Highgate WA: R80 Project #2

[westminster]

Who wants to see the plans?

These haven't gone to Council so are likely to change but this is pretty much what I'm happy with bar a few tweaks like doors to WIR.

I need to implement some planter boxes etc to liven it up a bit and think about landscaping ideas for the courtyards etc,

 

[Blacky]

Who wants to see the plans?

These haven't gone to Council so are likely to change but this is pretty much what I'm happy with bar a few tweaks like doors to WIR.

I need to implement some planter boxes etc to liven it up a bit and think about landscaping ideas for the courtyards etc,

I do. I do...

 

[Brady]

me too pics please

 

[Ryangler]

Also keen to grab a look... Thanks

 

[westminster]

Ok I forgot that I needed to take off my identifying items.

All sanitised now

Welcome to Housing for Rich Hipsters Beards, flanelette shirts, retro glasses and mason jars compulsory

 

[bryn]

I'll have unit A thanks . I notice a small typo in the middle floors- both unit B & C are called unit B.

 

[Brady]

Thanks for sharing, looks cool...

Still have no idea of things to look for though

Are you changing ensuit access to Unit B Bedroom 2 like you have for Unit B?

 

[westminster]

Update:

Since I stopped tweaking the plans it went into Estimating and has come out today.

Grand total 2.037m. Let's call it 2

This is good as my last back of the envelope calcs was 2m.

Sums?

1m land
2m construction and all associated fees inc demo, headworks blah blah
100k holding and contingency
total 3.1m

Current estimated value from REA is $1m each. He's hopeful of more but we don't work on hope we work on good solid reality

Gross profit should be 29%

Plenty can happen in the market between now and when they finish so at the moment it's belly button fluff in the navel gazing.

 

[Shaz331]

hummm.... just looked over the plans that you posted (which are fantastic by the way!) and noticed that you made a change to unit c 2nd level
so when you open the ensuite door from bed 2 - you look straight at the toilet.

are you sure this is a good idea?

toilets are usually tucked away out of sight for a reason - you dont want to be lay in bed looking at the toilet (or worse yet looking at the hubby on the toilet cause he's too lazy to shut the door!!!)

just food for thought

 

[westminster]

Thanks Shaz I'll look into that.

 

[westminster]

A nothing much update.

I have done my PPA paperwork and all the DA Council submission stuff is almost finished so it can be lodged very soon for DA.

 

[westminster]

Well DA was lodged today. The waiting game begins.

 

[westminster]

Well in speedy timeliness my application has had a town planner assigned, assessed and letter sent to us seeking clarification on items which they deem NOT to comply.

The letter arrived today when I was at the builders so we read it together. There were around 8 points I think and we had a discussion on those that can be fixed, those that can be justified and those which can't be met.

 

[westminster]

Ammendments were made and it went back to Council and we are now at Community Consultation stage where neighbour and general riff raff get 14 days to object, support or ask questions about the project.

Practically zooming along

 

[Demoivre]

Ammendments were made and it went back to Council and we are now at Community Consultation stage where neighbour and general riff raff get 14 days to object, support or ask questions about the project.

Practically zooming along

Congratulations mate. Don't think your on your P's anymore

 

[Brady]

Always nice to be getting traction. Keep it up.

Agreed off the P's

 

[westminster]

Community consultation summaries came back last week and were a laugh/cry type objections.

Based on the changes previously made for council they also requested a couple more things - move a garage door so that it's 750mm from boundary to meet visual truncation site lines and recess the letterbox for Unit A so it doesn't protrude onto footpath.

Amended plans went back yesterday for the council matters.

Most of the community objections were about perceived overlooking issues and as the design complies withe Rcodes in this respect they won't be changed.

The other HOT topic was the design having garages off the laneway. I was surprised at this as that is what a laneway is for. One person said 'the impact of 4 double garages along the laneway will greatly impact traffic noise and impede safe pedestrian passage along the laneway'. I always considered parking on a laneway to be the safest option as it stops people reversing out and over pedestrian footpaths at the front - safer for pedestrians, cyclists, traffic and increases the amount of street parking along the front as there are no driveway crossovers. I wasn't aware that people consider a laneway to be a glorified footpath.

Anyway. It's gone back in and we shall see what happens next. I have to say City of Vincent are very responsive which is great for me the developer. They give a deadline for every time they expect something back which many councils don't so it goes back to the designer and may sit in a queue until it can be looked at. Vincent give you 7 or 14 days depending on what they want. Everything is forced along nicely

 

[westminster]

And here is what Vincent has assessed the project as complying and not complying and the plans that were used in community consultation

Originally the plan was to not build onto the Southern border but Council wanted greater setback from the laneway and it made the ground floor living areas far too small so it had to go onto the Souther border. This did mean that we had to do community consultation which wasn't required if we only built up to boundary on one border

 

[westminster]

Well a few minor issues were tweaked after community consultation mainly due to requests by Council.

Then it was to go to the Council meeting this month for approval. Town Planning do a write up for the Councillors on where is doesn't comply and give a recommendation for approval or refusal and the Councillors vote and have final say.

Well........ my designer received a call today from Town Planning saying that it was probably going to be recommended as a refusal based on the scale of the project. By scale he is referring to height and possibly the % of that the site that is developed.

I am a little flabbergasted at the moment as it complies with practically all of their Town Planning Scheme with a small amount of discretion on 1-2 things which aren't related to scale.

The height of the project is 2 storeys plus loft and is under the height restrictions and it complies with the site coverage set. It doesn't overshadow neighbours more than is allowed.

Sooooo he would like to internally refer the project to the Design Advisory Committee which is normally for apartments to see what they say. So now we are doing that on the 18th March.

Little frustrated that this topic wasn't raised at any stage.

 

[sanj]

That's pretty bloody poor. Sounds like the planner wants an extra layer of **** covering in case the local nimbys act up. Bringing in the dac for grouped dwellings is ridiculous imo