Original source · versioned page text
Amended Delegated Report - Code - Planning - MCU25 0101 (As Published)
Assessment
The parts of the proposed dwelling within the rear setback include the storage area and lift in the
basement, bedroom 1 and the lift on the lower floor and bedroom 3 and the lift on the upper floor.
The proposed setback maintains the amenity of users of the subject site and the adjoining premises
by these building elements not being habitable spaces, which do not include windows.
The proposed rear setback does not unreasonably obstruct views or cause overlooking of private
open space or habitable areas of the adjoining premises, through the provision of a
varied/staggered rear setback between 4.5. - 6.8m, which responds to the shape of the subject lot.
The rear boundary interfaces with the driveway and circulation areas of the adjoining development
at 4 Pelican Street and there are no private open space areas. On the upper level of the dwelling,
there are louvres with operable screens covering the windows.
The reduced side boundary setbacks are limited to the parts of the dwelling that are 4.5m above
ground. The proposed setbacks are varied with portions that exceed the minimum i.e. 2.5m-4.0m
from the side boundaries. The portions that are less than the minimum setback (proposed 1.5m)
interface with the adjoining two-storey dwelling that is setback 2.0m-2.50m from the property
boundary. To ensure the amenity between these neighbouring properties is maintained and
opportunities for overlooking are reduced, it is considered reasonable to apply the standard
screening condition to the Decision Notice for this development.
The development maintains adequate distance between the adjoining properties and existing
vegetation and additional landscaping will help buffer these developments.
Space for landscaping in the forms of trees and shrubs is provided between buildings at ground
level. The proposed side boundary setbacks are well landscaped with a combination of trees,
shrubs and groundcovers.
Along Kingfisher Drive and the surrounding streets there are similar examples of reduced rear
setbacks, demonstrating that the proposal is consistent with the predominant character of the
surrounding.
There are no areas of ecological importance within or near the subject land.
Page 9 of 20
Document Set ID: 24807636
Version: 2, Version Date: 20/05/2026
See the original
The page text is free to read. Viewing or downloading an original file needs an account.
Log in to see the originalLog in to download the original file
The download may take up to a minute.