Page 3452 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
compliance with the solar envelope provisions mean the new dwelling will limit the overshadowing of adjoining residential blocks. This improvement with variation 306 is that 95 per cent of all single dwelling blocks must meet the requirements of the block compliance tables or be contained within an integrated housing development parcel. Under the previous residential subdivision development code just 75 per cent of detached residential blocks needed an energy rating of three stars or above.
Since the commencement of variation 306, issues have been raised by the building industry regarding the outcomes that have been observed. These issues include the supposed need for a house to be dug into a site—wedding cake styled homes—in order to comply with the solar envelope and that blocks have their longer boundaries facing east or west. As I have mentioned before to this Assembly, adherence to the solar envelope does not require garages or any other part of the house to be dug into a site. A block that meets the requirements of the compliance tables means it is capable of having a reasonable sized home on it.
If a house is sunk into the ground it can be for a variety of reasons such as digging until the foundations can sit on a rock, catering for a garage to be located below living areas or that the design of the house is not appropriate to the slope of the site. The Estate Development Code allows for blocks to have their longer side to the north but also allows the northern boundary to face the street or rear yard. This delivers a good outcome for the residents. I do not deny that a long northern boundary enables a house to have a greater amount of northern glazing. However unless the house is on a wide block, it needs to be acknowledged that this creates a narrow open space area that relates to the living area and it is often not suitable on sloping sites.
New greenfield estates will be developed on steeper land than in many established areas. For this reason a different way of approaching estate development is needed as is a new approach to building designs. Industry could also look to provide better information to homebuyers about choosing the appropriate block to suit a particular size and type of house. If the longer boundary of a block faces north, the blocks need to be wider to avoid overshadowing the neighbours. If the longer boundary faces east or west, a house is still able to be positioned with a northerly aspect. This also enables a comfortably proportioned open space area to be located directly to the north of the living areas in the front or rear yard. That is not necessarily as achievable when north is to the side. Another advantage of living areas having a northern front facade is that it promotes passive surveillance of the street and encourages a stronger relationship with the public realm.
Mr Coe in his motion fails to acknowledge that there was and still is strong community support for the initiatives that were introduced with variation 306. The community has embraced the policies that were introduced with variation 306, particularly the solar access policies. These were moderate and sensible policies which built largely on provisions which previously existed.
I cannot support Mr Coe’s motion. With that, I have circulated an amendment to that motion, and I now move:
Omit all words after “notes”, substitute:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video