Inadequate Setbacks
Summary: The Medium Density Residential Zone Code calls for the use of setbacks to protect amenity. The building tower is materially non-complaint with recommended setback benchmarks to the east, north and southern boundaries from level 8 (above 29m) upwards.
-
City Plan Setback Objectives: The Performance Outcome PO1 and the Overall Outcomes of the Medium Density Residential Zone Code require buildings to be setback from side and rear boundaries to protect the amenity of adjacent residences. The Performance Outcome prioritises the provision of setbacks using separation, rather than mitigating design features such screens and acoustic barriers.
The importance of setbacks are also reiterated through the High Rise Accommodation Design Code, with Performance Outcome PO5 and Overall Outcomes requiring development to mitigate negative visual and physical impacts through appropriate setbacks and design.
-
Proposed Tower Setbacks
The proposal allows approximately 7 metres of tower separation to the neighbouring development to the east (“Siarn”), the impacts of which are mitigated to a degree by the design of Siarn. Only 3.5 metres separates the tower to the northern boundary.
On the western portion of the site, fronting the Gold Coast Highway, most of the ground level landscaping including trees, and part of the recreation pool deck area encroaches into the future road widening setback area. Post resumption, the building will be setback between 2-4 metres from the Gold Coast Highway corridor. This is a non compliant, poor future outcome for residents and will result in the east elevation of the development being excessively dominant to the street with little softening landscaping.
The development has proceeded to public notification without SARA’s final response to the issues associated with the proposal encroaching into the setback zone to hand. -
Impacts of Narrow Setbacks:
-
Overbearing form that feels oppressive for nearby properties.
-
Insufficient space to support tall screening plants and trees.
-
Overlooking and privacy issues, in particular to the northern boundary.
-
Conclusion: The northern setback does not protect neighbouring amenity and may prevent reasonable amenity protection both now and should that site eventually be re-developed. The siting of landscaping and part of the recreation deck in a future resumption zone is an undeniably poor outcome for future inhabitants, the overall streetscape, and permitting these improvements may increase the cost of future resumption to taxpayers.