwelling. · The proposal will be 3.4m forward of the dwelling; 3.7m front setback remains. · Material/colours to be an Alnet range sail with galvanized round steel powdercoated posts. · The details of the proposed structure are included in the attachments. The following development statistics are applicable to the development application. CARPARKING SPACES 2 in proposed carport + 2 between front and

existing garage (under the sail) SITE COVERAGE 368m2 or 55% SETBACKS Front – 3.7m Rear & sides – not affected

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION Council officers allocated the proposal to public notification category 2 pursuant to Schedule 9, Part 1, 2 (1) (ca) (ii) of the Development Regulations 1993. No representations were received during the formal two week notification period. ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone (Policy Area 38) as described in the City of West Torrens Development Plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Metropolitan Provisions Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 97 Principles of Development Control 53, 92, 93, 142, 271, 274

Zone

Objective 1 Principles of Development Control 2, 7, 14, 15

Policy


In assessing the merits or otherwise of the application the primary planning issues have been assessed relevant to the Development Plan under the following sub headings.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 197 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Visual Impact on Neighbouring Developments or Streetscape The Development Plan seeks the siting of carports and garages inline or 0.5m behind the front wall of the associated dwelling. There is also a front setback requirement of the same distance as one or the other of the adjoining buildings, provided the difference between the setbacks of the two adjoining buildings is less than or equal to 2m. The proposed structure meets neither of these measures. Front setbacks are critical in maintaining a consistent built form and an attractive streetscape. This portion of Halsey Road features minimal trees and screening vegetation, therefore meeting this setback requirement is crucial to the maintenance of the streetscape. Site Coverage and Open Space The construction of the sail covering the driveway would increase the total site coverage to 55%. The maximum site coverage for allotments over 450sqm is 45%. This represents an excedence of 22%. Carparking Provisions The carport/sail provides cover for the existing driveway area, in addition to the two spaces in the existing garage, under the roof of the main dwelling. Stormwater There are no gutters in place to catch the runoff. Should the application be approved, a condition should be applied to ensure no runoff onto neighbouring properties. The driveway may need to be resurfaced and sloped sending excess water to the street. SUMMARY The proposed development raises the following issues which are at variance with the City of West Torrens Development Plan:

· Site coverage is 55% but the guidelines state 45% · The front set back would be reduced to 3.7m, as per the applicant's drawings. The front

boundary is unclear as there is no footpath. This is 2m and 2.5m forward of the western and eastern adjacent dwellings respectively.

· Visual Impact to streetscape. · Stormwater runoff cannot be contained from the sail and would create excessive

stormwater following heavy precipitation. Ultimately, the Development Plan seeks to avoid making carports a prominent feature of the street frontage. In addition to the other points which are at variance with the Development Plan, this application does not warrant approval with its proposed design. RECOMMENDATION That the Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993, resolve to REFUSE Development Plan Consent to Development Application 211/1096/2007 to construct a carport/ sail (5.5m wide, 6m long, 2.4m high at front; 3.2m high where attached to the existing dwelling) forward of dwelling at 91 Halsey Road, FULHAM on (CT 5602/61) for the following reasons:-

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 198 Reasons: Council Wide Objectives: 97 Council Wide Principles of Development Control: 53, 92, 93, 142, 271, 274 Reasons:

· The proposed development is not compatible with the desired setbacks, streetscape and built form for the locality.

Zone Objectives: 1 Zone Principles of Development Control: 2, 7, 14, 15 Reason:

· The proposed development does not maintain and complement the character and built form of the existing streetscape.

Residential Policy Area 38 Objectives: 1 Residential Policy Area 38 Principles of Development Control: 1 Reason:

· The proposed development is not consistent with the character statement of the policy area.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 206 6.12 1-17 Cook Street, UNDERDALE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION DETAILS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Construction of nine two-storey row dwellings APPLICANT Mr Lino Fusco APPLICATION NO 211/1139/2007 LODGEMENT DATE 08 October 2007 ZONE Residential POLICY AREA 42 APPLICATION TYPE Merit PUBLIC NOTIFICATION N/A – Category 1 REFERRALS Internal - Senior Project Engineer ASSESSING OFFICER Patrick Mitchell, Janine Lennon DEVELOPMENT PLAN VERSION

09 August 2007

RECOMMENDATION DELEGATE APPROVAL BACKGROUND This application seeks consent for nine dwellings (row dwellings) and was therefore referred to the Panel for its consideration on 11 December 2007 in accordance with Council’s standard policies and delegations. The previous report and attachments can be found in Attachment 2. At that time, the Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993, deferred a decision on the application to allow the applicant to:

1. Seek clarification of the promenades urban design guide lines and their relationship with the Development Plan and clarification of previous approvals.

2. Submit adequate detail which demonstrates that the visual appearance of the development and the streetscape will be enhanced as a result of the development when viewed from Cook Street and adjoining areas.

3. The receipt and Council approval of the on-site stormwater detention design and detail (including calculations).

Amended plans have been subsequently supplied by the applicant and the changes form the basis of the following assessment (Attachment 1) PROMANADE URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES The Promanade Urban Design Guidelines were established as a part of the Land Management Agreement over the Promanade site, the following in an extract from the Land Management Agreement regarding the design guidelines:

The Council and the Owner wish also to ensure that the Land is developed with a high standard of design to achieve, preserve and conserve a high level of amenity on the Land. The Council and the Owner have agreed on general design principles for the proposed Development and have also agreed building envelopes for all allotments of the proposed Development. The design principles and building envelopes are contained in the Design


Guidelines annexed hereto and marked Annexure “B” (hereinafter called “the Design Guidelines”);

In accordance with the above, it appears that where the Development Plan and the guidelines differed, Council has ratified that meeting the guidelines is acceptable for its purposes. REFERRALS

Internal - Council’s Senior Project Engineer

The application was referred to Council’s Senior Project Engineer to comment on matters associated with stormwater management. Council’s Senior Project Engineer advised that stormwater retention provision has been provided in the form of a stormwater infiltration trench adjoining the proposed development this detail formed a part of the previous land division application. In addition, prior to stormwater runoff being collected and discharged to the provided connection point, it will be required for the stormwater to pass through a Gross Pollutant Trap to remove solid material which may potentially clog the communal soakage trench over time (i.e. general litter, silt, leaf and lawn clippings). While the location of the Gross Pollutant Trap has been identified, the details of the Gross Pollutant Trap itself are still outstanding and it has been recommended that this information be provided prior to the granting of Development Plan Consent. ASSESSMENT The subject land is located within the Residential Zone as described in the City of West Torrens Development plan. The main provisions of the Development Plan which relate to the proposed development are as follows: Council Wide Provisions

Objectives 1, 5, 6, 17, 22, 23, 25, 26, 97, Principles of Development Control 3, 4, 13, 15, 23, 36,37, 42, 43, 44, 45, 48, 80,

82, 84, 86, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 109, 113, 116, 117, 120, 122, 123, 125, 129, 271, 273, 274,

Residential Zone

Objective 1, 2, 3 Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 6, 7, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19,

Policy Area 42

Objective 1, Principles of Development Control 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,

21, 22

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 208 Building Setbacks The proposal has been amended to meet the Promonade Urban Design Guidelines which seek a minimum building setback of 4.0m from the allotment frontage and 7.5m for first floor aspects (these setbacks also appear generally consistent with other land parcels adjoining the boundary of the Linear Park (River Torrens) Zone). Repetition of Design / Streetscape amenity The provisions of the Development Plan seek to discourage undue repetition of style and external appearance where groups of residential development are proposed (Council Wide PDC 80). The application, as originally submitted, indicated that the northern aspect of the proposed dwellings have attempted (to some degree) to break up the repetition in external appearance of the dwellings. However, the rear (southern) aspect of the dwelling development did not break up the repetition in external appearance to the garages and provided little streetscape appeal (i.e. the dwellings associated garages would be identical in nature utilising the same colours, materials, building setbacks, et cetera; and no landscaping to the Cook Street frontage was proposed). Cook Street has been designed with the intention of it being used essentially as a lane. All allotments adjoining the street feature a dual frontage with Cook Street being the secondary frontage. Given Cook Street's intended status as access only, limited building setbacks have been afforded to the Cook Street frontage. Accordingly, the layout of the subdivision ultimately provides limited options to enhance the streetscape. Notwithstanding the above, the applicant was requested to consider design techniques that will break up the repetition in building appearance and to enhance the Cook Street streetscape. The applicant subsequently submitted revised plans that indicate an alteration in the external appearance of the garage facades, which is expected to be generally consistent with Policy Area 42 PDC 14 by providing a combination of double tilt up doors and moulded door panels not greater than 5m in width, being provided. Additional landscaping to the Cook Street frontage has also been proposed in the form of small garden beds between the garage openings. Stormwater & Flooding As previously stated the application was referred to Council’s Senior Project Engineer who advised that each of these allotments has been provided with a stormwater connection on the northern side of the respective property and that stormwater must pass through a Gross Pollutant Trap, prior to stormwater runoff being directed to the communal soakage trench. The applicant has subsequently illustrated some stormwater features on the plans. However, detail of the proposed Gross Pollutant Traps has not been provided. SUMMARY The primary issues in relation to the assessment of the proposal appear to relate to the discrepancies between different provisions in the Development Plan to the Promenade Urban Design Guidelines (most significantly the building setback provisions). Whilst it is evident that the building setbacks from the Linear Park property boundary encroach on the Development Plan provisions, they do meet the guidelines. The second issue of the lack of streetscape appeal along Cook Street. In this regard, the application proposes a series of garages facing Cook Street with minor landscaping to break up the significant expanse of garaging, given that the overall layout of the development shows a clear intention for Cook Street to be used for vehicle access only, the proposed streetscape is considered acceptable.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 209 RECOMMENDATION The Development Assessment Panel, having considered the application for consent to carry out development of land and pursuant to the provisions of the Development Act 1993 resolves to DELEGATE to the Manager, Urban Planning, the power to grant Development Plan Consent to Development Application 211/1139/2007 by Lino Fusco to allow for the construction of nine two-storey row-dwellings at 1-17 Cook Street, Underdale subject to the satisfactory resolution of the following outstanding matters and the following draft conditions (and any subsequent or amended condition(s) that may be required: OUTSTANDING MATTERS 1. The receipt and Council approval of the detail of the proposed Gross Pollutant Traps. DRAFT COUNCIL CONDITIONS 1. The development must be undertaken and completed in accordance with the plans and

information detailed in this application except where varied by any condition(s) listed below. 2. Stormwater detention and water quality measures are to be implemented in accordance

with engineering calculations and design drawings, as submitted and approved by Council. 3. The construction of a drainage system and the position and manner of discharge of a

stormwater drain must not: a) result in the entry of water into a building; or b) affect the stability of a building; or c) create unhealthy or dangerous conditions on the site or within the building; or d) flow or discharge onto the land of an adjoining owner; and not flow across footpaths or

public ways. 4. All driveways, parking and manoeuvring areas must be formed, surfaced with concrete,


5. All planting and landscaping must be completed prior to occupation of the dwellings and

must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council thereafter. Any plants that become diseased or die must be replaced with suitable species.

6. The upper level southerly facing windows must be provided with fixed obscure glazing to a

minimum height of 1.7 metres above the upper floor level in order to minimise the potential for overlooking of adjoining properties. The glazing in these windows is to be maintained at all times to the reasonable satisfaction of Council.

7. The materials used on the external surfaces of the building and / or the colorbond finishes

or paintwork thereon must be maintained to the reasonable satisfaction of Council at all times.

8. The finished floor level of each dwelling must be a minimum of 350mm above the highest

point of the watertable adjacent to the property. 9. Total build-up of the site level above existing ground level must not exceed 400mm at any

point. 10. Retaining walls must be designed to accepted engineering standards, and not of timber

construction if retaining a difference in ground level exceeding 200 mm.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 210 11. The concrete rubbish bin platform and visitor parking on Powell Road as well as the access

path to the proposed dwellings Linear Park frontage must be constructed prior to occupation of the dwellings herein approved.

NOTES 1. Any new crossing places shall be constructed to Council’s requirements. New vehicle

crossing places must be located a minimum of 1.0m from any existing or proposed verge features (i.e.: crossing places, trees, stormwater connections). An Application to Construct a Vehicular Crossing Place(s) Across Council Land is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works. Council’s crossing place and reinstatement design details are contained within this application.

2. New stormwater drainage connection(s) must be located a minimum of 1.0m away from

any existing or proposed reserve features (i.e. crossing places, trees, stormwater connections, stobie poles). An Application to Connect a Stormwater Drain(s) Across Council Land is required to be lodged (including payment of lodgement fee) and approved by Council’s Infrastructure Services section prior to the undertaking of any works. Council’s stormwater connection design specifications are contained within this application.

3. The cost of rectifying any conflict with existing Council infrastructure arising out of this

development will be borne by the applicant. 4. Any access over or works undertaken on Council owned land (including but not limited to

works relating to reserves, crossovers, driveways, landscaping, footpaths, street trees and stormwater connections), will require the approval of the Council’s Infrastructure Services section. Further information and/or specific details can be obtained by phoning Council on 8416 6333.

5. Prior to the commencement of construction of the development herein approved, it is

recommended that the applicant employs the services of a licensed Land Surveyor to carry out an identification survey of the subject land and to peg the true boundaries, to ensure that building work will be either on the true boundaries or the specified distance from the true boundaries of the subject land, as the case may be.





7. Pursuant to Section 86(1)(a) of the Development Act 1993 you have the right of appeal to

the Environment, Resources and Development Court against either 1) a refusal of consent or 2) any condition(s) which have been imposed on a consent. Any such appeal must be lodged with the Court within two (2) months from the day on which you receive this notification or such longer period as may be allowed by the Court. The Environment, Resources and Development Court is located in the Sir Samuel Way Building, Victoria Square, Adelaide SA 5000 (Postal Address: GPO Box 2465, Adelaide SA 5001).

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 211 8. All planting must be of species which will not grow to cause damage to paved or sealed

areas, building foundations or underground services.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 252 7. SUMMARY OF COURT APPEALS

Monthly statistics are provided for the information of the Panel in relation to: 1. any matters being referred to the Development Assessment Commission (DAC); 2. any planning appeals before the Environment, Resources and Development Court (ERDC)

and their status; and 3. any Section 69 or 84 enforcement notices issued. The current status is listed as follows: Matters pending determination by DAC Reason for referral DA number Address Description of

development Section 49 211/1379/2005 4 Hamra Avenue, West

Beach New canopy above the entry of Administration Building One. Comments forwarded to DAC - DAC continuing with an assessment.

Section 49 211/26/2006 Construction of replacement 66kV power line. Comments forwarded to DAC - No decision as yet.

Section 49 211/847/2007 River Torrens – section between Henley Beach Road & Tapleys Hill Road

Comments referred to DAC 18 September 2007.

Section 49 211/995/2007 Variation of DA 211/600/2002 – Waste Transfer Facility at 15 Starr Avenue, North Plympton

Under assessment

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 253 Development Application appeals before the ERDC DA Number Address Reason for

Appeal Description of Development

Status

211/1230/2006 134-136 Anzac Highway, Glandore

Applicant appealed Panel's decision to refuse application

Extension of trading hours for a shop to 24 hours, 7 days per week

Compulsory conference adjourned to 17 December 2007 pending a review of the noise generation potential by Council's acoustic Consultant and the further consideration of the matter if Council's DAP at it December Meeting.

211/302/2007 34 Huntriss Street, Torrensville

Applicant appealed Panel's decision to refuse application

Construction of a Residential outbuilding at the rear of the allotment 10 metres in length by 9.9 metres in width by 4 metres in height together with partial demolition of the front with the existing garage.

Compulsory conference adjourned to 19 March 2008 pending the assessment and consideration of amended plans by the Development Assessment Panel at the March Meeting.

Current Enforcement Notices

Address Description of development

Reason for notice Status

34 Huntriss Street, Torrensville

Construction of a Residential outbuilding at the rear of the allotment 10 metres in length by 9.9 metres in width by 4 metres in height together with partial demolition of the front with the existing garage.

Building was constructed with a Development Approval.

Civil Action on hold, pending ERD Appeal.

NOTE: Italics above indicate updated information.

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PANEL 12 February 2008 Page 254 SUMMARY

The information requested by the Panel has been provided for information purposes. RECOMMENDATION

The Development Assessment Panel received and noted the information 8. MEETING CLOSE

· notice of panel meeting . notice is hereby given in accordance with section 56a(19) of the ....

Documents