High Density Ammendment C96 now approved by state Gov.
The last stage of the C96 saga has now been completed, the state Gov has approved it.
As you will find in the plethora of previous articles on this site, C96 amendment was an update to the Planning scheme particularly around DD08 overlay. It allowed higher buildings along main roads, and tried to enforce restricts on smaller side street sites. But there was still ambiguity, and it will remain to be tested with new developments.
Approval of Amendment C96 Tightening of DDO8 Controls
Supposedly there were minimal changes by the State Gov.
The Planning Dept info is here…including all the new regs and maps.
| Manningham C96 | Implements a number of actions from the ‘Manningham Residential Strategy (2012)’ and provides clearer guidance for higher density dwellings around activity centres and along main roads. |
1 Comment
The ambiguity the author refers to might be concerning sunken living areas and how they should be classified or whether the height of a building should be measured from the slab floor if it is below the natural ground level. In rejecting the proposal at 189 Foote Street the Council officer for planning and environment wrote; “Council agrees with this statement”..”There is excessive excavation that disguises the true height of the building”.
On sloped sites, two and three storey limits should be assessed on the number above the roof of the basement car park and not from above the natural ground level otherwise we will continue to see developers employing excessive excavation, often resulting in the slab floor of the building up to 2.5metres below natural ground level just to increase apartment yield. The new clause regarding “unsightly basement wall protrusions” (above natural ground level) seems to recognise they would need to be more above than below NGL by adding “are sited to allow for effective screen planting”.
It should be noted that nearly all established properties within the Manningham area have the full height of their garage/basements visible above ground and this trend has continued with all recently built two storey town house developments in the Municipality.
A two storey, 12 apartment development, built under the conditions of the DDO8 in precinct B, at 110-112 Beverley Street has most of its basement visible in finished brickwork and all within a height of 8.95.meters.
In my opinion the most important changes made to the DDO8 schedule is the limiting of two storeys townhouse development on building blocks under 1,800m2 in Precinct A, and two storey town house style development in precinct B, irrespective of land size.
Is a height limit of 9 meters (10 meters if the land is sloped) necessary for a two storey town house if it complies with the “preferred character”? A two storey building, with standard ceiling heights and flat roof, should only require a height of less than 7.5 meters.
Sharkey