Further Advice Assessment Manager MCU24 0112 · MCU24/0112

Roof Forms
Issue
It is acknowledged that in the revised plans provided as part of the response to the Information
Request, eaves have been added to the façade of the building fronting Hilton Terrace
(approximately 30% of the perimeter of the building). The overall extent of the eaves provided
to the perimeter of the building is significantly less than the 75% required by AO19.1 of the
Medium Density Residential Zone Code.
The current extent of eaves provided to the perimeter of the building does not successfully
avoid a box profile as required by PO19 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code.
Advice Required
2.      Provide to a greater extent of the perimeter of the building (closer to 75%), eaves which
        are at least 600mm.
Materials and Finishes
Issue
The overall east and west elevations do not show a sufficient mix of lightweight materials and
textured external finishes to break up the surface, which may result in a single plane finish.
Advice Required
3.      Provide amended elevations that demonstrate a greater mix of materials and finishes to
        provide an interesting built form that integrates with the surrounding natural and built
        environment.
Landscaping
Issue
On Plan No. A1103 – Landscape Open Space, the pools and a section on the driveway are
identified as soft landscaping.
Advice Required
4.      Provide an amended Landscape Open Space Plan which removes these areas as soft
        landscaping and recalculate the figures showing the total areas for soft and hard
        landscaping, to ensure that the development still complies with AO10.1 of the Dual
        Occupancy and Multiple Dwelling Code.
Issue
Along the frontage of the site the development only provides a 1.3m wide landscape buffer, in
lieu of the 2m required in accordance with AO8.1 of the Driveway and Parking Code and
AO6.1 of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code.
Advice Required
5.      It is considered that there is enough room on site to provide at least a 2m landscape
        buffer along the road frontage. The development can be pushed back to achieve this
        outcome, considering there is a 10m+ rear setback.
        Provide amended plans detailing a 2-metre-wide landscape setback to the frontage.
Access Path to Park
Issue
The justification for this access path is unclear, considering all units are proposed to have their
own access through to the park next to each of the pool terraces. This area along the side
boundary could be utilised to provide a better landscape outcome between the site and the
adjoining property to the east.




                                                                                           Page 2 of 3