R Codes (WA) 5.2 Streetscape question

Hi
Can anyone explain the following Deemed To Comply clause?

C1.1 ii. to 3m where the garage allows vehicles to be parked parallel to the street. The wall parallel to the street must include openings.


I am looking at a way to reduce the 4.5m setback (r40) i need for the front property in a triplex grouped dwelling design. I am under the site coverage but all that front open space (16m x 4.5m) is making the design too small. Else i will build a car bay 1.5m from the boundary.

Thanks!!
 
Ok so entrance to said garage would come off common access leg and the garage would be 'in front' of the house.

To aid with surveillance (I assume) they want the garage not to be solid walls but some openings - this could probably be some visually permeable slats/mesh/laser cut work or an actual opening so it's more like a carport

Alternatively just use a carport which can be in the front setback and can have a door fitted to it if it's visually permeable - again see above. Like this

http://renovationperfection.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/IMG_1862-960x717.jpg
 
Ok so entrance to said garage would come off common access leg and the garage would be 'in front' of the house.

To aid with surveillance (I assume) they want the garage not to be solid walls but some openings - this could probably be some visually permeable slats/mesh/laser cut work or an actual opening so it's more like a carport

Alternatively just use a carport which can be in the front setback and can have a door fitted to it if it's visually permeable - again see above. Like this

http://renovationperfection.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/IMG_1862-960x717.jpg

I thought Carports and Garages must comply with the 4.5m primary setback and only carbays can be placed within the setback. Can you discuss why carports are allowed in the setback?
 
I thought Carports and Garages must comply with the 4.5m primary setback and only carbays can be placed within the setback. Can you discuss why carports are allowed in the setback?

Sure, it's because of my interpretation of 5.2.1 Setback of garages and carports

C1.5 Carports within the street setback area in accordance with clause
5.1.2 C2.1iii provided that the width of the carport does not exceed 50 per cent of the frontage at the building line and the construction allows an unobstructed view between the dwelling and the street, right-of-way or equivalent (refer to Figure 8a)

Vincent in particular have a policy that is quite good to allow people to put a carport in the front of a heritage type house as when they were built there were no provisions for parking.
 
Side on they can be reduced to 3m - says so.

setbacks are 4.5m if the garage is forward of the house, but if the garage is behind the house by 0.5m or more it can come forward of 4.5m as per the figure series at the back of the r codes. But if it's on the boundary then you're limited by your boundary wall primary street setback.

just can't remember which figure it was.
 
^ but as the setbacks for R40 are 4m it won't help much will it?

I'd do a side on garage (or carport) and use the space next to it as the 4 x 5 courtyard.
 
Side on they can be reduced to 3m - says so.

setbacks are 4.5m if the garage is forward of the house, but if the garage is behind the house by 0.5m or more it can come forward of 4.5m as per the figure series at the back of the r codes. But if it's on the boundary then you're limited by your boundary wall primary street setback.

just can't remember which figure it was.

Thanks, so carports and garages can be 3m setback where they run parallel to the street (eg access from a common driveway). Myf has a good point, it does not say if this overrides the setbacks. I would have thought it would say "For R50 and greater: Garages set back 4.5m from the primary street except that the setback may be reduced:"
 
Okay - it's Figure 2c as attached.

Setback to garage may be reduced providing it remains more than 0.5m behind the dwelling AND you maintain your averages.

Where this falls over is when the garage is on the boundary or the dwelling is on the boundary - because boundary walls can't come closer than the nominated primary street setback.

Good luck!
 

Attachments

  • Fig2c.jpg
    Fig2c.jpg
    61 KB · Views: 127
Thanks Aaron, i think i understand.

Does anyone know how this development was approved? The garage looks atleast 3m or closer to the boundary and its a solid wall with no openings?
6fb5t3.png
 
probably designed to come off the common access, and being open open on all four sides means it could come down to a min 1.5m setback with planning approval.

Then just re-orient the entry and hey presto.

*oh sorry - you meant the garage - those windows are the "openings" and side on it's probably down to the minimum - 2m possibly - with planning approval. But it looks like 3m - remember it's to the boundary, not the fence.
 
Back
Top