NOTICE PAPER
Monday 20 April 2015 at 7pm
Council Chamber, Stonnington City Centre,
(enter off Glenferrie Road, Malvern)
RECONCILIATION STATEMENT
We acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional land of the Boonwurrung and Wurundjeri
people and offer our respects to the elders past and present. We recognise and respect the
cultural heritage of this land.
PRAYER
Almighty God, we humbly beseech you, to grant your blessing on this Council, direct and prosper
its deliberations to the advancement of your glory, and the true welfare of the people of the City of
Stonnington. Amen.
NOTE
Council business is conducted in accordance with Part 4 Division 3 of the Meeting Procedure
section of Council’s General Local Law 2008 (No 1). Some copies are available with the agenda or
you can find a copy on Council’s website www.stonnington.vic.gov.au under local laws.
Page 2
Council Meeting
Notice Paper
Monday 20 April 2015
Order of Business and Index
a)
Reading of the Reconciliation Statement and Prayer
b)
Apologies
c)
Adoption and confirmation of minutes of previous meeting(s) in accordance with Section 63
of the Act and Clause 423 of General Local Law 2008 (No 1)
1.
MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON 30 M ARCH 2015 AND 13 APRIL 2015 ........................... 5
d)
Disclosure by Councillors of any conflicts of interest in accordance with Section 79 of the Act1
e)
Questions to Council from Members of the Public
f)
Correspondence – (only if related to council business)
g)
h)
Questions to Council Officers from Councillors
Tabling of Petitions and Joint Letters
i)
Notices of Motion
j)
k)
Reports of Special and Other Committees; - Assembly of Councillors
Reports by Delegates
l)
General Business
1.
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0451/14- 383 WATTLETREE ROAD, MALVERN EAST - THE
PROPOSAL SEEKS TO CONSTRUCT A THREE STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING WITH BASEMENT CAR
PARK, COMPRISING 10 APARTMENTS, AND A CAR PARKING WAIVER FOR ONE VISITOR SPACE ............... 7
2.
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0473/14 - 523 ORRONG ROAD, ARMADALE - CONSTRUCTION OF
A FOUR STOREY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................31
3.
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0079/14 - 11 TASHINNY ROAD, TOORAK - CONSTRUCTION OF
TWO DWELLINGS ON A LOT WITHIN A GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE ....................................................51
4.
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0735/14 – 616-618 WARRIGAL ROAD, MALVERN EAST –
CONSTRUCTION OF A FIVE STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING SHOP AT GROUND
LEVEL AND 13 DWELLINGS ABOVE ...................................................................................................71
5.
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0273/14 - 663 663A 665 667 669 & 691 MALVERN ROAD,
TOORAK – CONSTRUCTION OF A PART FIVE, PART SIX STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING
CONTAINING 18 APARTMENTS ABUTTING MALVERN ROAD AND 17 TWO AND THREE STOREY
TOWNHOUSES TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE .......................................................................................87
6.
DRAFT CULTURAL DIVERSITY POLICY 2015-2019 .........................................................................119
7.
AMENDMENT C184 - PUBLIC ACQUISITION OVERLAY, PRAHRAN - CONSIDERATION OF
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING PANEL AND ADOPTION ......................................................123
8.
AMENDMENT C212 - M ALVERN ROAD BURKE ROAD NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY CENTRE
PLANNING CONTROLS ..................................................................................................................129
9.
AMENDMENT C215 BURKE ROAD LEVEL CROSSING REMOVAL PROJECT INCORPORATED
DOCUMENT ..................................................................................................................................135
1
Note that s.79(1)(a) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a conflict of interest
immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion.
Page 3
10.
CONSIDERATION OF DONATION TO BAIRO PITE CLINIC ...................................................................141
11.
SOCIAL JUSTICE DISCUSSION PAPER ............................................................................................ 143
m)
Other General Business
n)
Urgent Business
o)
Confidential Business
1.
CIVIC PRECINCT PROJECT - CONSTRUCTION TENDER REPORT ....................................................... 147
Page 4
ADOPTION AND CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
20 APRIL 2015
RECOMMENDATION
That the Council confirms the Minutes of the Council Meeting of the Stonnington City
Council held on 30 March 2015 and 13 April 2015 as an accurate record of the proceedings.
Page 5
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
l)
General Business
1
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0451/14- 383 WATTLETREE ROAD, MALVERN EAST THE PROPOSAL SEEKS TO CONSTRUCT A THREE STOREY APARTMENT BUILDING WITH
BASEMENT CAR PARK, COMPRISING 10 APARTMENTS, AND A CAR PARKING WAIVER
FOR ONE VISITOR SPACE
Statutory Planning Manager: Alexandra Kastaniotis
General Manager Planning & Development: Stuart Draffin
PURPOSE
For Council to consider a planning application for the construction of a three storey (plus
basement) apartment building at 383 Wattletree Road, Malvern East.
Executive Summary
Applicant:
Ward:
Zone:
Overlay:
Date lodged:
Statutory days (as at
Council meeting):
Trigger for referral to
Council:
VCAT Hearing Date
Cultural Heritage Plan:
Number of objections:
Consultative Meeting:
Officer Recommendation:
Eastrise Construction
C/- Urbis Pty Ltd
East
General Residential Zone (Schedule 3)
None
10 June 2014
85 days
More than 7 objections
11 May 2015 (4 days)
No
26 (6 Statements of grounds)
Yes – held on 6 November 2014
That Council advise VCAT that had a Failure to Determine
appeal not been lodged, a Notice of Decision to Grant a
Planning Permit would have been issued
BACKGROUND
The Proposal
The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Christopher
Doyle Architects and are known as Job No. 14-03, Drawing No.s: PD01 – PD35 and Council
date stamped 20 March 2015.
Amended plans supersede the advertised plans and detail the following changes;


The revised basement plan details the alteration of the plant room to an additional
storage area.
The ground floor of the building now incorporates an indentation of 700mm at the
centre of the front facade of the building to improve the level of articulation.
Page 7
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015











Apartment No.1, No. 2, and No.9 are now three bedroom dwellings (originally 2
bedroom dwellings), resulting in a change to the apartment make up (from 10 x 2
bedroom dwellings to 7 x 2 bedroom dwellings and 3 x 3 bedroom dwellings).
Increased ground side setbacks (from 1.87m to 2m), and the eastern setback of the
kitchen wall to Apartment No.3 increased to 3.5m, to protect the Port Jackson Fig. The
rear (north) ground floor setbacks increased to 5m and 6.675m.
The eastern and western ground floor boundary walls reduced to an average height of
3.2 metres.
Reduced areas of paving and increased provision of planting to the eastern and
western setbacks.
Increased first floor eastern and western side setbacks (from 1.87m to 2m, and 2.57m
to 3.5m), and an increased rear (north) setback of 3.12m to 6m (to the building plain)
and 4.4m the balconies.
The second floor apartments (No.9 & No.10) are now located beneath a mansard roof
element, to achieve compliance with Standard B17 of Clause 55.
The second floor eastern and western side setbacks increased from 4.87 to 5m, and
from 4.87m to 6.85m for the terrace to Apartment No. 10, and from 2.57m to 2.97m for
the terrace to Apartment No. 9. The rear (north) setback increased from 7.05m &
7.92m to 9.1m.
The overall building height has been reduced by 980mm to 10.57 metres (from 11.55
metres).
Site coverage has been reduced from 591 square metres to 565 square metres (60%
reduced to 58%).
Site permeability increased from 25% to 26%.
Reduction in apartment floor space by 65 square metres across the development.
Key features of the proposal are:










Demolition of the existing dwelling (no permit required).
Construct a three storey apartment building with basement car park. The apartment
building comprises 10 dwellings (7 x 2 bedroom dwellings and 3 x 3 bedroom
dwellings), with four dwellings located at the ground floor and first floor, and two
dwellings located at the third floor.
All dwellings have an open plan kitchen, living room, and dining room layout. The
ground floor dwellings have access to courtyards, where as the first floor and second
floor dwellings are provided with balconies. Secluded Private Open Space areas range
from 95 square metres to 8 square metres.
The basement car park contains a total of 21 car spaces; 20 resident car spaces and 1
visitor car space. The proposal requires a variation of one visitor car space. Vehicle
access to the basement will be provided via the rear laneway, the existing crossover
located on Wattletree Road is proposed to be reinstated.
A central pedestrian entry point is provided at the Wattletree Road frontage.
The apartment building will have a total height of 10.57 metres (measured from the
north elevation).
The apartment building has a minimum front setback of 8.9 metres and is setback off
all boundaries, excluding a portion of the east and western ground floor walls (located
over 10 metres from the front facade of the building.
Proposed external materials include rendered brickwork (natural grey colour), face
brickwork, colourbond roof, with aluminium window frames.
A front fence is proposed to be setback from the front boundary by a 1 metre wide
garden bed. The fence will be 2.28 metres in height and constructed out of iron pickets
with brick pillars.
The proposal does not involve the removal of any significant vegetation.
Page 8
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Site and Surrounds
The site is located on the northern side of Wattletree Road in Malvern East. The site has the
following significant characteristics:




The site is zoned General Residential Zone (Schedule 3) and is not affected by any
overlays.
The site is regular in shape with a frontage of 21.34 metres, a depth of 45.72 metres,
and an area of 975 square metres.
The site contains a double storey dwelling with pitched roof, detached garage,
swimming pool, single crossover to Wattletree Road, and rear access via the laneway,
a medium height front fence, and a number of small trees located along part of the
northern boundary.
The site has a fall of approximately 0.44 metres from front to rear.
The immediate surrounds are described as follows;




No. 385 Wattletree Road, Malvern East is located to the east of the site and comprises
a double storey contemporary dwelling with pitched roof, attached garage, swimming
pool to the rear, high permeable front fence, and vehicle access via Wattletree Road
and the rear laneway. Vegetation is located along the western boundary, including a
large Port Jackson Fig to the rear of the site.
No. 4 Kingston Street, Malvern East is located to the west of the subject site and
contains a double storey dwelling with pitched roof, swimming pool to the rear, a
number of larger trees, and a high solid front and boundary fence, with access provided
via a crossover to Kingston Street. A current application (reference 1131/14) for the
development of a three storey development (plus basement car park) at the site is on
advertising.
Adjacent to the subject site and to the north of the rear laneway lie No. 4 Irymple
Avenue and No. 6 Irymple Avenue, Malvern East. No. 4 Irymple Avenue, Malvern East
contains a single storey dwelling with pitched roof, carport to the front and a garage to
the rear of the site, and vehicle access to both the rear laneway and Irymple Avenue.
No. 6 Irymple Avenue contains a double storey contemporary dwelling with pitched roof
attached garage with access provided via Irymple Avenue.
Central Park Reserve, a Council owned park, is located adjacent to the subject site to
the south of Wattletree Road.
The surrounding land is characterised by a mix of single and double storey dwellings with
generous areas of private open space to the front and rear. Some examples of multi-dwelling
developments are evident within the surrounding streets and works for a three storey multidwelling development (approved under Planning Permit 503/12) at No. 379 Wattletree Road,
Malvern East are currently underway, and a development for a three storey multi-dwelling
development at No. 4 Kingston Street is currently being assessed (Planning Application
1131/14). A clear dominant architectural style is not easily identified. The majority of
dwellings are setback off most or all boundaries. Many of the roads within the surrounding
area, such as Nott Street and Erica Street, are notable for their established street trees. The
site is located approximately 140 metres from the corner of Wattletree Road and Burke Road
intersection which is identified as being a small neighbourhood activity centre. Commercial
buildings and uses are located to the east of Irymple Avenue and further along Burke Road.
Page 9
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Previous Planning Application(s)
A search of Council records indicates that no relevant planning applications have been
submitted for the subject site.
Planning Permit 503/12, issued at the direction of VCAT, for No. 379 Wattletree Road,
Malvern East authorises a three storey (plus basement car park) apartment building
comprising 12 dwellings. The order makes reference to higher density developments
incorporating a range of dwelling types being encouraged where a site has a main road
location, with good access to public transport, and close proximity to a neighbourhood
activity centre. The building will have a total height of 11.18 metres.
Planning Application 1131/14, has been lodged for No. 4 Kingston Street, Malvern East and
proposes a three storey (plus basement car park) apartment building comprising 13
dwellings, the building has a proposed total height of 10.8 metres. Further information has
been submitted by the applicant and the application will be advertised in due course.
The Title
The site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 03621 Folio 138 as lot 8 on Plan of
Subdivision and no covenants or easements affect the land. The subject site has a right of
carriageway and drainage to the rear laneway.
Planning Controls
The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:
Zone
Clause 32.08 General Residential Zone
(Schedule 3 - Residential Boulevards & Corridors)
Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on the lot.
Schedule 3 introduces a mandatory maximum height of 12 metres (plus 1.2 metres for a lift
overrun), and additional requirements to Standard B6, B17, and B18 of Clause 55. A
development must meet the requirements of Clause 55.
A declaration to amend the application, following the submission of plans and documents
responding to Council’s request for further information, was submitted on 20 August 2014.
Therefore transitional provisions afforded to applications submitted prior to the change in
zone (19 June 2014) do not apply.
Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06 Car Parking
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2 prior to a new use commencing or a new building being
occupied, the car spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land or as
approved under Clause 52.06-3 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-3 a permit may be granted to reduce (including reduce to zero) the
requirement to provide the number of car parking spaces required under this clause.
The table at Clause 52.06-5 states one car space is required for each one to two bedroom
dwelling, two spaces for each three bedroom dwelling, and one visitor space is required to
each 5 dwellings for developments of 5 or more dwellings. The proposal generates a
requirement of 13 resident spaces and 2 visitor spaces. The basement comprises 20
resident car spaces (two spaces allocated per dwelling) and 1 visitor space, the provision is
Page 10
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
in excess of the standard requirements for residents and requires a reduction of one visitor
space.
Clause 52.34 Bicycle Facilities
Pursuant to Clause 52.34-1, a new use must not commence until the required bicycle
facilities and associated signage are provided on the land. Given the development is less
than four storeys, the requirements of this clause are not applicable.
Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings
Given Clause 32.01-4 is triggered an assessment against Clause 55 is required.
Relevant Planning Policies
Clause 11
Clause 15
Clause 16
Clause 21.03
Clause 21.05
Clause 21.06
Clause 22.18
Clause 32.08
Clause 52.06
Clause 55
Clause 65
Settlement
Built Environment and Heritage
Housing
Vision
Housing
Built Environment and Heritage
Stormwater Management; Water Sensitive Urban Design
General Residential Zone (Schedule 3)
Car Parking
Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings
Decision Guidelines
Amendment C175 – Neighbourhood Character Local Policy
Amendment C175 has been prepared to introduce a new Neighbourhood Character Policy
into the local section of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. The Neighbourhood Character
local planning policy includes the preferred character statements, design objectives and
design responses to be taken from the precinct profiles. This policy will clarify the preferred
neighbourhood character for an area and assist in ensuring that a development proposal
respects and reinforces the preferred character.
Council received the Panel Report on 26 November 2014, which recommends that the
Amendment be adopted as exhibited subject to minor modifications. As a result, Amendment
C175 has reached a stage that it can be considered as a seriously entertained planning
policy. Due consideration should be given to the proposed Neighbourhood Character Policy.
According to the Amendment, the subject site falls within a Garden Suburban Precinct
(Schedule 4) (“GS4”). An assessment against the Neighbourhood Character Policy will be
provided below.
Advertising
The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment
Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land (and by placing
two signs on the site). The public notification of the application has been completed
satisfactorily.
The site is located in the East Ward and objections from 26 different properties have been
received. The objections are summarised as follows;

Traffic safety, traffic generation, and parking concerns.

Amenity impacts associated with overshadowing from the proposed building.

Non-compliance with ResCode in relation to the upper floors and associated visual bulk
impacts.
Page 11
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015














Building height and non-compliance with the mandatory maximum height requirement
of 12 metres.
Lack of consistency with the existing neighbourhood character.
Impact on the health of the Port Jackson Fig located within No. 385 Wattletree Road.
The owner of No. 385 Wattletree Road has submitted an arborist report prepared by
John Fordham of Horticultural Services which assesses the potential impact of the
development on the vegetation within No. 385 Wattletree Road.
Amenity impacts to No. 385 Wattletree Road, Malvern East, including overlooking to
the front and rear yards and west facing bathroom windows, overshadowing, visual
bulk impacts.
Potential impact of the basement on the structural integrity of the dwelling at No. 385
Wattletree Road.
The proposed development has been designed to maximise profit without proper
consideration of the impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood.
Noise pollution, air pollution, and flooding risks increased due to the proposed
development.
The proposal does not comply with a number of ResCode Objectives, such as site
coverage, side and rear setbacks, overshadowing and overlooking.
Overlooking to the rear open space of No. 8 Irymple Avenue and No. 4 Irymple
Avenue.
Inconsistency with the heritage overlay which affects the properties to the southern
side of Wattletree Road.
Light spill to No. 4 Irymple Avenue.
Waste management.
Demolition of the existing house and impact on existing character of the area.
Impact of development on local fauna.
A Consultative Meeting was held on 6 November 2014. The meeting was attended by
Councillors McMorrow, and Stubbs, objectors and a Council planning officer. The applicant
did not attend. The meeting did not result in any changes to the plans.
It is noted however that the applicant has submitted amended plans, Council date stamped
20 March 2015, which supersede the advertised plans.
Referrals
Transport and Parking
Comments were provided on 5 September 2014 in relation to the Traffic Impact Report (TIR)
Council date stamped 10 June 2014, and revised plans and additional information Council
date stamped 08 August 2014. The amended plans, Council date stamped 20 March 2015
detail the provision of one visitor car space and do not change the dimensions or setbacks of
the basement.
Parking provision;

The amended proposal now incorporates three x 3 bedroom dwellings and seven x 2
bedroom dwellings which requires the provision of 13 resident car spaces and 2 visitor
car spaces. The amended plans detail a total of 21 car spaces; 20 for residents and
one visitor space.

Comments recommended that due to the excess of car parking spaces that two of the
spaces be reallocated for visitor use.
Page 12
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Traffic generation;

The traffic generated by the proposed development is unlikely to have a significant
impact on the surrounding road network. The Traffic Impact Report estimates that there
will be six (6) vehicle trips per hour, for residents of the proposed 10 dwellings.
Car parking/access design;

The car parking design (access ways, car parking spaces, and gradients) is considered
satisfactory.

The proposed number of spaces and for bicycle parking for this development is
considered satisfactory. However, manufacturers’ specifications for the visitor bicycle
parking arrangement are required for review.

The existing vehicle crossing on Wattletree Road should be removed, and kerb and
channel reinstated to the satisfaction of Council.
Landscape
Initial comments are based on the advertised plans (including a proposed Landscape Plan
prepared by Christopher Doyle, Council Stamped 25 August 2015), and a Landscape Plan
prepared by Urbis and Council date stamped 08 August 2014. Further comments have been
provided in relation to amended plans that detail an increased building setback from the Port
Jackson Fig located within No. 385 Wattletree Road, Malvern East.
Initial comments;





No Significant trees are located within the site boundaries.
A significant Ficus rubiginosa (Port Jackson Fig) is located directly adjacent to the
eastern boundary of the subject site. This tree appears in good health, and is a
significant feature of the surrounding landscape. The basement excavation has been
scheduled to occur outside the listed SRZ of 3.1m, but actual construction works are
shown as close as 1.87m from the boundary. This level of works opposite the tree
would not be supported given the encroachment into the TPZ of this specimen.
A mature Pittosporum eugenoides (Lemon Wood) is located directly south of the Port
Jackson Fig. This specimen contributes to the vegetative screen between the 2
properties, in particular to the rear private open space of 385 Wattletree Road. This
tree has been incorrectly labelled in the submitted Galbraith report as the
environmental weed Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum).
Additional tree specimens will most likely be affected within both 385 Wattletree Road
& 4 Kingston Street with the proposed construction of new dwelling walls along the
eastern and western boundaries of the proposal. Council’s Arborist has since advised
that as the additional trees referred to are not significant, and it is recommended that
the applicant consult the owners prior to construction.
Landscape plan; confirmation regarding which landscape plan is to be considered,
furthermore both plans proposed in situ tree planting even though suitable in-ground
planting space is available. It must be clear what is intended to be planted in-ground,
and what is to be in situ.
Comments provided in relation to amended plans;


Previous pruning of the western section of the upper crown of the Port Jackson Fig will
see it not requiring any further work if the built form is 3.5m from the boundary.
The applicant’s aborist report states that it is impossible to be sure without exploratory
excavation that a setback of 4 metres, preferably more, free of any excavation will be
required for a large length opposite the fig. The applicant has increased the ground
Page 13
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
floor setback of the building and basement to 4.2 metres opposite the fig, however
exploratory excavation does not appear to have been undertaken.
Urban Design
Comments are based on the advertised plans. Concerns were raised in relation to landscape
setting, visual bulk and streetscape integration.
Landscape setting;

The proposal crowds the site interfaces with the two adjacent neighbouring properties
and does not provide sufficient space for the planting of deep soil canopy trees. The
side setbacks to the external faces of the basement are not properly dimensioned; and
they do not appear to take into account the full impact of the likely width of the
basement retaining structure.

New and larger apartment developments must be designed to be integrated within an
appropriately sized landscape setting. The purpose behind this objective is to reinforce
(or, in some cases, repair) the landscape character of the neighbourhood, and to
provide an on-site landscape amenity for residents of new higher-density apartment
developments.

It is recommended that the site setbacks are increased.
Visual bulk;

The side and rear setbacks result in the presentation of an excessive degree of visual
bulk to the private open spaces of the neighbouring properties to the north of the
laneway.
Streetscape integration;

The proposed width of the building crowds the side boundaries of the site and
noticeably lessens the existing rhythm of building spacing in the streetscape. A
narrower building form would address this issue.
Council’s Urban Designer has provided verbal comments advising that the reduced building
footprint, shown within amended plans Council date stamped 20 March 2015, sits more
comfortably within the streetscape setting and is an acceptable outcome from and Urban
Design perspective.
Environmentally Sustainable Design
Comments are provided in relation to the advertised proposal, and the submitted SMP
Council date stamped 08 August 2014.




The SMP indicates that shading structures such as extended eaves and retractable
awnings will be provided to the development. However, no east and west facing
elevations have been provided to confirm this. Applicant to provide relevant elevations
and ensure plans confirm location of proposed shading elements.
SMP indicates that high levels of daylight will be achieved within the development.
However, this cannot be confirmed as no east or west elevations appear to be included
with the application.
The SMP indicates that a 2.5kW photovoltaic system will be provided however the
location of the panels is not indicated on the plans, this needs to be addressed via a
condition
The SMP indicates that gas hot water and stove tops will be provided to all units, the
applicant is to confirm if individual metering for gas will also be provided to units.
Page 14
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015


The location, dimensions and annotation confirming rainwater tank connections to
internal toilets have not been indicated on plans. Applicant to modify this aspect. In
addition, roof plans must be modified to confirm drainage area to be connected to the
rainwater tank.
The completed STORM report indicates that paving and terrace areas above the
basement will drain to buffer strips. However, these have not been indicated on plans.
Landscape plan to be modified to confirm location of buffer strips and drainage slope
from terraces to the buffer strips. In addition, landscape plan to confirm that planting
types proposed are able to meet buffer strip requirements.
Waste
Comments are provided in relation to the advertised proposal. Concerns were raised in
relation to the ‘Preliminary Waste Management Plan’ (WMP) Council date stamped 8 August
2014. The concerns raised which must be addressed in a revised WMP are summarised
below;





The WMP does not respond adequately to the Stonnington Residential Waste
Management Guidelines.
Waste generation estimations have not been based on the standard Stonnington
allocations and therefore the proposed bin allocation does not comply with standard
requirements.
Bins must be presented for collection in front of the premises to which the bins are
allocated. Waste bins cannot be presented for collection in a neighbouring street.
Initiatives and actions must be included on how the development will contribute to the
outcomes of the Victorian State Government’s ‘Getting Full Value’.
The WMP should include advice that the Council’s Waste Collection & Disposal
Services Policy states every rateable tenement is liable to pay a garbage charge
irrespective of the level of waste collection services provided by Council to the
tenement.
Infrastructure
Comments are provided in relation to the advertised plans, however are still relevant to the
amended plans. Council’s Infrastructure Department has not raised any concerns relating to
the proposed development and requires standard conditions to be included on the permit.
The standard conditions regarding drainage design, maintaining the levels of the rear right of
way, and re-instating the redundant vehicle crossing.
KEY ISSUES
Strategic Justification
The purpose of the General Residential Zone (Schedule 3) is to implement State and Local
Planning Policies, to encourage development that respects the existing neighbourhood
character, to implement neighbourhood policy, provide diversity of housing and moderate
housing growth in locations offering good access to services and transport. The State
Planning Policy Framework encourages higher density development located in or close to
activity centres, employment corridors and public transport. In addition, local policies call for
well-designed medium density housing that respects neighbourhood character, improves
housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency of
housing.
Page 15
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Having regard to the policies, provisions and decision guidelines of the Stonnington Planning
Scheme and the context of the subject site and its surrounds, it is considered that the
proposed development is consistent with the strategic directions of the State and Local
Policy Framework, in particular Clause 11 (Settlement), Clause 16.01 (Residential
Development), Clause 21.03 (Vision for the City), Clause 21.05 (Housing) and Clause 21.06
(Built Environment and Heritage).
The proposal seeks to construct 10 dwellings in a well serviced location within the
municipality. The location of the proposed development satisfies the strategies set out in
Clause 16.01-2 (Location of residential development) which encourages ‘higher density
development on sites that are well located in relation to activity centres, employment
corridors and public transport’. The site is located on Wattletree Road which is identified
within Clause 21.03 as being a priority tram route, and is located approximately 140 metres
(as the crow flies) from the small neighbourhood activity centre located at the Bourke Road
and Wattletree Road intersection. The site is identified, pursuant to Clause 21.05-2 (Location
of residential development) as being within a Substantial Change Area due to the immediate
abuttal to a main road within a priority tram route. Clause 21.05 (Housing) directs medium
and higher density housing to Substantial Change Areas.
Clause 21.06 (Built Environment and Heritage) sets out a number of key issues, objectives
and strategies relating to the built environment and heritage of the municipality. These key
issues, set out within Clause 21.06, are the overall urban structure, landscape character,
amenity, built form character, public realm and pedestrian areas, solar access and wind
protection, noise and air quality, energy, water and waste efficiency, designing for safety,
universal access and social inclusion, and heritage.
The objective of Clause 21.06-2 (Landscape character) is ‘to repair and reinforce the high
quality landscape character of the City’. Generally speaking Clause 21.06-2 encourages new
development to incorporate a designated landscape setting with substantial canopy
vegetation, adequate setbacks for sufficient planting of canopy trees, avoidance of excessive
site coverage within medium and higher density development, and planting appropriate to the
character of the area in front gardens and native (preferably indigenous) in rear gardens, to
enhance habitat values while also respecting the area’s character, amenity and European
heritage. The proposal incorporates adequate setbacks to allow for the planting of canopy
trees, particularly within the front setback to respond to the landscape character of the area
where established trees are a notable feature.
Clause 21.06-3 (Amenity) aims ‘to achieve high standards of amenity within new
developments, and with adjoining developments’. It is considered that the proposal provides
for a good level of internal amenity with all habitable room windows provided with direct
access to natural light, appropriate room dimensions, good internal layout and connections,
and adequate areas of private open space provided. Furthermore the proposal does not
result in unreasonable amenity impacts which will be discussed in more detail within the
Clause 55 assessment. Although the development will present as a substantial built form in
comparison to the existing development located at the site, it is considered acceptable in
light of the site context and the sufficient setbacks proposed.
Although the building is located partially on the east and west boundaries, it is limited to the
ground floor only. Furthermore the walls on boundaries are setback over 10 metres from the
front façade of the dwelling and will be largely obscured from the street frontage due to the
setback and provision of landscaping. Furthermore the setbacks at the upper levels are
considered acceptable and have been increased in comparison to the advertised proposal.
The increased setbacks help to reduce the visual bulk impacts to the properties located to
the east and west, and opposite the site to the north of the laneway.
Page 16
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Clause 21.06-4 (Built form character) aims to provide new development that does not
undermine the valued character of the City, to promote good design in all new developments,
ensuring the integration of new development with its surrounds, and to promote special
protection for areas of highly consistent character. Although the architectural design is not
one that is generally seen within the area, the scale and setbacks are reasonable when
considering the strategic direction for medium and higher density developments at the
subject site. Furthermore, although detached single and double storey dwellings, with
generous areas of private open space to the front and rear, make up part of the existing
character, it is likely that the character will change, particularly along Wattletree Road due to
strategic support for higher density developments.
It is considered that the subject site has strategic support for higher density development.
The location is appropriate for urban consolidation and provides an opportunity for increased
housing choice. It is considered that the proposed development satisfactorily addresses
policy objectives of urban consolidation, streetscape character, household diversity, building
form and landscape character and is responsive to its context.
Notwithstanding the general assessment, detailed consideration must be given to how the
proposal specifically responds to the neighbourhood character, design and residential
amenity. These are discussed further below.
Clause 55
Neighbourhood Character/ Design Detail
As discussed above the existing character is mixed, however a dominant feature includes the
single storey and double storey detached dwellings, with large areas of private open space. It
is noted that although these features make up the existing character, Wattletree Road, being
a Substantial Change Area, it is anticipated that the development character will undergo
notable change. The design includes a 9 metre front setback, allowing the planting of
vegetation to integrate the development with the street, and to respond to the existing
landscape character. Furthermore the development involves an indentation at the mid
section of the front facade at all levels to improve the presentation of the development to the
street. As discussed above the ground floor eastern and western boundary walls are
considered acceptable due to their setback from the front facade, furthermore the walls will
not significantly impact the amenity of the adjoining properties (to be discussed further
against the Standard B18 assessment). The rear setback of the building has been increased,
in comparison to the advertised proposal, to reduce the visual bulk impacts to the
surrounding properties, particularly to No. 4 & No. 6 Irymple Avenue. The setback to the rear
eastern corner of the site, to accommodate the retention of the Port Jackson Fig within No.
385 Wattletree Road also reduces the impact of the building when viewed from the rear yard
of No. 385 Wattletree Road.
Amendment C175 identifies the area as the Garden Suburban 4 Precinct (GS4). The
preferred future character for the GS4 comprises spacious and leafy streetscapes with
Edwardian, Interwar or Post‐war era and new buildings set in established garden surrounds.
Regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for canopy trees.
New buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while
complementing the key aspects of building form, one‐two storey scale and design detail of
the older dwellings in the precinct. Low or permeable front fences retain views to gardens
and buildings from the street. GS4 also states that Substantial Change areas will
accommodate more dwelling developments with a slightly more compact setting but with
space for canopy trees and other vegetation and high quality, responsive design. It is
considered that the proposed building responds to the preferred future character statement
Page 17
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
by incorporating adequate setbacks, suitable areas for landscaping, permeable fencing, and
an appropriate graduation from double storey to three storey development.
The proposed front fence with a maximum height of 2.28 metres (not including the feature
elements) requires a variation of 0.28 metres to Standard B32 of Clause 55.06-2 (Front
fences objective). The variation is considered acceptable as the fence is permeable and
softened further by the separation between to the street provided by a planter box. Fencing
within the immediate surrounds ranges in heights and styles, including a number of high solid
front fences. Furthermore the fencing does not detract from the good level of integration that
building has with the street, achieved with an orientation towards Wattletree Road and a
focal entry point.
Dwelling diversity
The proposal involves an appropriate mix of 7 x two bedroom dwellings, and 3 x three
bedroom dwellings.
Street setback
Standard B6 of Clause 55.03-1 (Street setback objective) prescribes a standard front setback
requirement of 9 metres for the subject site; the proposal requires a minor variation of 0.01
metres to the standard requirement with a front setback of 8.9 metres proposed. The
variation is minor and will not have a detrimental impact on the integration of the
development with the street. The front setback respects the existing character.
Building Height
The schedule to the zone introduces a mandatory maximum height of 12 metres (plus 1.2
metres for the lift overrun). The proposed building height of 10.16 metres (measured from the
north elevation) sits comfortably within the mandatory maximum requirements. The transition
from two storeys to three storeys is considered acceptable, due to the transition of only one
storey combined with the first floor and second floor side setbacks proposed. Furthermore
the rear setbacks ranging from 5 metres at the ground floor level, 4.4 metres to the balconies
and 6 metres to the building plane at the first floor level, and 4.4 metres to the second floor
balconies and 9.1 metres to the building plane responds appropriately to the properties to the
north of the laneway and the location of their secluded private open space areas.
Site Coverage
The proposal involves site coverage of 58% and a basement site coverage (including ramp)
of approximately 69%. Both site coverage and basement site coverage comply with the
standard requirements of 60% and 75% (respectively). The proposed site coverage is
respectful of the existing neighbourhood character, as it provides for acceptable areas of the
site that can be landscaped, particularly within in the front setback. Furthermore the extent of
the building footprint, combined with setbacks and landscaping, reduces the visual bulk
impacts to the surrounding properties.
Permeability
The proposal involves a permeability level of 25% which meets the standard 20%
permeability requirement. In conjunction with this, the development will be required to
respond to Clause 22.18 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme (Stormwater Management:
Water Sensitive Urban Design) further reducing any stormwater runoff.
Energy Efficiency
The proposed development has made appropriate use of daylight where possible. North
facing windows and balconies are provided to dwellings facing north, and east and west
facing habitable room windows have been incorporated to improve access to daylight. The
site is constrained by the north-south orientation, however all dwellings have access to direct
sunlight. The development has incorporated sustainability features such as solar panels to
Page 18
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
further decrease the dependency on fossil fuels. In any given instance, the Building
Regulations will require a 6 star energy efficiency rating. In addition the development will not
have a detrimental impact on the energy efficiency of the adjoining properties, as
overshadowing of habitable room windows and secluded private open spaces proposed is
not excessive, this will be discussed further below.
Landscaping
It is considered that the layout of the development allows opportunity for meaningful
landscaping, and the protection of the significant Port Jackson Fig within No. 385 Wattletree
Road can be addressed further via permit conditions. The proposed landscaping will
contribute to the existing landscape character of the area and soften views of the
development. The indicative landscaping plan incorporates the planting of canopy trees
within the front setback, and smaller trees/vegetation within the side setbacks and rear yards.
Two landscape plans were submitted with the application however neither have been
submitted with the VCAT amended plans, a permit condition will require a landscape plan to
be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
The landscape plans and Tree Report submitted with the application were reviewed by
Council’s Landscape Department. Council’s Landscape Department have also provided
comment in relation to the increased setback from the Port Jackson Fig. Initial comments
stated that the location of the basement may impact the health of the Port Jackson Fig,
further comments state that although the increased setback of 4.2 metres meets the
recommended minimum setback of 4 metres, it appears root exploration has not been
conducted. The setback of the basement (4.2 metres) and the building (minimum of 4.26
metres at the ground floor level) is slightly in excess of the recommended setback, however
without root exploration we cannot be certain that the development will not detrimentally
impact the Port Jackson Fig. As such a permit condition will ensure that prior to construction
root exploration is undertaken and inspected by a Council arborist, who will liaise with the
planning department regarding the location of the building. If significant root matter is
encountered it may necessitate the reconfiguration of the built form, or alternative
construction methods, within the affected area.
Amenity Impacts
Side and Rear Setbacks
Standard B17 (side and rear setbacks) sets out numeric requirements for side and rear
setbacks. Schedule 3 to the zone requires, in addition to the standard requirements, that for
a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front facade of the building, the building (including
basement) is setback a minimum of 2 metres from one site and 1 metre from the other side
boundary at a ground floor level. The proposal meets this requirement by proposing a
eastern and western ground floor setback of 2 metres for a distance of slightly over 10
metres from the front facade of the building, and a setback of 2.15 metres to the east and
west of the basement.
The ground floor boundary walls will be assessed against Standard B18.
The tables below illustrate how the proposal compares to the Standard B17 requirements;
Ground Floor
Orientation
North
East
Setback
Proposed
5 metres
2 metres to 3.5
Wall Height
Proposed
4.1 metres
6.49 metres, 6.81
Page 19
Setback
Required
1.15 metre
1.867 metres,
Compliance
Achieved?
Yes
Yes
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
metres
West
2 metres
metres, & 7.08
metres
4.11 metres to
6.87 metres
1.963 metres, &
2.17 metres
1.153 metres to
1.981 metres
2.23 metres
1.867 metres,
1.963 metres, &
2.17 metres
1.981 metres to
2.665 metres
Yes
Yes
Yes
No, variation of
.04 metres to
bedroom 1 (in
part) and the
living room of
Apartment 10
required.
No, variation of
0.93 metres for
kitchen and
bathroom wall of
Apartment 10
required
Yes
First Floor
North
East
6 metres
2 metres to 3.5
metres
West
2 metres to 3.5
metres
7.14 metres
6.81 metres, 6.49
metres, & 7.08
metres
6.87 metres to
7.575 metres
North
East
9.1 metres
3.5 metres to 5
metres
10.16 metres
6.81 metres to
9.95 metres
5.25 metres
1.963 metres to
5.04 metres
West
3.5 metres to 5
metres
6.87 metres to
10.3 metres
1.981 metres to
5.93 metres
Yes
Second Floor
The above setbacks are taken from the building plain, however should the setbacks be
measured to the balconies to Apartment 7, Apartment 8, and Apartment 10 compliance
would still be easily achieved. The balcony to Apartment No.9 is setback 2.97 metres to the
east and west, if the height measurement is taken from the top of the parapet associated with
the balconies (7.43 metres to the east & 7.7 metres to the west), setbacks of 2.52 metres
and 2.79 metres are required respectively, for which compliance is achieved.
The variation of 0.04 metres to the eastern first floor wall is considered minor and will not
result in any notable amenity impact to the property to the east, being No. 385 Wattletree
Road, Malvern East.
The variation of 0.93 metres to the western firs floor wall (kitchen and bathroom wall of
Apartment No.10) is considered acceptable as the building, for the most part of the subject
wall, is located opposite a blank ground floor wall of the dwelling at No. 4 Kingston Street,
Malvern East. Part of the subject wall is located opposite part of a ground floor habitable
room window of No. 4 Kingston Street. The variation is unlikely to impact the amenity of No.
4 Kingston Street as the existing window is setback 2.75 metres from the shared boundary
and only part of the window (less than 50% of the window) will have a direct view of the wall.
It is worthy to mention that should the development (Planning Application 1131/14) be
approved at No. 4 Kingston Street, the non-compliant wall will be located opposite habitable
room windows at a ground floor, first floor, and second floor level with setbacks ranging from
2.7 metres to 5.507 metres. It is not considered that the variation would result in a significant
Page 20
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
impact to the amenity of the proposed development, particularly as many of the rooms
opposite the subject wall are bedrooms where less time is generally spent (in comparison to
a lounge room).
Walls on Boundaries
The schedule to the zone restricts the location of boundary walls to 5 metres behind the front
facade of a building, the proposal meets this additional Standard B18 requirement as the
boundary walls are setback slightly over 10 metres from the front facade.
The ground floor eastern boundary wall is located opposite a portion of the dwelling located
at No. 385 Wattletree Road which contains a habitable room window, verandah and
secluded private open space. The eastern boundary wall has a proposed height of 3.17
metres which complies with the average height requirements. Although the wall is located
opposite a sensitive area of No. 385 Wattletree Road it is considered acceptable due to the
compliant height and length, combined with the location of the eastern facade and eave of
the existing dwelling which appears to be within close proximity to the eastern boundary (with
the eave located on the boundary).
The ground floor western boundary wall is located opposite one east facing ground floor
habitable room window at No. 4 Kingston Street. The wall has a height of 3.195 metres, and
again due to the compliant height and length, is considered acceptable.
Daylight to Existing Windows
The building requires a setback from the existing west facing windows of the dwelling at No.
385 Wattletree Road of 3.405 metres, a setback of 4.341 metres is achieved.
The building requires a setback from the existing east facing ground floor windows of 4
Kingston Street of 1.598 metres, due to the wall height of 3.195 metres; a compliant setback
of 1.6 metres is achieved and therefore complies. The building requires a setback from the
existing east facing first floor windows of 4 Kingston Street of 1.75 metres, due to the 3.5
metre wall height (measured from the finished floor level of the rooms containing the subject
windows); a compliant setback of 4.75 metres is achieved.
It is worthy to note that the proposed setbacks to the western boundary would allow for an
adequate amount of sunlight to the east facing habitable room windows proposed
development at No. 4 Kingston Street (permit application 1131/14) should the development
be approved. The proposal detailed within application 1131/14 involves minimum setbacks of
2.7m (first floor) and 4.542 metres (second floor) to the eastern boundary. At the first floor a
setback of 3.405 metres to habitable room windows would be required; a minimum setback
of 4.7 metres is achieved. At the second floor a setback of 5.15 metres to habitable room
windows would be required; a setback of approximately 8 metres is achieved.
Overshadowing
The proposed building will result in additional areas of overshadowing to the adjoining
properties to the east and west however the extent is not considered to be unreasonable.
The building will result in a small area of additional overshadowing to the rear SPOS area of
No.4 Kingston Street at the 9am time period. Again, the building will result in a small area of
overshadowing to the rear SPOS of No. 385 Wattletree Road at 3pm. Both additional areas
of overshadowing are not considered to be substantial and both dwellings will continue to
enjoy an area greater than 40sqm of unshadowed SPOS.
Overlooking
The existing eastern and western boundary fencing will mitigate any potential views from the
ground floor. The plans will need to be update to include details of the proposed northern
Page 21
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
boundary fencing for consistency, although it is noted that overlooking from the habitable
room windows and SPOS areas of Dwellings No. 3 & 4 would not occur due to the location of
boundary fencing to the properties to the north of the laneway.
The eastern and western first floor habitable room windows are treated with obscured glazing
from 1.7 metres from finished floor level to mitigate any potential overlooking to the
neighbouring areas of SPOS or habitable room windows. The windows will not be operable
below 1.7 metres from finished floor level.
The first floor balconies of Dwellings No. 7 & 8 will be screened along the western and
eastern sections with an opaque 1.7 metre high screen. The balconies to Dwelling No. 7 & 8
are not screened along the north. The overlooking diagram detailed at Section A-A and
Section B-B show that the line of sight from the first floor balconies, although extending in to
the property boundaries of No. 4 & 6 Irymple Avenue, does not reach the SPOS areas. The
first floor balconies to Dwelling No. 5 & 6, have 1.7 metre high opaque screening to the east
and west to protect the privacy of No. 385 Wattletree Road and No. 4 Kingston Street,
although it is noted that the areas adjacent to the balconies does not consist of SPOS or
habitable room windows.
The second floor east facing windows are screened with opaque glazing from 1.7 metres
from finished floor level. The view from the second floor east facing living room window, and
west facing kitchen window of Dwelling no. 9 will be blocked by the screening to the terrace.
The second floor east and west facing habitable room roof windows will have sill heights of
1.7 metres from finished floor level to mitigate any potential overlooking. A notation will need
to be included on the elevations for the east facing bedroom 2 window of Apartment No. 9
confirming this. The balcony to Dwelling No. 10 has an outlook to the rear SPOS areas of
No. 4 Kingston Street and No. 385 Wattletree Road, the balcony will need to be screened or
compliance with Standard B22 will need to be demonstrated, potentially via a section
diagram.
Due to the level of screening discussed above, if the development proposed under planning
permit application 1131/14 is approved; the proposal at the subject site will not result in any
unreasonable overlooking impacts to the apartments at No. 4 Kingston Street.
Noise Impacts
Noises emanating from vehicles accessing the basement should not result in any
unreasonable amenity impacts as the basement entrance is located (mostly) opposite the
existing carport of No. 4 Irymple Avenue, opposite a small corner of the rear of No. 6 Irymple
Avenue (both separated by the laneway). The basement ramp is not located close to the any
habitable room windows of the adjoining properties. Furthermore, the plant equipment is
located within the basement. It is considered that the development will not generate noise
over and above that expected with a normal dwelling/residential building.
Internal Amenity
The proposal provides for 10 apartments comprising of three x 3 bedroom dwellings and
seven two bedroom dwellings ranging from 116 square metres to 143 square metres with
private open space areas ranging from 8 square metre balconies to 95 square metre
courtyards. All dwelling are sufficient sized with all habitable room windows capable of
receiving access to natural light.
Each apartment is easily accessible, the screening devices throughout the development limit
internal views and individual storage areas are provided within the basement (within the
Page 22
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
storage room and above bonnet storage) that are easily accessible and provide future
occupants with a reasonable level of amenity.
Having regard to the site services, the development provides letter boxes at the pedestrian
entry point and sufficient space for the storage of waste receptacles as contained in the
basement level. The current waste management plan advises that the bins will be collected
from Kingston Street which is not compliant with the Stonnington Residential Waste
Management Guidelines. The applicant will need to submit a revised WMP to ensure
collection occurs at the street frontage if proposed to be reliant on council collection.
Infrastructure
Council’s Infrastructure Engineer has reviewed the application and requires a number of
conditions pertaining to the drainage design, maintaining the levels of the rear right of way,
and re-instating the redundant vehicle crossing. These will be included on any permit that
issues.
Subject to conditions, there are no more outstanding infrastructure concerns.
Car Parking and Traffic
The amended plans detail the provision of one visitor space within the basement which
requires a reduction in one space to the standard requirements of Clause 52.06 of the
Stonnington Planning Scheme. As the proposal incorporates the re-instating of one
crossover to Wattletree Road, effectively improving the on street parking availability, and
involves a basement car park accessible via a laneway (which may discourage visitors from
parking within the basement) the reduction to the standard requirements is considered
acceptable.
The manufacturers’ specifications for the visitor bicycle parking arrangement are required for
review by the Transport and Parking Department and a permit will be included to reflect this,
should a permit be issued.
Environmentally Sustainable Design/Water Sensitive Urban Design
A revised SMP will be required, via permit condition, to reflect the amended plans and to
respond to Council’s ESD officer’s referral comments. The proposal will need to maintain
compliance with the requirements of Clause 22.18 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, at
present the proposal achieves a STORM rating of 102% which meets best practice
requirements. Associated connections to the water tank and buffer strip will be required via
permit conditions.
Urban Design
It is considered that the amended plans address Council’s Urban Designers comments
adequately by increasing the side and rear setbacks, providing adequate landscaping to
soften the development, and providing a focal point at the mid section front facade of the
building to break up the breadth of the built form. As discussed previously Council’s Urban
Designer has provided verbal comments advising that the reduced building footprint, shown
within amended plans Council date stamped 20 March 2015, sits more comfortably within the
streetscape setting and is an acceptable outcome from and Urban Design perspective.
Page 23
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Landscape
As discussed above the proposed setbacks from the trunk of the Port Jackson Fig located
within No. 385 Wattletree Road meet the minimum setback recommended within the
submitted arborist report, this combined with permit conditions relating to the protection of
the tree, including root exploration, are considered adequate.
Waste
A revised waste management plan will be required in accordance with Council’s Waste
Management Officer’s comments.
Objections
In response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following
comments are made:
Potential impact of the basement on the structural integrity of the dwelling at No. 385
Wattletree Road

Engineering requirements will be addressed at the building permit stage.
Light spill into No. 4 Irymple Avenue

The light spill into No. 4 Irymple Avenue will likely be consistent with that associated
with a residential use. Furthermore the development is setback a considerable distance
from the dwelling located at No. 4 Irymple Avenue, and there is not provision for control
over internal lighting use for dwellings.
Demolition of the existing house and the associated impact on the existing character of the
area

The site is not affected by a heritage overlay and therefore a planning permit is not
required to demolish the existing dwelling.
Impact of the development on local fauna.

It is unlikely that the development will have any significant impact on the existing local
fauna, particularly as the proposal does not involve removal of any significant
vegetation.
VCAT Proceedings
It is worthy to note that a merits hearing date has been set for the 11th of May 2015, and is
set for 4 days.
Human Rights Consideration
This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State
Government and which complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
CONCLUSION
Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended
that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:

The proposal is well supported by State and Local Planning Policies.
Page 24
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015





There is strategic justification for the construction of additional dwellings at the subject
site.
The proposed scale of the development is considered acceptable given the location of
the site within a substantial change area.
The proposal has been designed to minimise impacts on adjoining residential
properties and complies with the objectives outlined in Clause 55.
The development provides a high level of amenity for future occupants whilst allowing
for increased housing choice.
The proposal suitably responds to the landscape character of the area.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
PD - 0451-14 - 383 Wattletree Road Malvern East - 1 of 1
Plans
RECOMMENDATION
That Council advise VCAT that had a Failure to Determine appeal not been lodged, a
Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 0451/14 would have been issued for
the land located at 383 Wattletree Road, Malvern East under the Stonnington Planning
Scheme for the construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential
Zone, and a reduction to the standard requirements of Clause 52.06 subject to the
following conditions:
1.
Prior to the commencement of the development, the applicant must submit to the
Responsible Authority three copies of plans drawn to scale generally in
accordance with the plans prepared by Christopher Doyle Architects (Council
date stamped 20 March 2015) but modified to show:
a)
Amended elevations detailing a notation on the second floor east facing
bedroom window of Apartment No. 9 confirming the sill height is 1.7 metres
above the finished floor level.
b)
The east and west elevations of the balcony to Apartment No. 10 screened
in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 (Overlooking objective)
of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, or compliance with the standard
demonstrated.
c)
A notation included on the proposed ground floor plan detailing the
minimum height of the northern fencing.
d)
Locations and details of all sustainability measures referred to within the
endorsed SMP, including the location of the solar panels, as requested by
Condition 12 of this permit.
e)
Manufacturers specifications for the visitor bicycle parking arrangement.
f)
A landscape plan in accordance with Condition 3 of this permit.
g)
A Tree Management Plan in accordance with Condition 5 of this permit.
h)
A Sustainable Management Plan in accordance with Condition 12 of this
permit.
Page 25
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
i)
A revised Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition 8 of this
permit.
j)
Any changes required as a result of Condition 6 of this permit.
All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority
2.
The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and
works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless
the Stonnington Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without
the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
3.
Before the development starts, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape
architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be
submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the
landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The
landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must
be provided detailing the following:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)
l)
A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be
retained and/or removed
Buildings and trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring
properties within three metres of the boundary
Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways
A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,
including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity,
and quantities of each plant
Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site
Planting of canopy trees within the front setback
Planting of small trees within the front eastern and western setbacks
In situ planting clearly identified
Soil volumes for any in situ planting (directly related to their size at
maturity)
The extent of any cut, fill, embankments or retaining walls associated with
the landscape treatment of the site
Details of all proposed hard surface materials including pathways, patio or
decked areas
The location and specific details of the proposed buffer strip, including
details of the drainage slope from the terrace areas to the buffer strips, and
confirmation that the planting types proposed meet buffer strip
requirements.
All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
4.
Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on
the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction
of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged
plants are to be replaced.
5.
Concurrent with the endorsement of development plans a tree management plan
prepared by a suitably qualified arborist must be submitted to and approved by
the Responsible Authority. When approved, the tree management plan will form
part of this permit and all works must be done in accordance with the tree
Page 26
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
management plan.
The tree management plan must detail measures to protect and ensure the
viability of the Ficus rubiginosa (Port Jackson Fig) located within No. 385
Wattletree Road Malvern, East.
Without limiting the generality of the tree management plan it must have at least
three sections as follows:
a) Pre-construction – details to include a tree protection zone, height barrier
around the tree protection zone, amount and type of mulch to be placed
above the tree protection zone and method of cutting any roots or branches
which extend beyond the tree protection zone.
b) During-construction – details to include watering regime during construction
and method of protection of exposed roots.
c) Post-construction – details to include watering regime and time of final
inspection when barrier can be removed and protection works and regime
can cease.
Pre-construction works and any root cutting must be inspected and approved by
the Parks Unit. Removal of protection works and cessation of the tree
management plan must be authorised by the Parks Unit.
6.
Prior to the endorsement of plans, and to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority, the location of the eastern ground floor building facade and basement
(proposed within close proximity to the structural zone of the Port Jackson Fig)
is subject to a non-destructive root exploration investigation. This is to be
undertaken by the applicant and the exploration trench must be inspected by a
Council arborist, who will liaise with the Planning Department regarding the
exact location of the basement and eastern building facade. Should significant
root matter be encountered during the root investigation it may necessitate the
reconfiguration of the eastern building facade and basement.
7.
Before the development (including excavation and demolition) starts, a tree
protection fence must be erected around the Ficus rubiginosa (Port Jackson Fig)
in accordance with the recommendations detailed within the endorsed Tree
Management Plan, and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The tree
protection fence must remain in place until all construction is completed. The
ground surface of the Tree Protection Zone must be covered by a 100 mm deep
layer of mulch before the development starts and be watered regularly to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
8.
No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within
the Tree Protection Zone without the written consent of the Responsible
Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within
the Tree Protection Zone.
9.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Waste Management Plan must be
submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Waste
Management Plan must include:
a)
Dimensions of waste areas
b)
The number of bins to be provided
c)
Method of waste and recyclables collection
d)
Hours of waste and recyclables collection
e)
Method of presentation of bins for waste collection
f)
Sufficient headroom within the basement to allow the passage of waste
Page 27
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
g)
h)
collection vehicles
Sufficient turning circles for the waste collection vehicles to drive out in
forward gear from within the basement
Strategies for how the generation of waste and recyclables from the
development will be minimised
When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.
Waste collection from the development must be in accordance with the plan, to
the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
10.
Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film)
designed to limit overlooking as required B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in accordance
with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority
thereafter for the life of the building.
11.
The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives
detailed in the endorsed site plan and stormwater management report to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
12.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Sustainable Management Plan
(SMP) Report must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority.
Upon approval the SMP will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and the
development must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the
SMP to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The SMP must be generally
in accordance with the SMP prepared by Sustainable Development Consultants,
Council date stamped 08 August 2014, but modified to:
a) Reflect the revised development detailed within the amended VCAT plans,
Council date stamped 20 March 2015.
All works must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed Sustainability
Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations
to the Sustainability Management Plan may occur without written consent of the
Responsible Authority.
13.
Prior to the occupation of the development approved under this permit, a report
from the author of the Sustainable Management Plan, approved pursuant to this
permit, or similarly qualified person or company, must be submitted to the
Responsible Authority. The report must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the Sustainable
Management Plan have been implemented in accordance with the approved plan.
14.
A report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a
drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified
Engineer in accordance with that report prior to a building permit being issued.
The drainage must be constructed in accordance with the Engineer’s design.
15.
Existing levels of the rear of the right-of-way, including the edge, must not be
lowered or altered in any way (to facilitate the basement ramp).
16.
The redundant vehicle crossing must be removed and the footpath, nature strip,
and kerb reinstated at the owners cost and to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
Page 28
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
17.
All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this
permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority by completion of the development.
18.
All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or
screened so as not to be visible from any of the surrounding footpaths and
adjoining properties and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of
unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the
Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
19.
This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
a) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.
In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a
request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed
timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.
NOTES
a.
This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building
works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant
building permits are obtained.
b.
The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not
eligible to receive “Resident Parking Permits”.
c.
At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act
1987 stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred
to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:
i. Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the
development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and
ii. Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development
allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.
Page 29
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
2
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0473/14 - 523 ORRONG ROAD, ARMADALE CONSTRUCTION OF A FOUR STOREY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Statutory Planning Manager: Alexandra Kastaniotis
General Manager Planning & Development: Stuart Draffin
PURPOSE
For Council to consider a planning application for the construction of a multi-dwelling
development in a General Residential Zone at 523 Orrong Road, Armadale.
Executive Summary
Applicant:
Ward:
Zone:
Overlay:
Date lodged:
Statutory days: (as at
council meeting date)
Trigger for referral to
Council:
Cultural Heritage Plan
Number of objections:
Consultative Meeting:
Officer Recommendation:
Richard Kornhauser
C/- SJB Planning
South
General Residential Zone (Schedule 3)
None
17 June 2014
33
Four storey building
More than seven objections
Not required
11
Yes – held on 7 October 2014
Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit
BACKGROUND
The Proposal
The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Ron Unger
Architects and are known as Drawing No’s: TP05C, TP06C, TP07C, TP08C, TP09C and
TP10C and Council date stamped 18 March 2015. An updated Landscape Plan prepared by
John Patrick Pty Ltd forms part of the application material and is known as L-TP01 Rev A.
The site plan / design response, shadow diagrams and perspectives are as per the
advertised plans Council date stamped 28 July 2014.
Key features of the proposal are:




Removal of the existing buildings on the subject land.
Construction of a part three and part four storey apartment building including a
basement garage for 21 vehicles (including 2 visitor spaces) and three residential floors
levels comprising of 9 new dwellings in total. The basement sits more than 1.2 metres
above ground level and is therefore classified as a storey. Hence the building is four
storeys to Larnook Street and three storeys to Orrong Road.
The apartment mix will consist of 8 x 2 bedroom apartments and 1 x 4 bedroom
apartment.
Main building entrance to lift and stair core is provided from Larnook Street.
Page 31
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015










Basement entry is provided via an existing crossing (to be widened) on Larnook Street.
The Ground floor will consist of four, 2-bedroom apartments with associated terraces
and landscaped gardens. Units 1 and 2 are orientated to front Orrong Road with direct
access provided from this frontage via pedestrian gates.
The First floor consists of four, 2-bedroom apartments with balconies of between 10sq.
m and 18 sq. m orientated to the north, east and west.
The Second floor level will contain one, 4-bedroom apartment over the entire floor.
Terraces equating to a total area of 121 sq. m are provided with an outlook to the north
and south.
Basement coverage to be 66% of the overall site area.
Total building and driveway footprint to equate to 68% site coverage.
Total permeable ground to be 31% of the overall site area.
Maximum overall building height to be 12.3 metres.
The building is generally setback a minimum of 6 metres from Orrong Road and
between 2.1m and 4.3 metres to Larnook Street.
The contemporary building is to be finished in brick, rendered masonry, rendered light
weight walls, precast concrete, clear and obscure glazing, and slate tile roofing.
Site and Surrounds
The site is located on the south-west corner of Larnook Street and Orrong Road. The site
has the following significant characteristics:




Street frontage to Orrong Road of 23.47 metres, a frontage to Larnook Street of 45.72
metres, yielding an overall site area of 1073 sq. m.
There is a fall in the land of approximately 1.7 metres from east to west.
The land is currently developed with a single storey dwelling including a carport within
the north-west corner of the site that abuts Larnook Street. The dwelling features a
generous setback from Orrong Road and is constructed in close proximity to the
southern boundary.
Private open space is located to the east and west of the residence.
The land to the south (521 Orrong Road) is occupied by a double storey brick building
containing 7 residential units. The building has a street setback to Orrong Road of 5.9
metres. A driveway extends along the full length of the northern boundary with habitable
room windows setback 6.37 metres from the common boundary with the subject site. Northfacing non-habitable room windows are setback 4.26m from the northern boundary. Car
parking is provided to the rear of this building, abutting the western boundary.
Land to the west (56 Larnook Street) is occupied by a single storey brick dwelling with a
driveway that extends along the eastern boundary (the common boundary with the subject
site). The residence is setback 7.4 metres from Larnook Street and private open space is
located to the rear (south) of the dwelling. A Planning Application (PL0047/14) is currently
being assessed by Council Officers, which seeks to construct a two storey apartment
building comprising 8 dwellings with 8 car parking spaces provided in a basement accessed
from Larnook Street. The driveway is maintained along the eastern boundary.
No decision has been made on this application to date; however it has been advertised and a
Consultative Meeting has been carried out. The Applicant is currently in discussions with
Council Officers regarding possible design changes to address concerns.
To the east and north are Orrong Road and Larnook Street, respectively. Both streets
contain large mature trees that contribute to the character and amenity of the area. Four
large street trees exist adjacent to the subject site, two along each street frontage.
Page 32
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Across Larnook Street to the north are three, two storey contemporary residences that are
setback between 2.2m and 3.2 metres from Larnook Street.
Previous Planning Application(s)
A search of Council records indicates that there are no recent planning applications for this
site.
The Title
The site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 03989 Folio 764 as Lot 1 on Title Plan
679483 and no covenants affect the land. A drainage easement (approximately 1.65 metres
wide) extends along the western boundary of the subject site.
Planning Controls
The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:
Zone
Clause 32.08 - General Residential Zone – Schedule 3
Pursuant to Clause 32.08-1 a permit is not required to use the land for dwellings.
Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.
Section 3.0 of Schedule 3 specifies a mandatory maximum building height of 12 metres
unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the
site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the height of the building must not
exceed 13 metres.
A lift overrun may exceed the abovementioned mandatory height requirements by no more
than 1.2 metres.
The maximum building height for this site, due to the slope in the land, is 13 metres.
Schedule 3 also includes variations to ResCode Standards as follows:
Site coverage
Side and rear
Setbacks
Walls on
boundaries
Standard
A5 and B8
A10 and B17
A11 and B18
Requirement
Basements should not exceed 75% of the site area.
For a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front
facade of the building fronting the street, setback
new buildings (including basements) a minimum of
2 metres from at least one side boundary and at
least 1 metre from the other side boundary up to 3.6
metres in height.
Where no setback is specified, standard A10 or B17
applies.
Walls should not be located on side boundaries for a
distance of 5 metres behind the front façade of the
building fronting the street.
Overlays
Nil
Page 33
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06 – Car Parking
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2, prior to a new use commencing or a new building be occupied
the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land.
The table at Clause 52.06-5 states that 1 car space is to be provided to each one or two
bedroom dwelling; or 2 spaces to each three or more bedroom dwelling; plus 1 car space for
visitors to every 5 dwellings for developments of 5 or more dwellings.
The statutory car parking rate for this development for the residents is 10 spaces plus 2
visitor spaces. The proposed development provides 21 car spaces, which exceeds the
statutory requirement by 9 spaces.
Clause 52.29- Land adjacent to a Road Zone, Category 1 or a Public Acquisition Overlay for
a Category 1 Road
A permit is required to alter access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1. This application
does not seek to alter or create an access within the Road Zone and therefore does not
apply.
Clause 52.34 - Bicycle Facilities
Pursuant to Clause 52.34-1 bicycle facilities should be provided in accordance with the
requirements at Clause 52.34-3 and 52.34-4. The development is required to provide 1
residential space for every 5 dwellings and 1 visitor space for every 10 dwellings. 3 bicycle
spaces are therefore required. The development provides 11 bicycle spaces within the
basement, which exceeds the statutory rate by 8.
Relevant Planning Policies
Clause 11
Clause 15.01
Clause 15.02
Clause 16.01
Clause 18.02
Settlement
Urban Environment
Sustainable Development
Housing
Movement networks
Clause 21.03
Clause 21.05
Clause 21.06
Clause 21.08
Clause 22.18
Vision
Housing
Built Environment and Heritage
Infrastructure
Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) Policy
Amendment C175 – Draft Neighbourhood Character Local Policy
Amendment C175 has been prepared to introduce a new Neighbourhood Character Policy
into the local section of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. This policy will clarify the
preferred neighbourhood character for an area and assist in ensuring that a development
proposal respects and reinforces the preferred character.
The Neighbourhood Character Local Planning Policy includes the preferred character
statements, design objectives and design responses to be taken from the precinct profiles.
A Panel Hearing was set down for 15 and 16 April 2014. At the conclusion of the Hearing,
the Panel determined to adjourn the matter pending the gazettal of Stonnington's new
Page 34
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
residential zones. The new zones were gazetted on 19 June 2014. The Panel Hearing
reconvened on 2 October 2014 providing further opportunities to hear the submissions and
Council’s closing submission.
Council received the Panel Report on 26 November 2014 and released the report on 5
December 2014. The Panel Report recommends that the Amendment be adopted as
exhibited subject to changes.
At its meeting on 2 February 2015, Council considered the recommendations of the Panel
and resolved to adopt the amendment with changes.
Based on the resolution by Council, the subject site falls with the Garden Suburban 2
category. Further consideration of this policy will be provided later in this report.
Advertising
The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment
Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing
two signs on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed
satisfactorily.
The site is located in South Ward and objections from eleven (11) different properties have
been received. The concerns can be broadly summarized as follows:









Out of character with the local heritage architecture
Car parking
Traffic congestion
Safety
Entry and exit point via Larnook Street
Height
Number of dwellings
Insufficient landscaping
Waste Management
A Consultative Meeting was held on 7 October 2014. The meeting was attended by
Councillor Ullin, representatives of the Applicant, objectors and a Council Planning Officer.
Plans were formally amended under Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987
on 18 March 2015 to show the following changes from the advertised plans:



A reduction in the north-south dimension of the building to provide for a 400mm
increase in the northern side boundary setback to Larnook Street at all levels, including
the basement. The setback is now 2.4 metres (previously 2.0m).
A minor (90mm) reduction in the setback from the southern boundary, maintaining a 9
metre separation from the habitable room windows in the apartments to the south and
a minimum 2.6 metre setback from the southern boundary (including at basement
level) to ensure space for substantial landscaping along this interface.
A slight reduction in the driveway width, allowing an increase of 300mm in the setback
from the western boundary. The driveway width of 3.3 metres plus 150 mm kerbs still
satisfies the Australian standard. The setback of the basement and ground floor levels
is increased from 1.65m to 1.95m. This provides more space along the western
boundary for larger trees as shown in the revised landscape plan, prepared by John
Patrick Pty Ltd.
Page 35
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015





Lowering of the basement and ground floor levels by 300mm and the first floor level by
200mm with no change to the overall height of the building as the floor to ceiling
heights are intended to be increased from 2.7m to 2.8m (at ground and first floor
levels).
Street setback of Apartments 4, 8 and 9 from Larnook Street increased by 1 metre.
The external stair between the terrace and ground level open space of Apartment 4
relocated.
Internal walls to the studies in the apartments at ground and first floor levels removed.
An updated Landscape Plan Rev A dated 21.01.2015 prepared by John Patrick Pty
Ltd, includes additional trees along the north and west boundaries, and in particular the
north-west corner of the site.
Given the changes address the concerns raised it was not deemed necessary to re-advertise
the plans, as no additional material detriment would result. The objectors have been notified
of the amended plans via the invitation to the Council Meeting.
Referrals
Council’s Transport and Parking Department (Comments based on advertised plans)
Car Parking Provision
The proposal is to provide 21 parking spaces, which is a surplus of 10 spaces from the
requirements of the Planning Scheme.
The allocation of spaces is for the 2-bedroom dwellings to have two (2) spaces each, and the
4-bedroom dwelling to have three (3) spaces, with two (2) spaces allocated to visitors can be
considered satisfactory.
Traffic Generation
The traffic generation of the proposed development is unlikely to cause significant impact to
the surrounding road networks.
Car Park Design
The layout of the basement and parking area is considered to be satisfactory subject to the
following:
Sight Distance at Property Boundary
Based on the plans provided it appears that some sight distance will be provided to the east
of the accessway, but no sight distance will be provided to the west. The sight distance
triangles are to be fully dimensioned and shown on the plans.
Parking Bays
The parking bays are designed to the requirements of the Planning Scheme, however
spaces next to walls need to be widened to 2.9m and these dimensions shown on the plans.
Bicycle Parking
The number of bicycle spaces proposed is satisfactory. However, the type of bicycle parking
is to be clearly identified, and all dimensions are to be shown on revised plans. If a
proprietary product is to be used, a manufacturer’s specification is to be provided.
Page 36
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Council’s Sustainability Officer (Comments based on advertised plans)
Council’s Sustainability Officer has highlighted several items that require additional details to
be shown on the plans:









Study nooks have been provided with no access to daylight, thus requiring artificial
lighting when in use. An alternative proposal should be considered.
Whilst the majority of windows will be shaded by overhangs and extended eaves, fixed
horizontal shading device should be provided to exposed northern aspect windows.
User operable external shading is recommended to western windows to minimise
summer afternoon solar heat gain.
Whilst a solar hot water system is proposed to the top floor apartment, the majority of
units will be provided with instantaneous gas hot water. Therefore, the STEPS report to
be amended to reflect the majority approach.
The SDA and basement plan annotations indicate that impermeable areas will drain to
two rain gardens. However, the location, dimensions and drainage areas connected to
these have not been indicated on site or landscape plans. In addition, where rain
gardens are proposed, Applicant must provide relevant cross-sections (including
indicative planting types) as well as indicative management and maintenance
measures to ensure long-term success of stormwater diversion.
Rain gardens are proposed to drain to a 20000 litre rainwater tank to provide water for
irrigation to be confirmed on landscape plans.
STORM score within main text of the SDA (page 6) to be amended to match STORM
tool print out (101%).
Plans to confirm location and number of visitor bicycle spaces to be provided.
Applicant to note that Council’s best practice for construction and demolition stage
recycling and reuse is 70% by mass. The proposed 60% target should be improved.
The Applicant is to provide a commitment to development a Building User Guide, which
will provide information on aspects such as use and maintenance of rain gardens and
solar hot water systems, for example.
Planner Note: The revised plans Council date stamped 18 March 2015 have removed all
doors from studies so that no rooms rely on borrowed light and improving energy efficiency.
Council’s Urban Designer (Comments based on advertised plans)
Council’s Urban Designer has provided the following comments and recommendations:





The extent of the basement should be reduced to create an appropriate deep-soil
planting zone for canopy-tree vegetation, between the western end of the basement
and the easement.
The front setback should be increased and the landscaping along the Larnook Street
frontage should be substantially improved from the current minimal provision.
The setback from the Southern boundary should be increased to create a more
equitable interface around this shared boundary.
The massing of the building should be reducing as it extends towards the West, to
relate more closely to the topography of the site and to the streetscape.
The minimal northern setback, together with the (nearly 4-storey) scale of the building
to Larnook Street, combine to present an excessive degree of visual bulk that is out of
character in this local residential street.
Planner Note: The revised plans have increased the front setback to Larnook Street and
increased plantings along the north and west boundaries on the Landscape Plan. The
Page 37
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
plantings to the north-west seek to soften views of the new building from within Larnook
Street.
Council’s Arborist (Comments based on the advertised plans)




There are 3 mature trees located within this site, but none would be considered
exceptional specimens. Council has no objection to the proposed tree removals.
Large mature street trees are located on both the Orrong Road and Larnook Street
frontages of this property. Council should condition as part of the permit that tree root
barriers be constructed within the proposal where concrete paving is proposed
opposite existing mature Council street trees. Areas opposite these Council areas are
currently garden / open space, and the change to impermeable surfaces will leave
Council open to future insurance claims for deflection of these surfaces from existing /
future mature root growth.
Permit Condition – Protection fencing must be afforded to all the street trees on both
frontages of this property prior to construction works being undertaken. Fencing must
compliant with Section 4 of AS 4970.
Landscape Plan - The installation of Hymenosporum flavum (Native Frangipani) as a
screening tree along the southern boundary will not be successful in screening the new
built form from the block of flats to the south of the proposal.
Council’s Infrastructure Department
Infrastructure require conditions relating to the legal point of discharge and drainage design;
existing footpath levels must not be altered in any way (to facilitate the basement ramp); and
water tanks are encouraged.
Council’s Waste Department
A comprehensive Waste Management Plan prepared by Waste Space Solutions Pty Ltd and
dated 11 June 2014 accompanied this proposal. This document responded well to all waste
management challenges presented in the plans. Any Planning Permit issued for this
development must include a clause specifically requiring the submission and approval of a
Waste Management Plan.
KEY ISSUES
Strategic Justification
In assessing this application, consideration must be given to the relevant State and Local
Planning Policy Framework.
The overarching policies and objectives at both a State and local level encourage urban
consolidation in established urban areas and medium density residential development in and
around neighbourhood activity centres and close to public transport. These strategies call for
well-designed medium-density development that respects neighbourhood character,
improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy
efficiency.
The subject site is located on a main road that is defined as being a “tram / bus priority route”
within Council’s Strategic Framework Plan (Clause 21.03-3). At Clause 21.05-2, medium and
higher density housing is directed to sites with an immediate abuttal to a main road which is
a tram / bus priority route. These sites are defined as being suitable for substantial change.
Page 38
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Given the site’s attributes being located on a main road where a number of medium density
developments already exist, it is anticipated that a higher level of development can be
expected in this location rather than the residential hinterland to the east and west of Orrong
Road. This is further justified through the mandatory height requirements set out in the
General Residential Zone (Schedule 3).
Specifically, Schedule 3 relates to Residential Boulevards and Corridors and allows for a
maximum building height of up to 12 metres, unless the slope in the land allows for 13
metres, which is the case for this site. This development proposes a maximum height of 12.3
metres with a height of 10.98 metres to Orrong Road, falling below the allowable 13 metres.
Amendment C175 (Neighbourhood Character Local Policy) provides further strategic
guidance on the preferred neighbourhood character of this Garden Suburban (GS2) area.
The statement of preferred neighbourhood character defines GS2 as follows:
The Garden Suburban 2 (GS2) precinct comprises leafy streetscapes with a range of
Victorian, Edwardian or Interwar era and contemporary buildings set in established
garden surrounds. Regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and
allow for substantial planting or canopy trees. New buildings or additions offer
innovative and contemporary design responses that sit comfortably within the
streetscape respecting reflecting the key aspects of building form and the one-three
storey scale of the precinct. Low or permeable front fences retain views to gardens and
buildings from the street.
It goes on to state:
Areas within a Residential Growth or Mixed Use Zone or within a substantial change
area will accommodate more development with a more compact setting but with space
for canopy trees and other vegetation and high quality, responsive design.
The design response for this area calls for:












Upper levels to be designed to minimise impacts on any adjoining residential property.
New buildings to respond to the streetscape in an innovative and contemporary
manner.
Articulate the facades of buildings with the use of recesses, verandahs, balconies,
window openings and variations in materials and colours.
Roof forms should incorporate eaves
Provide adequate space between and around buildings to accommodate vegetation.
Include canopy trees and shrubs in landscape plans.
Retain established or mature trees where possible and provide for the planting of new
canopy trees in front and rear setbacks.
Include planting around the perimeter of the site to strengthen the garden setting.
Setback basements from all property boundaries to allow for in-ground planting.
Car parking structures should be located behind the front facade of the dwelling
fronting the street.
Hard paving for car parking should be minimised and permeable surfaces used as an
alternative to impermeable hard surfacing.
On main roads higher front fences, up to 1.8m, may be constructed where they provide
approximately 20% permeability and recesses for landscaping.
Based on the above, the proposed development responds well to the preferred
neighbourhood character for this area. The development is considered to be an acceptable
design response, fitting to its context as is discussed in greater detail below.
Page 39
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Built Form
An assessment has been carried out against the requirements of Clause 55 of the
Stonnington Planning Scheme. The issues of particular relevance are discussed below:
Neighbourhood Character
The subject site is predominantly surrounded by residential development, including medium
density apartment buildings and units. The King David School is also located to the south. A
small neighbourhood activity centre is situated approximately 360 metres to the north of the
site, where Orrong Road crosses High Street. The character of Orrong Road is varied and
no heritage overlays exist on the subject site.
The proposed design of the building seeks to reflect the art deco architectural style seen in
the wider area through the use of face brick, curved walls and glass block glazing features on
the facade. The architectural quality and building expression raises no concerns.
The development has been centrally positioned within the site so that there are no walls
proposed on the boundaries. This arrangement allows for landscaping to be incorporated
around the entire permitter of the new building in accordance with the design guidelines
sought by Council’s draft Neighbourhood Character Policy (C175).
Site coverage is proposed to be 68% (including driveways) of the overall site area, which is
higher than the 60% recommended by Standard B8 (Site Coverage). It is not uncommon for
site coverage to exceed the preferred 60% maximum within the inner city, where
development is generally denser. However, in this case while site coverage is higher than
recommended, permeability is comfortably achieved in accordance with Standard B9 at 31%
of the site area. Given the extent of available permeable surfaces there will no difficulty
accommodating meaningful landscaping to strengthen the garden setting of the wider
residential area.
Furthermore, Schedule 3 to the Zone stipulates a variation to Standard B8 (Site Coverage),
requiring that “basements should not exceed 75% of the site area”. The basement proposed
by this development occupies 66% of the site area and therefore complies with the Schedule
to the Zone.
The proposed site coverage is deemed to be acceptable and reflects the character of this
substantial change area.
The maximum building height proposed is 12.3 metres. This is below the maximum allowable
height of 13 metres specified by Schedule 3 to the Zone. The building will present at a height
of 10.98 metres to Orrong Road, being only minimally higher than the double storey buildings
to the north and south. The building will present at a height of between 11.6 and 12.3 metres
to Larnook Street with developments in this street generally of a double storey scale.
Positively, the upper levels have been well setback from the western boundary to ensure that
there is an adequate transition in scale between the new development and the existing built
form along Larnook Street.
It is also noted that while there is currently a single storey dwelling situated directly to the
west, there is a development application currently with the Planning Department that seeks
to construct a double storey apartment building.
With regard to the street setbacks to Orrong Road and Larnook Street, the ResCode
standard recommends setbacks of 5.9m to Orrong Road and a side setback to Larnook
Page 40
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Street of 2m. The development satisfactorily responds to the streetscape by providing a
setback of 6 metres to Orrong Road and a staggered setback of between 2.1m and 4.3
metres to Larnook Street. While not matching the setbacks of the adjoining properties, the
setbacks will continue to reflect the character of both streets.
Landscaping
A detailed landscape plan has been submitted that includes the removal of 3 mature trees
and 22 replacement trees, as well an array of shrubs, grasses and climbers. Importantly, the
basement has been setback from all side boundaries between 1.95 metres and 6.43 metres
to allow for ample opportunities for deep soil planting and canopy trees.
The landscape plan has been reviewed by Council’s Arborist who has no objection to the
landscaping response, but has noted that the use of Hymenosporum flavum (Native
Frangipani) as a screening tree along the southern boundary will not be successful in
screening the new built form from the block of flats to the south. Screening vegetation along
the southern boundary is considered to be necessary to reflect the garden character of the
area and to soften the building when viewed from the adjoining residential properties. As
such, a condition will require that the Native Frangipanis be replaced with a more suitable
screening tree to the satisfaction of the Responsibility Authority.
Both Orrong Road and Larnook Street exhibit large mature street trees which contribute
positively to the neighbourhood and provide good screening of existing built form. It is
imperative that any new development protects existing street trees from root or structural
damage. Conditions will be required to ensure that the trees abutting this site are protected.
Concern has been raised with the extent of planting along the north and west boundaries of
the subject site by Council’s Urban Designer. In response to these concerns the Landscape
Plan has been updated to include two new Gorgeous Crab Apple Trees within the northern
setback and a new Pinnacle Lily-pily along the western boundary. The additional trees
proposed are deemed to adequately assist in screening the building bulk from the north and
west.
Environmentally Sustainable Design and Energy Efficiency
The development is deemed to achieve the energy efficiency Objectives of Standard B10
subject to the changes recommended by Council’s Sustainability Officer with regard to
shading to north and west facing windows.
In accordance with this Standard, all dwellings will have access to direct sunlight and many
are orientated to the north to maximise northern light to habitable rooms. Secluded private
open spaces have also been positioned to receive northern sunlight. As per the amended
plans, all doors to the studies have been removed so that no rooms within this development
will rely on borrowed light.
The Environmental Sustainable Design Report submitted with this application further
confirms an average energy rating of 7.2 stars for the dwellings, well above the required 6
stars.
Amenity Impacts
Side and rear setbacks
All side and rear setbacks comply with the recommendations of Standard B17 as confirmed
in the tables below:
Page 41
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Western interface
Proposed setback
Basement
Ground
First
Second
1.95 metres
Between 7.4 metres
and 8.52 metres
Between 5.8 metres
and 7.54 metres
Between 10.7 and
10.95 metres
Required minimum
setback
1 metre
1.18 metres
Complies
3.99 metres
YES
5.6 metres
YES
Required setback
1 metre
Complies
YES
1.12 metres
YES
2.69 metres
YES
5.09 metres
YES
YES
YES
Southern interface
Basement
Ground
First
Second
Proposed setback
Between 2.54 and
2.63 metres
Between 2.54 and
2.63 metres
Between 2.3 and 2.93
metres
Between 5 and 6.6
metres
The setbacks as proposed are reflective of the existing and preferred neighbourhood
character and will allow for in-ground landscaping to reflect the garden attributes of the area.
The setbacks will also ensure that no unreasonable amenity impacts result with regard loss
of daylight to windows, visual bulk, overshadowing or overlooking. The setbacks further
ensure that the building steps away from the boundaries as it rises, providing satisfactory
visual relief when viewed from a directly adjoining property. While Council’s Urban Designer
would like to see greater setback from the south and west than proposed, the setbacks do
comply with the Standard. Therefore, there is limited justification for a more substantial
setback from these boundaries given that an adequate transition is provided.
Daylight to windows
The setbacks ensure that all windows on an adjoining property maintain adequate access to
daylight. The north facing windows forming part of the residential building to the south are
located 6.37 metres from the subject site and will not be unreasonably affected by this
development.
Overshadowing
As per the shadow diagrams provided by the Applicant (advertised plans Council date
stamped 28 July 2014) the extent of overshadowing to the south and west will fully comply
with ResCode Standard B21, which specifies that:
Where sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is reduced,
at least 75 per cent, or 40 square metres with minimum dimension of 3 metres,
whichever is the lesser area, of the secluded private open space should receive a
minimum of five hours of sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on 22 September.
Page 42
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
If existing sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is less
than the requirements of this standard, the amount of sunlight should not be further
reduced.
Between 9am and 3pm on the Equinox the shadows cast will fall over the driveways of both
properties to the south and west. No shadows will fall over an area used for private open
space. The entire area of secluded private open space at the rear of the building at No. 56
Larnook Street will be unaffected by shadows from the new development.
Overlooking
With regard to overlooking, Standard B22 specifies that any new windows or balconies with
an outlook of a sensitive interface within 9 metres are to be screened to a height of 1.7
metres above finished floor level.
The floor plans and elevations do not include any screening to windows or balconies above
ground floor level. Due to the considerable setbacks proposed there is no need to screen any
windows or balconies at the second floor level. A driveway sits directly to the south which is a
non-sensitive interface. At the first floor level, the south-facing windows are located 9 metres
from the adjoining habitable room windows to the south. Again no screening is required.
Views to the west at the first floor level fall over the driveway, a non-sensitive area.
Screening is therefore not deemed to be necessary.
It is unclear whether overlooking will occur to the west from the first floor balcony within Unit
7. This will be addressed via a condition.
At the ground floor level, the west facing balconies have been shown to be screened with
obscure glass to 1.7 metres in height in accordance with the Standard. Subject to conditions,
there will be no unreasonable overlooking.
Internal Amenity
The development is considered to offer a good level of internal amenity for the new dwellings
with the apartments varying in size between 111 sq. m and 245 sq. m. All apartments are
provided with a minimum of two (2) car spaces and storage facilities within the basement.
As there are no walls on boundaries, all apartments will receive ample access to daylight and
all are provided with a minimum of 10 square metres of private open space in the form of
balconies and terraces.
The size and amenity of the apartments proposed are deemed to be of a high standard and
may appeal to owner occupiers. The current trend in higher density residential developments
is to compromise on both size and quality to maximise apartment yield. This application
proposes a reasonable number of new residences for a site area of 1075sq. m, thereby
promoting new housing in a well serviced location (in accordance with urban consolidation
objectives); while offering good on-site amenities for future occupants.
Design Detail
Front Fence
The plans note that the front fence will consist of part existing fence, new 1.9m timber fence
and a new 1.9m high steel rod and rail fence. The fence to Orrong Road does not require a
permit as it complies with the height specified in Clause 55.06-2. The fence to Larnook Street
exceeds the 1.5m height recommended by ResCode but is considered to be acceptable as it
Page 43
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
is similar to other fences in this street and will be partially transparent. An updated Sections
and Fences Elevation (TP 11) will be required by way of conditions to confirm these details.
Car Parking and Traffic
The development fully complies with the statutory car parking requirements of the
Stonnington Planning Scheme by providing in excess of the required car parking to each new
dwelling plus two visitor parking spaces on site.
With regard to the layout and design of the car parking Council’s Transport and Parking
Department have advised of additional details to be shown on the plans as detailed at under
the Referrals section of this report. The outstanding items being, sight lines distances, the
parking bay widths and details of bicycle parking can all be adequately addressed via
conditions.
Vehicle access
Some objectors have raised the access from Larnook Street as a concern, preferring to see
access provided from Orrong Road. Orrong Road is within a Road Zone, being the
responsibility of VicRoads. Any change would require VicRoads approval. There is no
justification to require a change in the point of access for this development. Such a variation
would require a complete re-design and would have considerable impacts on the
development and the Orrong Road streetscape.
Council’s Traffic Engineers have reviewed the plans in detail and have confirmed that:
 The traffic generation of the proposed development is unlikely to cause significant
impact to the surrounding road networks.
Based on this advice and the given the number of cars utilising the basement (21); the
anticipated traffic to be generated; and the site’s corner location; it is not unreasonable that
access be provided from Larnook Street.
It is further noted that a new crossing to Orrong Road would likely result in damage to, and
possible loss of a street tree. This is not a positive outcome as established trees contribute
positively to the amenity of the area.
Subject to conditions, the car parking provision and layout is accepted.
Water Sensitive Urban Design
In accordance with Council’s local Stormwater Management Policy (Clause 22.18),
impermeable areas will drain to two rain gardens. However the location, dimensions and
drainage areas connected to these have not been indicated on site or landscape plans.
Additionally, a 20,000L tank has been shown beneath the basement. The STORM Report
supplied by the Applicant states a rating of 101%. This varies from the ESD Report that
states 107%. Regardless, the treatments will comply with Council requirements for on-site
water retention by achieving a minimum 100% rating. However, conditions will require that
the details of rain gardens be provided and any discrepancies between reports be corrected.
Waste
The applicant has submitted a Waste Management Plan which has been reviewed by
Council’s Waste Department and no concerns have been raised.
Page 44
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Council waste collection service is proposed for this development with garbage and recycling
to be transferred to shared bins within the designated bin store in the basement. Bins are
proposed to be collected from the Larnook Street frontage, with the number of bins required
taking up 24% of the street frontage. This is not considered to be problematic.
A condition will require that a Waste Management Plan be submitted for endorsement.
Objections
In response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following
comments are made:
Four storeys excessive
The building contains three floors of residential apartments, with the basement level
comprising the fourth floor as it is not wholly below ground level due to the slope in the land.
When viewed from Orrong Road the new development will appear as three storeys in scale.
Density
The proposed density is considered to be appropriate for a site of this size within the inner
city and with direct access to public transport and a range of services.
Human Rights Consideration
This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State
Government and which complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
CONCLUSION
Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended
that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:




The proposed residential building is in accordance with State and local policies,
including the new mandatory controls forming part of the General Residential Zone.
The new building is not incompatible with the character of the area and will not present
excessive visual bulk to the adjoining interfaces.
The design provides adequate space for canopy trees and other vegetation to be
planted around the building, strengthening the garden character of the area.
The development will not unreasonably impact upon adjoining amenity as determined
by compliance with ResCode (Clause 55) Objectives.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
PD - 0473-14 - 523 Orrong Road Armadale - 1 of 1
Plans
RECOMMENDATION
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 0473/14 for the land located
at 523 Orrong Road, Armadale be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for
construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone subject to
Page 45
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
the following conditions:
1.
Before the commencement of the development, three (3) copies of plans drawn
to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans
submitted with the amended application Council date stamped 18 March 2015
but modified to show:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
The sight distance triangles to both the east and west are to be fully
dimensioned and shown on the plans in accordance with the requirements
of the Stonnington Planning Scheme, or otherwise to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority;
All parking spaces next to walls are to be widened to 2.9m and are to be
dimensioned on plans;
The type of bicycle parking is to be clearly identified, and all dimensions
are to be shown on plans. If a proprietary product is to be used,
manufacturer’s specifications are to be provided.
Fixed horizontal shading device to be provided to exposed northern aspect
windows;
User operable external shading to be shown to the western windows to
minimise summer afternoon solar heat gain;
Sections and Fences Elevations (Plan TP11) updated to reflect the changes
shown on plans 18 March 2015;
Confirmation as to whether there are views to a sensitive interface within 9
metres from the balcony associated with Unit 7. If there are views to a
sensitive interface within 9 metres, this balcony must be screened in
accordance with Standard B22 (Overlooking);
Tree root barriers shown where concrete paving is proposed opposite
existing mature Council street trees;
Relevant cross-sections (including indicative planting types) of all rain
gardens as well as indicative management and maintenance measures to
ensure long-term success of stormwater diversion;
all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
2.
The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and
works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless
the Stonnington Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without
the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
3.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a landscape plan to be prepared by a
landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer,
must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When
approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the
permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three
copies must be provided. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the
landscape concept plan Rev A dated 21.01.2015 prepared by John Patrick Pty
Ltd, but modified to show:
a)
b)
The Hymenosporum flavum (Native Frangipani) along the southern
boundary to be replaced with a more suitable screening tree to the
satisfaction of the Responsibility Authority;
Details of rain gardens, including indicative planting types as well as
indicative management and maintenance measures;
Page 46
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
c)
Confirmation that rain gardens are proposed to drain to a 20000 litre
rainwater tank to provide water for irrigation;
all to the satisfaction of the Responsibility Authority
4.
Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on
the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction
of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged
plants are to be replaced.
5.
Protection fencing must be afforded to all the street trees on both frontages of
this property prior to construction works being undertaken. Fencing must
comply with Section 4 of AS 4970
6.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, the applicant must provide a Water
Sensitive Urban Design Response addressing the Application Requirements of
the Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority. All proposed treatments included within the Water Sensitive Urban
Design Response must also be indicated on the plans.
7.
The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives
detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.
8.
Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1 a
Sustainable Management Plan (SMP) must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SMP will be endorsed as part of the
planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design
initiatives outlined in the SMP to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Amendments to the SMP must be incorporated into plan changes required under
Condition 1. The report must be generally in accordance with the Sustainable
Design Assessment prepared by ACX argyle dated 24 July 2014 but modified as
follows:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Whilst a solar hot water system is proposed to the top floor apartment, the
majority of units will be provided with instantaneous gas hot water. STEPS
report to be amended to reflect the majority approach;
Clarification of storm water collection and retention, including STORM
rating to correspond with submitted STORM Report;
Proposed target for construction and demolition stage recycling and reuse
to be 70% by mass in accordance with Council’s best practice.
Commitment to development of a Building User Guide, which will provide
information on aspects such as use and maintenance of rain gardens and
solar hot water systems, at a minimum;
Consistency with the application plans.
All works must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed Sustainability
Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations
to the Sustainable Management Plan may occur without written consent of the
Responsible Authority.
9.
Prior to the occupation of the development approved under this permit, a report
from the author of the Sustainability Management Plan, approved pursuant to
this permit, or similarly qualified person or company, must be submitted to the
Page 47
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Responsible Authority. The report must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the Sustainability
Management Plan have been implemented in accordance with the approved plan.
10.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Waste Management Plan must be
submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Waste
Management Plan must be generally in accordance with the Waste Management
Plan prepared by Waste Space Solutions Pty Ltd and dated 11 June 2014 and
must include:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
Dimensions of waste areas
The number of bins to be provided
Method of waste and recyclables collection
Hours of waste and recyclables collection NB. These should correspond
with our Local Laws
Method of presentation of bins for waste collection
Sufficient headroom within the basement to allow the passage of waste
collection vehicles
Sufficient turning circles for the waste collection vehicles to drive out in
forward gear from within the basement NB. This subsection only to be used
for collection from basement
Strategies for how the generation of waste and recyclables from the
development will be minimised
When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the
permit. Waste collection from the development must be in accordance with
the plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
11.
Any external lighting must be designed, baffled and located so as to prevent any
adverse effect on adjoining land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
12.
Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film)
designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in
accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority thereafter for the life of the building.
13.
A report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a
drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified
Engineer in accordance with that report prior to a building permit being issued.
The drainage must be constructed in accordance with the Engineer’s design.
14.
The existing footpath levels must not be lowered or altered to facilitate access to
the subject site.
15.
Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to
be relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the
applicant and subject to the relevant authority’s consent
16.
All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this
permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority by completion of the development.
17.
Prior to occupation, access for persons with disabilities must be provided in
compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and such access must be
maintained at all times the building is occupied or in use.
Page 48
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
18.
All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or
screened so as not to be visible from any of the surrounding footpaths and
adjoining properties (including from above) and shall be baffled so as to
minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance
with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of
the Responsible Authority.
19.
This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
a)
b)
The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
The development is not completed within four years of the date of this
permit.
In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a
request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed
timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.
NOTES:
This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or
occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are
obtained.
Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further
written approval of Council.
“Significant tree” means a tree:
a) with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its
base; or
b) with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5
metres above its base; or
c) listed on the Significant Tree Register.
Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is
required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of trees
during construction works.
Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of any street tree without the further written consent of the
Stonnington City Council. Contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 for further
information.
The crossover must be constructed to Council’s Standard Vehicle Crossover
Guidelines unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority. Separate
consent for crossovers is required from Council’s Building and Local Law Unit.
The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not eligible to
receive “Resident Parking Permits”.
At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stated
that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made
in writing within the following timeframes:
Page 49
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
i.
Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the
development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and
ii. Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development
allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.
Page 50
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
3
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0079/14 - 11 TASHINNY ROAD, TOORAK CONSTRUCTION OF TWO DWELLINGS ON A LOT WITHIN A GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE
Statutory Planning Manager: Alexandra Kastaniotis
General Manager Planning & Development: Stuart Draffin
PURPOSE
For Council to consider a planning permit application for the construction of two dwellings on
a lot within a General Residential Zone at 11 Tashinny Road, Toorak.
Executive Summary
Applicant:
Ward:
Zone:
Overlay:
Date lodged:
Statutory days:
Trigger for referral to
Council:
VCAT Hearing Date:
Cultural Heritage Plan:
Number of objections:
Number of parties to the
appeal:
Consultative Meeting:
Officer Recommendation:
C/- Christopher Doyle
Christopher Doyle P/L Architects
North
General Residential Zone – Schedule 10
None
12 February 2014
231
Councillor call up
6 May 2015 (compulsory conference date)
13 July 2015 (hearing date)
Not required
Eight objections from five properties
One objector has applied to be a party to the appeal
Yes – 15 July 2014
That Council advise VCAT that had a Failure to Determine
appeal not been lodged, a Notice of Decision to Grant a
Planning Permit would have been issued.
BACKGROUND
The application was lodged with Council on 12 February 2014 and further information was
requested on 7 March 2014. Satisfactory information was submitted on 14 April 2014 and the
application was advertised via letters to adjoining properties and signs on site. Council
received eight objections from five different properties.
Following a consultative meeting held on 15 July 2014 the application was formally amended
under Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to address objector concerns.
The applicant lodged an appeal under Section 79 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987
with the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) for Council’s failure to determine
the application within the statutory timeframe (60 days). A compulsory conference hearing
has been set down for 6 May 2015, followed by a two day hearing to commence on 13 July
2015.
Page 51
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The applicant substituted amended plans with VCAT which were served with Council on 3
March 2015. These amended plans supersede the previous set of plans and form the basis
of this report.
The Proposal
The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Christopher
Doyle Architecture and are known as File No. 13-17 Drawing No.s; PD01- PD30 and are
Council date stamped 3 March 2015.
Additional information submitted for Council’s consideration includes a Planning Report,
Sustainable Design Statement/STEPS Report and a STORM Rating Report. All the above
documentation is Council date stamped 3 March 2015.
The substituted VCAT plans result in the following amendments to the plans:
 Deletion of double garages on ground floor and associated crossover
 Provision of a driveway ramp down to a basement car park arrangement
 Amended front fence design to accommodate the single driveway ramp, and revised
pedestrian gate locations
 Revised ground floor layouts to accommodate the driveway ramp
 Provide a side entry arrangement to Townhouse B
 Amend both the first floor plan and attic plan to accommodate the revised lift location (to
account for the new basement)
Key features of the proposal are:
 Demolition of the existing dual occupancy dwelling and associated outbuilding (no permit
required).
 Construction of a three storey plus basement side-by-side dual occupancy residential
building.
 Three car spaces and storage to each dwelling is to be provided within a shared
basement.
 Vehicle access to the basement is to be via the existing crossover (to be widened)
adjoining Tashinny Road.
 An entry, foyer, study, dining, living, and kitchen will occupy the ground floor of each
dwelling.
 Three bedrooms, laundry and associated bathrooms occupy the first floor in each
dwelling.
 A bedroom/den, bathroom, home theatre and outdoor deck occupy the attic level in each
dwelling. As the third storey is within the roof space it presents to the street much like a
double storey building.
 The secluded private open space areas to each dwelling are to be oriented north
(towards the rear of the site).
 The building incorporates a mansard tiled roof with a maximum building height of 9.725
metres above natural ground level (NGL). The roof also contains two architectural finials,
one of which protrudes to a height of approximately 10 metres above NGL and the other
exceeds 10 metres above NGL.
 External materials include cement rendered walls (light stone colour), slate and tile roof
(dark grey in colour), and timber window frames with Juliette wrought iron balconies
fronting Tashinny Road.
 The height of the front fence ranges between 1.6 metres and 2.1 metres in height and is
constructed out of iron pickets with brick pillars and features a pedestrian gate for each
respective dwelling.
Page 52
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
 The proposal does not involve the removal of any significant vegetation.
Site and Surrounds
The site is located on the north side of Tashinny Road, approximately 135 metres east from
its intersection to Williams Road in Toorak. The site has the following significant
characteristics:
 The existing dual occupancy dwelling on site is a double storey inter-war maisonette
building from the 1930s with a freestanding double car garage in the north east corner of
the site.
 A concrete driveway runs along the west side of the property boundary.
 The land falls from the east towards the west by approximately 700mm.
 The site is generally rectangular in shape.
 The site frontage has a length of 15.41metres, a depth of 32 metres on the eastern
boundary, a depth of 33.53 on the western boundary and a rear boundary length of 15.19
metres.
 The site has an area of approximately 499 sq. metres.
The immediate surrounds are described as follows;
 To the south of the site is Tashinny Road which is a narrow local street that runs east off
Williams Road. The street features a pedestrian footpath, tree lined nature strip and
parallel car parking on either side.
 To the north of the site at No. 12 Gordon Street is a detached single storey brick dwelling
with a pitched roof.
 To the west of the site is a pair of semi-detached double storey brick dwellings at No. 9
and No. 9A Tashinny Road which are designed in a contemporary manner.
 To the east of the site is a pair of semi-detached double storey brick dwellings at No. 15
and No. 17 Tashinny Road.
The subject site forms part of an established residential area that exhibits a mixture of
dwelling types and styles including Federation, Interwar and Contemporary. It is evident that
the older housing stock within the precinct is being replaced with new dwellings. Dwellings
are generally detached or semi-detached and are generally one to two storeys in scale. Roof
styles consist of a mixture of flat and pitched tiled roofs. Dwellings are commonly constructed
of brick, render and weatherboard. In many instances garages and carports are in the side or
front of sections of properties. There are also many basement car park arrangements. Front
fences vary from and are generally either of a solid masonry fence, traditional timber picket
fencing or nonexistent.
The subject site is accessible to public transport, with tram services operating within walking
distance on Malvern Road which is approximately 400 metres (as the crow flies) south of the
subject site and Toorak Road, which is approximately 420 metres (as the crow flies) north of
the subject site. Furthermore, the nearest railway station is Hawksburn, which is located
approximately 200 metres (as the crow flies) from the subject site. These facilities provide
connection to the wider metropolitan public transport network.
Previous Planning Application(s)
A search of Council records indicates there are no relevant planning applications for this
land.
Page 53
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The Title
The site contains 6 different units on one strata plan (Lot 1-6 on Strata Plan 13156) and is
described on Certificate of Title Volume 09314 Folio 356, 357, 358, 359, 360 and 631.
Covenant (Instrument No 1560101) affects the land which restricts the following:
 Building or erecting no more than two dwellings on the lot with all usual outbuildings.
 Adapting the dwellings or outbuildings for more than two dwellings.
 Building or erecting dwellings which shall be part of or attached to any other dwelling
erected on any other lot.
 Excavating, carry away, or removing any earth, clay, gravel or sand except for the
purpose of excavation for the foundations of any building.
 No such dwelling shall be constructed out of materials other than of brick, stone or
concrete nor have a roof other than of slate tiles or shingles.
Only the external building materials are shown on the plans therefore, it is recommended that
a condition be placed on any issue of permit insuring that the dwellings will be constructed
out of brick, stone or concrete in accordance with the Covenant. As a result, the proposal will
not result in a breach of this particular covenant.
Planning Controls
The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:
Zone
Clause 32.08 General Residential Zone
(Schedule 10 – Garden River and Garden Suburban Precincts)
Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on the lot.
It is noted that the application was submitted on 12 February 2014, prior to the gazettal of the
new residential zones on 19 June 2014. Subsequently, the application was formally revised
under Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 on 25 July 2014 and, as such,
the General Residential Zone -Schedule 10 provisions apply.
Clause 32.08-7 states that the maximum height of a building used for the purpose of a
dwelling or residential building must not exceed the building height specified in a schedule to
this zone. Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone specifies a maximum height of 9
metres unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres
of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the height of the building
must not exceed 10 metres. As the subject site has a fall of greater than 2.5 degrees the
maximum mandatory height is 10 metres.
Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone also sets out variations to the requirements of
Clause 55 as detailed below:
Standard
Site Coverage B8
Landscaping B13
Side and Rear
Setbacks
B17
Requirement
Basements should not exceed 75% of the site area.
In addition to the requirements of B13, at least one canopy
tree should be planted on the site.
For a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front facade of
the building fronting the street, setback new buildings
(including basements) a minimum of 2 metres from at least
Page 54
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
one side boundary and at least 1 metre from the other side
boundary up to 3.6 metres in height.
Walls on
boundaries
B18
Where no setback is specified, standard A10 or B17 applies.
Walls should not be located on side boundaries for a distance
of 5 metres behind the front façade of the building fronting the
street.
Overlay
None
Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06 Car Parking
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2 prior to a new use commencing or a new building being
occupied, the car spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land or as
approved under Clause 52.06-3 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Pursuant to
52.06-5 each three or more bedroom dwelling must provide at least two car parking spaces.
The proposed dwellings are each provided with three car spaces within a shared basement.
Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings
Pursuant to Clause 55, a development of two or more dwellings on a lot, which does not
exceed 4 storeys must meet the objectives of this clause.
Relevant Planning Policies
Clause 11
Clause 15.01
Clause 15.02
Clause 16.01
Clause 21.03
Clause 21.05
Clause 21.06
Clause 32.09
Clause 52.06
Clause 55
Clause 65
Settlement
Urban Environment
Sustainable Development
Residential Development
Vision
Housing
Built Environment and Heritage
Neighbourhood Residential Zone
Car Parking
Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings
Decision Guidelines
Amendment C175 – Neighbourhood Character Local Policy
Amendment C175 has been prepared to introduce a new Neighbourhood Character Policy
into the local section of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. The Neighbourhood Character
local planning policy includes the preferred character statements, design objectives and
design responses to be taken from the precinct profiles. This policy will clarify the preferred
neighbourhood character for an area and assist in ensuring that a development proposal
respects and reinforces the preferred character.
Council received the Panel Report on 26 November 2014, which recommends that the
Amendment be adopted as exhibited subject to minor modifications. As a result, Amendment
C175 has reached a stage that it can be considered as a seriously entertained planning
policy. Due consideration should be given to the proposed Neighbourhood Character Policy.
According to the Amendment, the subject site falls within a Garden Suburban 1 (‘GS1’)
Precinct. A detailed assessment against Amendment C175 will be discussed in the
assessment section of this report.
Page 55
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Advertising
The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment
Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing
one sign on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed
satisfactorily.
The site is located in North Ward and eight objections from five different properties have
been received. The objections can be summarized as follows:















Overshadowing
Loss of daylight to existing windows
Siting, spacing, scale
Inconsistent with neighbourhood character
Lack of meaningful landscaping
Visual bulk
Insufficient setbacks to boundaries
Inappropriate height of walls on boundaries
Lack of articulation
Loss of outlook
Loss of on street parking and increase of traffic
Increase of flooding
Loss of privacy
Construction management issues
Structural integrity to adjoining properties resulting from construction
A Consultative Meeting was held on 15 July 2014. The meeting was attended by Councillors
Chandler and Koce, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning
officer. The meeting resulted in the following changes to the plans:




The gutter RL dropped and the roof pitch revised
Walls on the Attic level are further setback from the boundaries by 240mm
Climbers on all walls and fences to 9A Tashinny Road have been removed
Species of screening trees along boundaries revised. More, specifically, the trees marked
'A' were originally Waferhousea Floribunda (Weeping Lillypilly) which have now been
replaced with Prunus Lusifanica (Portuguese Laurel).
 Freestanding clotheslines relocated to rear yard
 Amended first floor plan to create splays to the north-west and north east corners of the
building, in the Bedroom 1 area. In addition, amended roof over to account for the new
splays on the first floor.
 Living room wall on boundary (to Townhouse B) is no higher than the shared fence
between the subject site and 15 Tashinny Road.
The plans were not re-advertised as the changes result in no increase in material detriment
compared with the application that was originally advertised in April 2014.
Subsequent amendment were made to the plans and formally substituted with VCAT (as
discussed above).
Page 56
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Referrals
Parks Unit
 A significant Ulmus procera (English Elm) is located in the rear setback of this property.
As this tree appears to be a poor specimen Council has no objection to its removal.
 The existing crossing is proposed to be widened. The distance between the new
crossover and the street tree stem is not shown on the submitted plans. The Pyrus
calleryana (Callery Pear) street tree at this location has an SRZ of 1.5m radius around
the stem.
 Permit Condition - The edge of the eastern splay of the new crossover must be
constructed no closer than 1.5m from the edge of the street tree stem.
 Permit Condition – Street tree protection must be afforded to the mature Pyrus calleryana
(Callery Pear) street tree. Fencing must be compliant with AS 4687.
 The landscape concept is acceptable, but it must be clearly shown if trees are to be
planted in-ground or in situ.
An assessment against the above concerns has been discussed under the landscaping
heading below.
Infrastructure Unit
It was determined by the Infrastructure Unit that adequate drainage will be provided for both
dwellings provided they are both 17.20 metres above A.H.D. A request has been made to
include conditions on any issue of permit, which may issue requiring the applicant to obtain a
report for legal point of discharge prior to a building permit being issued. Additionally, a
condition restricting the alteration to the levels of the footpath is required and it was also
stated that water-tanks should be installed to reduce stormwater runoff.
An assessment against the above concerns has been discussed under the Infrastructure
heading below.
Traffic and Parking Unit
 The proposal satisfies the parking requirements in terms of numbers and dimensions;
 The traffic generation is anticipated to be negligible;
 The proposal includes a 3.6m wide accessway, which meets the minimum requirements
of the Planning Scheme;
 The plans show a headroom clearance of 2.4m along the ramp however, the clearance
under the garage door has not been dimensioned – details required;
 The sight distance at the property boundary has not been dimensioned on the plans–
details required;
 The parking bays shown on the plan are generally in accordance with the requirements of
the Australian Standards;
 The blind isles do not achieve full compliance with the minimum requirements, this can
be supported in this instance given that parking spaces exceed the minimum width;
 The grades along the ramp and covered parking area are not in accordance with the
requirements of the Planning Scheme;
 The location of the columns do not comply with the Planning Scheme; and
 The vehicle crossing does not comply with Council’s Vehicle Crossing Policy.
An assessment against the above concerns has been discussed under the Traffic and
Parking heading below.
Page 57
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
KEY ISSUES
Strategic Justification
The purpose of the General Residential Zone is to implement State and Local Planning
Policies, to encourage development that respects the existing neighbourhood character, to
implement neighbourhood policy, provide diversity of housing and moderate housing growth
in locations offering good access to services and transport. The State Planning Policy
Framework encourages higher density development to be located in or close to activity
centres, employment corridors and public transport. In addition, local policies call for welldesigned medium density housing that respects neighbourhood character, improves housing
choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency of
housing.
Having regard to the policies, provisions and decision guidelines of the Stonnington Planning
Scheme and the context of the subject site and its surrounds, it is considered that the
proposed development is consistent with the strategic directions of the State and Local
Policy Framework, in particular Clause 11.04 (Metropolitan Melbourne), Clause 21.05
(Housing) and Clause 21.06 (Built Environment and Heritage).
The proposed development seeks to construct a pair of semi-detached dwellings in a well
serviced location within the municipality. Specifically, the subject site is located within close
proximity to two Large Neighbourhood Activity Centres (i.e. Hawksburn Village and Toorak
Village) which consists of commercial facilities for local and everyday retail and service
activities.
The subject site is accessible to public transport, with tram services operating within walking
distance on Malvern Road which is approximately 400 metres (as the crow flies) south of the
subject site and Toorak Road, which is approximately 420 metres (as the crow flies) north of
the subject site. Furthermore, the nearest railway station is Hawksburn, which is located
approximately 200 metres (as the crow flies) from the subject site. These facilities provide
connection to the wider metropolitan public transport network.
Clause 21.05 (Housing) of the Stonnington Planning Scheme directs new residential
development to locations that are accessible to activity centers and public transport
networks. In order to achieve this objective Stonnington is broken up into three categories;
Substantial, Incremental and Minimal change areas. Being located within an Incremental
change area, it is the aim of local policy that multi-unit developments (2-3 storeys) be
directed to lots capable of accommodating increased density. It is considered that the
development site is of a size that is capable of being developed with two dwellings that
respect the character of the area and would not unreasonably impact on the amenity of
adjoining property occupiers.
Similarly, pursuant to Clause 21.06 (Built Environment and Heritage), medium density
developments (2-3 storey) are encouraged, provided they respect the preferred character of
the precinct. It is evident that the surrounding character of the area is emerging with dual
occupancy developments of a large double storey nature. The proposed dwellings are three
storeys however, the building presents to the street as a double storey dwelling as the third
floor is incorporated within the attic. It is considered that the proposed dwellings will not be
significantly higher or lower than the surrounding buildings and conforms to the preferred
character of the precinct.
Clause 21.06-3 (Amenity) aims ‘to achieve high standards of amenity within new
developments, and with adjoining developments’. It is considered that the proposal provides
for a good level of internal amenity with no reliance on borrowed light and appropriate room
Page 58
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
dimensions, layout and connections, and private open space provided. Furthermore the
proposal does not result in unreasonable amenity impacts which will be discussed in more
detail within the Clause 55 assessment.
It is considered that the subject site has strategic support for the proposed development.
Furthermore, it is considered that the proposed development satisfactorily addresses policy
objectives of streetscape character, household diversity, building form and landscape
character and is responsive to its context. Notwithstanding the general assessment, detailed
consideration must be given to how the proposal specifically responds to the neighbourhood
character, design and residential amenity. These are discussed further below.
Clause 55
Neighbourhood Character/ Design Detail
As noted in the site and surrounds section of this report, Tashinny Road is characterised by a
variety of dwelling types. These comprise of predominantly single and double storey
buildings including Federation and Interwar with contemporary dwellings emerging. The more
contemporary buildings are generally semi-detached multi-dwelling developments with sheer
double storey facades commonly finished in brick or render.
The proposed development is three storeys, however it presents to the street much like a
double storey development as the third storey is incorporated within the roof space. It is
considered that the size and scale of the proposed building is similar in size and scale to the
two adjoining dwellings and other development found within this locality. As such the
proposal is considered to sit comfortably within the streetscape.
The prevailing roof style consists of pitched tiled roofs with a number of flat roofed buildings
dispersed throughout the area. The facade articulation and window proportions reference the
key design elements of the surrounding dwellings.
Ultimately, the proposal achieves an appropriate balance between landscaping and built
form. Opportunities for landscaping have been provided in key locations throughout the site
to further enhance the design aesthetic of the proposed development. The proposal also
involves the widening of the existing single crossover to provide improved access for the onsite vehicle parking within a basement.
Council has undertaken neighbourhood character studies across the municipality’s
residential areas and is in the process of introducing a new neighbourhood character policy
into the local planning policies. According to the exhibited documents and Panel Report of
Amendment C175, the subject site falls within the Garden Suburban 1 (‘GS1’) Precinct.
The Garden Suburban 1 (‘GS1’) Precinct comprises leafy streetscapes with a range of
Victorian, Edwardian or Interwar era and contemporary buildings set in established garden
surrounds. Regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for
small, well designed garden areas that contribute to the landscape quality of the street. New
buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while
complementing the key aspects of form, one‐two storey scale and design detail of the older
buildings. Low, visually permeable front fences retain views to gardens and dwellings from
the street.
The table below outlines how the application performs against the proposed neighbourhood
character policy.
Page 59
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Character
elements
Existing building
Design Objectives
Design Response
To encourage the
retention of intact, older
dwellings that contribute
to the character of the
area.
Building height and
form
To ensure new buildings
and extensions do not
dominant the
streetscape.
To encourage a high
quality of building
detailing that references,
without mimicking, the
details of buildings in the
area.
To maintain and
reinforce the rhythm of
spacing between and
around buildings.
The application seeks to demolish the existing
dwelling. However, this is not prohibited under
the current or proposed planning controls. In
addition, the existing building makes limited
contribution to the character of the area.
Therefore, its removal will not adversely impact
on the existing neighbourhood character.
The height of the proposed development is
considered to be compatible with the existing
buildings on either side of the subject site and
within the precinct at large.
The building materials and design of the
proposed development are similar to that of
other properties found within the precinct and
are considered appropriate in this context.
Building materials
and design details
Orientation and
siting
Gardens
To maintain and
strengthen the garden
setting of buildings and
the tree canopy of the
neighbourhood.
Garages and
carports
To prevent the loss of
front garden space and
the dominance of car
parking structures.
Front fencing
To ensure fences
complement the
predominant style of
front boundary treatment
in the street and retain
views to the dwellings
and gardens.
The proposed development will be orientated
towards Tashinny Road. Whilst there are walls
built along the side boundaries, they are
appropriately setback from the facade. This is
considered to be an acceptable design
response given the examples of boundary
construction within Tashinny Road.
The development allows opportunity for
meaningful landscaping. The permit holder will
be required to erect tree protection fencing
around the mature Pyrus calleryana (Callery
Pear) located on the footpath prior to
construction works occurring. This matter will
be addressed via conditions of any permit
issued.
The proposed development adopts a setback
that is consistent with the pattern of front
setbacks along Tashinny Road. The proposed
front setback will be landscaped and would
contribute to the streetscape. Overall, it is
considered that the proposal will not adversely
impact on the landscape character of this area.
Parking will be provided in a basement with a
single point of access from Tashinny Road. The
location of the parking spaces is considered to
be appropriate and will not cause loss of front
garden space.
The application proposes a 1.6 metres to 2.1
metre high front fence which is constructed out
of iron pickets with brick pillars. The fence is
transparent in nature to allow for views into the
dwellings and garden.
Page 60
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed development represents a design
response that will complement the garden suburban setting of Tashinny Road.
Site Layout and Building Massing
Street setback
Standard B6 requires a minimum setback of 4.28 metres (average front setback of No 9A
and 15 Tashinny Road). Townhouse A achieves compliance with the Standard as it
incorporates a minimum street setback measuring 4.5 metres. However, given the irregular
angle of the site frontage, Townhouse B achieves a front setback of 4.09 metres.
In this inner urban context the non-compliance is considered to be relatively minor (i.e. 0.19
metres). A requirement to increase the setback by 0.19 metres is unlikely to result in any
discernible difference in either the neighbourhood character impacts of the development, or
its visual bulk implications. The proposed front setback is similar in nature to other setbacks
found within the neighbourhood and is considered acceptable in this context.
Building Height
The subject site has a slope of greater than 2.5 degrees along the east – west axis therefore;
the maximum building height must not exceed 10 metres. The proposed development has a
maximum height of 9.725 metres above NGL with the exception of an architectural finial on
the roof.
Should a permit be granted it is recommended that a condition be placed on the permit to
insure that the architectural finials do not exceed a height of 10 metres above NGL.
Therefore, achieving compliance with the maximum allowable height of 10 metres as
specified under Standard B7 (varied by Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone).
Site Coverage
The development proposes 53 per cent site coverage, which complies with the 60 per cent
maximum stipulated in Standard B8 at Clause 55.03-3.
A basement is proposed directly underneath the ground floor building footprint, covering 57.7
per cent of the site, which complies, with the 75 per cent maximum for basements outlined in
Standard B8 of Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone. This is considered to be
acceptable and will allow for deep soil planting opportunities throughout the site.
Permeability
The site will have 28 per cent permeability. This complies with the 20 per cent minimum
allowed under Standard B9. In conjunction with this, the development will be required to
meet Council’s Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy further reducing stormwater runoff.
Energy Efficiency
Given the orientation of the subject site, the primary living area and SPOS for both dwellings
is north facing and will gain a high level of daylight access. In any given instance, the
Building Regulations will require a 6 star energy efficiency rating.
Page 61
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Landscaping
It is considered that the layout of the development allows opportunity for meaningful
landscaping. For instance, the proposal includes lawn areas for the proposed dwellings to
the north and south with landscaping around the perimeter of the site. Furthermore, the
proposal features six canopy trees including two in the front setback which exceeds the
requirement of Standard B13. It is recommended that a condition be placed on any issue of
permit ensuring that the landscaping as shown on the landscape plan is planted and
maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Amenity Impacts
Side and Rear Setbacks
Standard B17 (side and rear setbacks) sets out numeric requirements for side and rear
setbacks. The tables below illustrate how the proposal meets these requirements.
Ground Floor
Dwelling A (living)
Ground Floor
Dwelling B (living)
First Floor
Dwelling A (bed 1)
First Floor
Dwelling B (bed 1)
Ground Floor
Dwelling B
First Floor
Dwelling B
Attic Floor
Dwelling B (height
taken from the middle
of the attic level)
Ground Floor
Dwelling A
First Floor
Dwelling A
Attic Floor
Dwelling A (height
taken from the middle
of the attic level)
North Elevation (Rear Setback)
Wall height Setback
Setback proposed
required
3.46
1.0 metres
5.39 metres
metres
2.94
1.0 metres
5.39 metres
metres
6.51
1.87 metres
5.39 metres
metres
5.89
1.69 metres
4.5 metres
metres
East Elevation (Side Setback)
Wall height Setback
Setback proposed
required
2.9 metres
1.0 metres
1.8 – 2.0 metres
Complies
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Complies
Yes
6.15 metres
1.76 metres
1.8 – 2.0 metres
Yes
7.6 metres
2.69 metres
3.57 metres
Yes
West Elevation (Side Setback)
Wall height Setback
Setback proposed
required
3.46 metres 1.0 metres
1.84 metres
6.7 – 6.87
metres
8.37 metres
1.93 – 1.98
metres
3.46 metres
Complies
Yes
2.04 – 2.0 metres
Yes
3.5 metres
Yes
The gutters on the east and west elevation encroach the side setback requirements but not
more than 0.5 metres as required by Standard B17.
Page 62
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Standard B17 as specified at Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone requires a
setback of 1 metre from one side boundary and 2 metres from the other side boundary up to
3.6 metres in height for a distance of 5 metres behind the front facade of the building fronting
the street.
The proposal includes a setback of 2 metres from the eastern boundary for a distance of
6.48 metres from the front facade and a setback of 4.6 metre from the western boundary on
the ground floor and a setback of 2.1 metres on the first floor for a distance of 6.5 metres
from the front facade. These setbacks are considered appropriate and sufficient to maintain
adequate spacing and rhythm between dwellings and are generally in accordance with the
character of the surrounding area.
It is apparent that the proposal is appropriately setback in accordance with the standard and
objective of B17 (Clause 55.04-1), so as to limit potential amenity impacts on neighbouring
properties including unreasonable visual bulk.
Walls on Boundaries
There are two portions of wall constructed on the eastern boundary (one section associated
with the foyer and one section associated with the living area). The eastern walls are to have
a height between 2.02 – 2.89 metres and a total length of 10 metres which meets the
requirements of Standard B18.
There is an existing brick wall associated with the existing garage constructed on the western
boundary in the rear yard for a length of approximately 5.2 metres and 3.12 metres in height,
which is being retained as part of this application. The new western wall on boundary will be
an extension to the existing boundary wall. The new wall will have a height of 2.95 – 3.02
metres and a total wall on boundary length of approximately 9.7 metres which meets the
requirements of Standard B18.
Standard B18 as specified at Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone details that walls
should not be located on side boundaries for a distance of 5 metres behind the front façade
of the building fronting the street. The proposed walls on boundaries are in excess of 6.5
metres behind the building façade.
In light of the above, it is considered that the proposed meets the standard and objective of
B18 (Clause 55.04-2).
Daylight to existing windows
The adjoining properties have a number of habitable room windows facing the subject site.
The impact of the proposed development on light access to these windows will be discussed
individually in turn below:
-
9A Tashinny Road
Dwelling A will be opposite a ground floor courtyard containing habitable room windows,
which are located centrally within the site. There is also first floor habitable room windows
directly above the courtyard. The proposed ground floor wall (associated with the foyer) that
is opposite these windows is approximately 3.6 metres in height; therefore Standard B19
requires a setback of 1.8 metres. As the proposal provides a 6.4 metres setback from the
windows in question compliance with the Standard is achieved.
Page 63
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The proposed first floor wall opposite the existing habitable windows has a height of 6.87
metres therefore Standard B19 requires a setback of 3.435 metres. As the proposal provides
a setback of 3.94 metres from the windows in question compliance with the Standard is
achieved.
The proposed attic floor opposite the existing habitable windows has a height of 7.6 metres
(taken from the middle of the angled roofline) therefore Standard B19 requires a setback of
3.8 metres. As the proposal provides a setback of 5.4 metres from the windows in question
compliance with the Standard is achieved. As a result, light access to the habitable room
window of 9A Tashinny Road will not be unreasonably affected by the proposal.
-
10 Gordon Street
The proposal seeks to retain the existing boundary wall located across from the two
habitable room windows at 10 Gordon Street therefore, not altering access to light.
-
15 Tashinny Road
Dwelling B will be opposite two ground floor habitable room windows. The proposed ground
floor wall that is opposite the northern most window is approximately 2 metres in height
therefore, Standard B19 requires a setback of 1 metres from the window. The proposal
provides a 1.26 metre setback from the window in question therefore achieving compliance
with the standard.
The proposed first floor wall height is 6.1 metres therefore; Standard B19 requires a setback
of 3.05 metres from the windows. The proposal provides a 3.2 metre setback from the
northern most window therefore, achieving compliance with the standard. The proposal
provides a 3 metre setback from the south most window resulting in a short fall of 0.05
metres. This non-compliance is considered to be minor in nature and acceptable in this
context as the amount of light to the habitable room will not be unreasonably affected.
The proposed attic floor opposite the existing habitable windows has a height of 8.37 metres
(taken from the middle of the angled roofline) therefore Standard B19 requires a setback of
4.18 metres. As the proposal provides a setback of 4.77 metres from the windows in
question compliance with the Standard is achieved here. As a result, light access to the
habitable room window of 9A Tashinny Road will not be unreasonably affected by the
proposal.
North-facing windows
There are no north-facing habitable room windows within 3m of the boundary of the subject
site therefore; Standard B20 is not applicable to this application.
Overshadowing
Given the orientation of the allotment and the layout of the proposed development, the
properties to the west will be partially overshadowed in the morning and the properties to the
east will be partially overshadowed in the evening. However, in accordance with the
requirements of Standard B21, at least 40 square metres of the SPOS areas pertaining to
the adjoining properties will continue to enjoy a minimum of five hours of sunlight between
9am and 3pm on 22 September.
Page 64
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Overlooking
The key assessment tool to determine unreasonable overlooking is the overlooking objective,
including Standard B22. The standard provides a 9m 45 degree angle arc that determines
unreasonable overlooking, and windows or balconies that are located in such a position must
be screened to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level accordingly. The standard does
not apply to any overlooking issues from the ground level as all the existing boundary fences
are at least 1.8 metres in height and the finished floor level is less than 0.8 metres above
ground level at the boundary. Key details are as follows:
 The first and second floor windows facing south are not screened. This is considered to
be acceptable because these windows have an outlook over Tashinny Road and do not
give rise to any overlooking issue.
 All the first floor east and west facing windows have opaque glazing to a height on 1.7
metres above finished floor level.
 All east and west facing the attic windows have a sill height of 1.7 metres above finished
floor level (highlight windows).
 The north facing decks associated with the first floor and attic have overview screening to
a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level.
 The north facing habitable room windows have opaque glazing to a height on 1.7 metres
above finished floor level.
In order to ensure no unreasonable overlooking will occur, the plans should specify the
transparency of the opaque glazing and overview screening. Furthermore, the plans should
detail how wide the restricted casement will open. The above matters will be addressed via
conditions on any issue of permit.
On-Site Amenity and Facilities
Dwelling Entry
Entries to the proposed dwellings are provided via Tashinny Road, which are clearly
identifiable from the street. The pedestrian gates and paths to the front doors will create a
sense of personal address to each dwelling.
Internal amenity
The proposed dwellings are provided with the necessary components for comfortable living,
including the provision of windows to all habitable rooms. It is noted that all the habitable
areas have clear outlook and direct solar/daylight access. Furthermore, the relevant Building
Regulations are in place to ensure all new residential buildings meet the relevant energy
efficiency standards.
Private open space
The proposed dwellings will each comprise in excess of 40 square metres of private open
space, including adequate areas of secluded private open space to the north of each
respective dwelling. In addition, the secluded private open space areas will be accessed via
the ground floor living areas. This meets the requirements of the standard.
Front Fence
There are many fences throughout the streetscape with a varying style, the most common of
which are brick or rendered brick with metal work infill or timber pickets. The standard
stipulates that a front fence should not exceed 1.5 metres above NGL. The majority of the
Page 65
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
fences within the vicinity are between 1.5 to 2 metres in height. The application proposes a
1.6 metres to 2.1 metre high front fence which is constructed out of semi-permeable iron
pickets with six brick pillars. The brick pillars are generally 0.4 metres higher than the iron
pickets therefore creating a level of visual interest and by breaking up the mass. The height
and design of the proposed front fence is not remarkably different from what can be found in
this neighbourhood. As a result, its impact on the neighbourhood character is considered to
be acceptable.
Service facilities
The proposal provides areas for the necessary site services. Each dwelling is provided with a
large storage facility, which is secure and conveniently accessible within the basement. The
mailboxes and other site facilities are adequate in size and their locations are appropriate.
Infrastructure
The proposal will incorporate water sensitive urban design features including the installation
of a water tanks. This will help reduce stormwater runoff and WSUD and sustainability
issues. Importantly, both dwellings have a floor level of 17.20 metres above A.H.D. therefore,
adequate drainage can occur.
Permit conditions requiring the legal point of discharge and a drainage design for the
development prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer will be included on any permit that
issues. In addition, a permit condition will require that level of the footpath must not be
altered.
Parks
It is recommended that permit conditions ensuring that the vehicle crossing is adequately
setback from the stem of the street tree and ensuring tree protection fencing is erected
around the street tree prior to works occurring will be included on any issue of permit.
Furthermore, clarification as to whether trees are to be planted in-ground (directly into the
soil / ground, not into a container) or in situ (into a constructed planter box, generally
elevated above the surrounding level) will be a requirement on any permit that issues.
Traffic and Parking
Concerns/queries have been raised from the Traffic and Parking Unit relating to the
headroom clearance provided for the garage, sight distances, ramp grades, floor gradients
and column locations. Permit conditions should be included on any permit that issues
requiring these to be addressed.
The Access Objective at Clause 55.03-9 aims ‘to ensure the number and design of vehicle
crossovers respects the neighborhood character’. The proposal seeks to alter the existing
crossing. The width of the proposed crossover is 3 metres (i.e. 19.5 per cent of the site
frontage), which complies with the 40 per cent maximum allowed under Standard B14. Traffic
and Parking Unit raised concerns, as the crossover has not been designed in accordance
with Councils Vehicle Crossing Policy. This will be addressed via conditions of any permit
issued.
Sustainable Design Assessment
Council has a proposed draft policy (Clause 22.22) titled Environmentally Efficient Design
(EED). The EED Policy provides guidance with regard to achieving best practice
environmentally sustainable development. Under the policy, development applications will
Page 66
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
need to submit a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) or a Sustainability Management
Plan, which is determined by the size of a development. Tools currently used by applicants
include STEPS, STORM and Green Star.
The applicant has submitted a STEPS response however, it is based on the advertised plans
(Council date stamped 14 April 2014). As a result, the STEPS response is not reflective of
the current proposal. This will be addressed via condition on any issue of permit.
Water Sensitive Urban Design
It is noted that the proposal will incorporate water sensitive urban design (WSUD) features
including the installation of a 8000 litre rainwater tank and a buffer strip along the pathway.
The STORM Rating Report indicates a rating of 100 per cent, which satisfies the application
requirements and objectives of Clause 22.18 (Stormwater Management WSUD). However,
the plans do not indicate that the rain water tank will be connected to the toilets which is
required to achieve the 100 per cent STORM Rating. Furthermore, the WSUD Report is
based on the advertised plans (Council date stamped 14 April 2014) therefore; it is not
reflective of the current proposal. The above matters will be addressed via condition on any
issue of permit.
Objections
In response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following
comments are made:
 The structural integrity of adjoining properties is not a relevant planning consideration.
Matters relating to structural design are dealt with through the building permit process.
 Construction management issues are not a relevant planning consideration. Matters
relating to construction management are regulated by building and local laws.
Human Rights Consideration
This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State
Government and which complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
CONCLUSION
Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended
that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:
 There is strategic justification for the construction of two dwellings on the subject site.
 The design, scale, siting and built form of the proposal is consistent with the existing
neighbourhood character.
 The proposed development will not result in unreasonable amenity impacts.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
PD - 0079-14 - 11 Tashinny Road Toorak - 1 of 1
Plans
RECOMMENDATION
That Council advise VCAT that had a Failure to Determine appeal not been lodged, a
Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 0079/14 would have been issued for
Page 67
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
the land located at 11 Tashinny Road, Toorak under the Stonnington Planning Scheme
for the construction of two dwellings on a lot within a General Residential Zone
subject to the following conditions:
1.
Before the commencement of the development, three (3) copies of plans drawn
to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the
substituted VCAT plans Council date stamped 3 March 2015 but modified to
show:
a) The edge of the eastern splay of the crossover must be constructed no closer
than 1.5m from the edge of the street tree stem.
b) Screening devices (windows and balconies) to be no more than 25%
transparent in accordance with Standard B22 (overlooking) of Clause 55.
c) Details of the operability of the restrictive openings to the habitable room
windows in accordance with Standard B22 (overlooking) of Clause 55.
d) Compliance with Council’s Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy. The
treatment measure (rainwater tank) must show the connectivity of the tank to
proposed toilet facilities in accordance with condition 14.
e) Water sensitive urban design response updated to reflect the current
proposal.
f) STEPS response update to reflect the current proposal.
g) Landscape plans updated to confirm whether the trees are to be planted inground or in situ.
h) The architectural finial features on the roof reduced in height pursuant to
Standard B7 (building height).
i) Show minimum floor gradient of the car parking areas. The minimum gradient
of the parking area shall be 1 in 200 (0.5 per cent) for covered areas to allow
for adequate drainage as per AS 2890.1.
j) The headroom clearance to the garage dimensioned. The Australian
Standards require a minimum clearance height of 2.2 metres.
k) Demonstrate on the plans satisfactory sight distances to Tashinny Road.
l) A longitudinal section from the footpath to the basement demonstrating all
proposed grades, all lengths of grades and all levels to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority. The maximum sag grade change is 15% and the
maximum crest grade change is 12.5% as per the Australian Standards.
m) Column locations and setbacks updated to show compliance with the
Stonnington Planning Scheme.
n) Details of the building materials (i.e brick, stone or concrete) in accordance
with Covenant instrument No. 1560101 as listed on the title.
All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
2.
The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and
works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless
the Stonnington Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without
the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
3.
Protection fencing must be afforded to the retained Pyrus calleryana (Callery
Pear) street tree prior to construction works occurring. Fencing must be
compliant with AS 4687. Fencing must remain in place until the completion of
construction works, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
4.
No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within
the Tree Protection Zone without the written consent of the Responsible
Page 68
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within
the Tree Protection Zone.
5.
Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on
the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction
of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged
plants are to be replaced.
6.
Prior to the development commencing, a report for the legal point of discharge
must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must
be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with that report prior
to a building permit being issued. The drainage must be constructed in
accordance with the Engineer’s design.
7.
Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film)
designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in
accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority thereafter for the life of the building.
8.
Prior to the occupation of the building, the walls on the boundary of the
adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority.
9.
All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this
permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority by completion of the development.
10.
Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to
be relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the
applicant and subject to the relevant authority’s consent.
11.
The crossover must be constructed to Council’s Standard Vehicle Crossover
Guidelines unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority. Separate
consent for crossovers is required from Council’s Building and Local Law Unit.
12.
The level of the footpaths must not be lowered or altered in any way to facilitate
access to the site.
13.
The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives
detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.
14.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, the applicant must provide a Water
Sensitive Urban Design Response addressing the Application Requirements of
the Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) Policy to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
15.
This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
a)
b)
The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
The development is not completed within four years of the date of this
permit.
Page 69
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a
request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed
timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.
NOTES
 This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or
occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are
obtained.
 Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of any street tree without the further written consent of the
Stonnington City Council. Contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 for further
information.
 Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further
written approval of Council.
“Significant tree” means a tree:
a)
with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its
base; or
b)
with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5
metres above its base; or
c)
listed on the Significant Tree Register.
Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is
required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of
trees during construction works.
 At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987
stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a
request is made in writing within the following timeframes:
a) Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the development
allowed by the permit has not yet started; and
b) Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed
by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.
Page 70
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
4
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0735/14 – 616-618 WARRIGAL ROAD, MALVERN EAST
– CONSTRUCTION OF A FIVE STOREY MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING SHOP AT
GROUND LEVEL AND 13 DWELLINGS ABOVE
Statutory Planning Manager: Alexandra Kastaniotis
General Manager Planning & Development: Stuart Draffin
PURPOSE
For Council to consider a planning application for the construction of a five storey mixed use
development comprising shop at ground level and 13 dwellings at 616-618 Warrigal Road,
Malvern East.
Executive Summary
Applicant:
Ward:
Zone:
Overlay:
Date lodged:
Statutory days: (as at council
ARG Planning
East
Commercial 1 Zone (C1Z, Schedule 10)
None
22/08/2014
48
meeting date)
Trigger for referral to Council:
Number of objections:
Consultative Meeting:
Officer Recommendation:
4 or more storeys
6
Yes – held on 26 February 2015
Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit
BACKGROUND
The Proposal
The plans that form the basis of this decision were prepared by Point Architects, job 669,
Drawing Nos: SA01, DR01, TP01-TP06, Council date stamped 2 March 2015 and Transport
Impact Assessment, Waste Management Plan and Sustainable Management Plan, all
Council date stamped 22 August 2014.
Key features of the proposal are:










It is proposed to construct a five storey mixed use development;
A shop (148m2), 13 car parking spaces (2 allocated to the shop and 11 allocated to the
dwellings), storage and waste management will be provided at ground level;
Of the 13 car parking spaces, 11 are within a stacking unit accessed via the right of
way at the rear, and 2 are at grade spaces accessed off Mountfield Avenue;
1 x one-bedroom dwelling and 3 x two-bedroom dwellings will be provided at first floor;
2 x one-bedroom dwellings and 2 x two-bedroom dwellings will be provided at second
floor;
3 x two-bedroom dwellings will be provided at third floor;
1 x one-bedroom dwelling and 1 x two-bedroom dwelling will be provided at fourth floor;
As the land slopes downhill from west-east, the maximum overall building height varies
between 16.0m and 16.4m above natural ground level;
Building site coverage of 100%;
Site permeability 0%;
Page 71
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015



One 10,000L rainwater tank is proposed to collect water off roof areas, plumbed to
toilets;
The shop provides an entry off Warrigal Road, whilst the dwellings will be accessed via
a common entry off the frontage to Mountfield Avenue; and
A detailed palette of materials is proposed, including areas of render, sections of precast, punched metal screening, glazed balustrades, alucobond detail and stained
timber.
It is noted that the applicant formally amended the application on 2 March 2015 in response
to concerns raised by Council and objectors. The changes made are detailed below and
include:







Reconfiguration of the ground floor design, including the parking, storage, waste and
entry areas. The entry lobby has been aligned with the lift and stair, and waste is
separated from vehicle movements and the entry lobby;
An internal bin room was added for the retail space;
Reduction in the extent of the building at level 3, increasing the setback from the rear
(west) from 4.0m to 6.0m;
Removal of one dwelling from level 3 to result in a total of 13 dwellings in lieu of 14 as
originally proposed;
Reconfiguration of dwelling types from providing 6 x 1 bedroom and 8 x 2 bedroom to
providing 4 x 1 bedroom and 9 x 2 bedroom;
Level 4 reconfigured by an increase in the setback from Mountfield Avenue (south)
from 1.5m to 3.0m, now 2m closer to Warrigal Road; and
West facing balcony associated with dwelling 13 has been relocated to face Mountfield
Avenue, further reducing the bulk facing the adjacent dwelling at 23 Mountfield Avenue.
Site and Surrounds
The site is located on the west side of Warrigal Road, Malvern East. The site has the
following significant characteristics:




The site is made up of two lots (Lots 14 and 15 on PS019830) and is currently vacant;
A frontage to Warrigal Road of 9.14m (plus a 4.31m splay) and a depth along
Mountfield Avenue of 27.43m;
An area of approximately 400m2; and
The land exhibits a fall running downhill from west to east of approximately 0.7m.
The subject site is located at the nexus of three land zones; the subject site and all the land
along Warrigal Road to the north is within a Commercial 1 Zone (C1Z), along Warrigal Road
to the south is land zoned Residential Growth Zone (RGZ1), and land to the west, along
Mountfield Avenue, is zoned Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ1).
As a result, a range of built form types exist, including 2 storey commercial buildings along
Warrigal Road and single and double storey detached homes along Mountfield Avenue.
More robust built forms are contemplated along Warrigal Road with the recently implemented
Residential Growth Zone.
Buildings fronting Warrigal Road within the Commercial 1 Zone are generally constructed to
the footpath, providing active frontages in the retail strip. On the south side of Mountfield
Avenue, setbacks are generally between 7m and 9m. The site’s immediate surrounds are
described as follows:
Page 72
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015




To the immediate west is a 3m wide right of way, and the front yard of number 23
Mountfield Avenue beyond, containing a single storey detached dwelling;
To the immediate north is a double storey commercial property (occupied by a financial
services company);
To the east is Warrigal Road, with the Matthew Flinders Hotel and associated bottle shop
and at grade car park on the east side of the road (within the City of Monash); and
To the south is Mountfield Avenue, with 620 Warrigal Road across the road, containing a
single storey detached dwelling.
The subject site is zoned Commercial 1 Zone (C1Z) and does not include any mandatory or
suggested height controls. The land to the south, zoned Residential Growth Zone (RGZ1)
along Warrigal Road has a height limit of 13.5m (or 14.5m on a sloping site).
The subject site is located in close proximity to the strip shopping centre in Warrigal Road to
the north, is close to Chadstone Shopping Centre and is within 300m of Holmesglen Railway
Station. In addition, a priority bus services run along Warrigal Road. Education facilities
within 2kms include Holmesglen TAFE, Gippsland TAFE, Malvern Valley Primary School,
Salesian College and St Mary Magdalens Primary. A number of public reserves are available
within 2kms including Ivanhoe Grove Reserve, Phoenix Park, Peverill Park and Treyvaud
Memorial Park.
Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement at Clause 21.05 identifies this area as a ‘substantial
change area’ where ‘medium density and higher density housing’ should be directed.
Previous Planning Applications
A number of relevant planning applications have been determined at this site, including:



326/02 allowing refurbishment of a previously existing building;
1255/05 allowing an extension to the previously existing building; and
529/08 allowing use of the site for a shop, internet cafe, student accommodation for 28
students) with 7 parking spaces being provided (4 accessed via the right of way at the
rear and 3 accessed off Mountfield Avenue). The maximum building height was 4
storeys / 14.3m. As works have not commenced, this permit expired on 10 June 2013.
The Title
The site is described on volume 7980 folio 024 specifically as Lots 14 and 15 on PS19830.
No covenants affect the land.
Planning Controls
The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:
Zone
Clause 34.01 – Commercial 1 Zone
Pursuant to Clause 34.01-4 a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry
out works. Both the use ‘shop’ and ‘dwelling’ are condition 1 uses within the zone and
therefore a permit is not required for the use.
Page 73
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06 – Car Parking
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5 a permit is required as the proposal seeks to reduce the parking
provision for the shop (provides 2 spaces to the shop in lieu of a requirement to provide 6),
does not provide 1 parking space per dwelling (provides 11 spaces for residents in lieu of a
requirement to provide 13) and does not provide any visitor parking spaces (in lieu of a
requirement to provide 2).
Clause 52.07 – Loading and Unloading of Vehicles
Pursuant to Clause 52.07 a permit is required as the proposal seeks to construct a shop
without providing on-site loading facilities.
Clause 52.34 – Bicycle Facilities
Pursuant to Clause 52.34 a development of 4 or more storeys is required to provide 1 bicycle
space to each 5 dwellings. The proposal provides 4 spaces, which exceeds the minimum 3
required by this clause. There is no bicycle parking requirement associated with the shop as
the floor area is less than 500 square metres.
Relevant Planning Policies
Clause 11.04
Clause 15.01
Clause 15.02
Clause 16.01
Clause 18.01
Clause 21.03
Clause 21.05
Clause 21.06
Clause 34.01
Clause 52.06
Clause 52.07
Clause 52.34
DTPLI
Clause 65
Metropolitan Melbourne
Urban environment
Sustainable development
Residential development
Transport
Vision
Housing
Built environment
Commercial 1 Zone
Car parking
Loading and unloading of vehicles
Bicycle facilities
Guidelines for Higher Density Development
Decision guidelines
Advertising
The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment
Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining and adjacent land and
by placing two signs on the site; one facing Warrigal Road and one facing Mountfield
Avenue. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.
The site is located in East Ward and objections from 6 individuals have been received. In
summary, the objectors’ concerns include:





Proposed scale and form of the development is out of character;
Lack of car parking and loading facilities;
Traffic safety;
Overshadowing of the public roadway; and
Waste collection.
A Consultative Meeting was held on 26 February 2015. The meeting was attended by
Councillors Stubbs, Davie and McMorrow, the applicant, a Council planning officer and 1
objector. At the consultative meeting the applicant provided ‘discussion plans’ detailing a
Page 74
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
range of changes in response to the concerns of Council and objectors, which were formally
substituted on 2 March 2015 and now form the application plans.
Council did not require the applicant to formally re-advertise the plans as the changes have
reduced the impact that the development will make and as such are exempt from the
notification provisions. It is also noted that these plans were presented at the planning
consultative meeting held on 26 February 2015 and that objectors were notified in the
invitation letters that amended documentation had been received by Council.
Referrals
Infrastructure Unit
Council’s Infrastructure Unit did not raise any specific concerns. It was requested that the
following conditions be included on any permit that may issue:
 A report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a
drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified
Engineer in accordance with that report prior to a building permit being issued. The
drainage must be constructed in accordance with the Engineer’s design.
 The existing footpath levels must not be raised or altered in any way.
 All redundant vehicular crossings must be removed and the footpath, nature strip and
kerb reinstated at the owner’s cost to the satisfaction of Council.
Urban Design
Council’s Urban Designer reviewed the advertised plans and provided the following
comments:
1. Scale and Form
The overall height of the building is 1-storey greater than that preferred in the adjacent
RGZ-1 to the South. This is a reasonable scale differential between a RGZ-1 and the
Commercial Zone. The scale relationship to Mountfield Avenue, however, requires
modification; as does the scale and form transition to the NRZ to the West.
To Warrigal Road, the building presents as a 4-storey ‘base’ building with a recessed top
floor. To Mountfield Avenue, the building presents as a 5-storey form and would be
visually dominant in the street. To the West, the building mainly presents as a 4-storey
building with a recessed upper floor.
I would recommend the following improvements to address the scale and form transition
issues to Mountfield Avenue to the South; and improve the form and scale relationship to
the NRZ-1 to the West:
-
Recess the top floor a minimum of 3m from the Southern site boundary; and
eliminate the framing elements associated with the existing Level 5 (South). The
existing top floor setbacks, from East and West site boundaries, should not be
reduced. This will improve the scale and form of the building and address the issue
of unreasonable visual bulk to Mountfield Avenue.
-
The rear of Levels 1 and 2 (to the West) should align with the Western face of the
Ground Level; and the West face of Level 3 should be setback a further 2.4m.
Page 75
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
These modifications will improve the form and scale transition to the existing nearby
properties, and future 9m developments, in the NRZ-1 to the West.
2. Residential entry design
The bin store is proposed to be located directly adjacent to the Residential entry to the
building. As proposed, this is not good design practice and will create fundamental
conflicts between bin collection activities and residents entering and exiting the building.
3. Car-parking arrangements
The proposal to provide parking access off Mountfield Avenue, as well as access off the
rear lane, is not a desirable practice. Larger new developments, such as this, should be
seeking to consolidate car-parking arrangements to one location. I would suggest that
the parking arrangements be reviewed.
4. Materials and Colours
A sample materials and colour board for the proposed cladding elements should be
submitted for approval.
Following the provision of formally amended plans on 2 March 2015, Council’s Urban
designer is satisfied that the increased setbacks at third and fourth levels and the
reconfiguration of the ground level entry/waste/car parking area has satisfactorily addressed
these issues.
Waste Management Unit
The Waste Management Unit reviewed the advertised plans and made the following
comments:
 The ‘Bin Store’ is inaccessible by staff of the retail outlet without having to walk
outside the building, along Mountfield Avenue. This is not desirable and the layout
must be modified to provide direct, internal access; and
 A condition should be included on any permit which may issue requiring a waste
management plan to be submitted for endorsement.
The layout changes shown in the amended documents formally submitted to Council on 2
March 2015 now provide an internal bin store for the retail space.
Transport & Parking Unit
The Transport and Parking Unit reviewed the proposal and made the following comments:
 The Traffic and Transport Assessment has been reviewed and the overall number of
residential and tenant parking spaces provided can be accepted;
 A minimum of 1 visitor space should be provided. Given the potential difficulty of utilising
a stacker (as a visitor) one of the non-stacker spaces should be allocated to visitors;
 It is inappropriate to rely on the right of way for manoeuvrability or queuing into the
parking area;
 A minimum 2.2m clearance should be provided beneath the roller door into the parking
areas;
 There is insufficient sight line visibility when exiting the parking area off Mountfield
Avenue;
 There is insufficient short term parking in the area to allow for a waiver of the Loading
Bay requirements;
Page 76
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
 Subject to conditions which require detailed model information, bicycle storage and
signage is appropriate;
 The proposed crossover does not appear to accord with Council’s policy; and
 Any redundant crossover to be removed and the kerb, channel and nature strip be
reinstated.
Conditions should be included on any permit which may issue requiring details to be shown
on plans for endorsement, including clearance heights into the parking area, bicycle rack
model and notes regarding the reinstatement of kerb, channel and nature strip.
Environmental Sustainability
Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer has reviewed the proposal and provided the
following comments:
 Consideration should be given to setting the pv solar panel array further south to
minimise the potential for overshadowing from future development;
 STORM treatments need to be annotated on the plan to accord with the report;
 An internal connection between the shop and the waste area must be provided;
 Council’s policy requests 1 bicycle space per dwelling, as only 4 are provided and a
parking reduction is sough, additional bicycle spaces should be provided; and
 A Building User Guide should be produced as a permit condition to ensure efficient
ongoing operation of the building.
It is noted that the amended documents formally submitted to Council on 2 March 2015
provide for an internal bin store for the retail space. Conditions should be included on any
permit which may issue requiring STORM details to be provided, PV panels to be offset
further to the south and the preparation of a building user guide.
It is noted that as there is no formal landscaping within the proposal, the application was not
formally referred to Council’s Parks Unit. However, the presence of street trees on Mountfield
Avenue adjacent to the proposed building works resulting in an informal discussion taking
place between Council’s Arborist and Planner where it was agreed that conditions should be
included on any permit which may issue requiring these trees to be protected and for no
trenching (for example, for services) to occur within the tree protection zones.
KEY ISSUES
The following assessment is based on the formally amended plans provided to Council on 2
March 2015.
The key issues with the proposal include whether the development respects the existing
neighbourhood character and whether the proposal will have an adverse impact on
residential amenity, including through parking and traffic generation. These key issues as
well as issues raised by objectors are discussed in detail below.
State Planning Policy Framework
A number of provisions from the State Section of the Planning Scheme are relevant to the
policy setting for assessment of this application. These include commentary about Structure
Planning (11.02-3), Metropolitan Melbourne (11.04), Urban Design (15.01), Housing (16) and
Transport (18).
Page 77
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
At the State Policy level these policy objectives provide a State policy impetus for the
residential intensification of sites that are well served by physical and social infrastructure.
Specific State policy support for appropriate residential intensification is highlighted in Clause
16 (Housing). This includes strategies to increase the supply of housing in existing urban
areas by facilitating increased housing yield in appropriate locations, including under-utilised
urban land (16.01-1) and to increase the proportion of housing in Metropolitan Melbourne to
be developed within the established urban areas particular at Activity Centres, employment
corridors and at other strategic sites (16.01-2).
The State Policy objectives in regard to transport also provide a particular emphasis on
encouraging higher land use densities and mixed use developments near railway stations,
major bus terminals, transport interchanges, tramways and principal bus routes (18.01-2).
When considered against this policy direction there is State policy support for the proposed
redevelopment and residential intensification of an existing site that is located near a
Neighborhood Activity Centre and which would increase housing yield. In addition, the State
policy objectives in relation to transport provide strong support for the development of higher
residential density on a site that is located within 0.3km from heavy rail and on a principal
bus route.
Local Planning Policy Framework
The Stonnington Strategic Framework Plan indentifies locations where specific outcomes are
encouraged. In regard to residential intensification this framework at Clause 21.05-2
acknowledges the need for increased densities across the municipality and directs specific
types of development to specific areas. The proposal is consistent with this policy, being in a
‘substantial change area’ where medium density and higher density housing should be
directed.
Specific built form outcomes are addressed in local Built Environment Policy at Clause 21.06.
This policy directs that new buildings not be significantly higher or lower than the surrounding
buildings and that development be of a height and scale that is consistent with its particular
setting and location. In this instance the five storey built form is considered acceptable in the
context and when viewed against the relevant policy settings.
For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is generally consistent with the strategic
direction outlined by the Stonnington Planning Scheme.
It is noted that the following assessment and discussion is based on the application plans
which were formally amended on 2 March 2015.
Proposed scale and Neighbourhood Character
The application has been assessed against Clauses 16.01 and 21.05 and is considered a
site responsive design which will sit comfortably in the existing and emerging streetscape.
The extent of built form has responded to the varying interfaces which exist, and the likely
built form which will occur as a result of the policy settings on surrounding land.
As described earlier, the subject site sits at the nexus of three zones, being the Commercial
1 Zone, Residential Growth Zone and Neighbourhood Residential Zone. It is located on a
declared main road (Warrigal Road) and benefits from the presence of a right of way at the
rear.
In response to this context, the proposal has introduced significant setbacks to the rear
(west) where the works are adjacent to the more sensitive Neighbourhood Residential zone,
Page 78
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
and along Mountfield Avenue where its presence should be softened in the transition
between Commerical and Residential land.
The zoning and controls which exist along Warrigal Road do not provide any mandatory
height controls. The provision of 4 and 5 storey built form is considered likely and acceptable,
and is a transition down from the 7 storey form found at Holmesglen TAFE. Council’s Urban
Designer noted that the “...overall height of the building is 1-storey greater than that preferred
in the adjacent RGZ-1 to the south. This is a reasonable scale differential between RGZ-1
and the Commerical Zone.”
Dept. of Transport, Planning & Infrastructure - Guidelines for Higher Density Residential
Development
Element 2 – Building Envelope
The overall building volume, height and massing is considered appropriate for the following
reasons:
 The building facade is commensurate in height to that contemplated by the current
policy settings which do not impose any mandatory (or preferred) maximum building
heights;
 At the rear, where the building adjoins residentially zoned land, the building is setback
sufficiently to ensure that the residential amenity of the adjoining lot is respected;
 The fifth storey of the building is setback an appropriate amount to minimise its visibility
from Warrigal Road and to soften its impact on Mountfield Avenue;
 The extent of built form is adequately broken up through the use of architectural
features, building materials and colours, balcony recesses and openings;
 Building massing has been focused towards the front of the site, and away from the
heightened sensitivity of the adjoining residential lots; and
 Given the siting and setbacks, the building will not overshadow any areas of secluded
private open space on any adjoining lots.
The proposal has appropriately considered its context and has ensured that the interface to
the west has been respected. In addition, the public interface to Warrigal Road will be
enhanced by creating an interactive interface with at-grade retail space. Safety will be
enhanced with additional ‘eyes on the street’ from the balconies above, and from shop
customers.
The proposal’s impact to the adjoining lot to the north (612-614 Warrigal Road) has been
considered in two ways. Firstly, the existing building is used for commercial purposes and
therefore does not contain any habitable room windows or other sensitive areas which will be
affected by the proposal under consideration. It is also considered good planning practice to
consider whether works on one site will adversely impact the future development potential of
adjoining lots. Given that the subject site is located to the south, it is unlikely that any future
development will be unreasonably impacted on.
Whilst ResCode does not apply to a development of 5 or more storeys, it is useful to refer to
as a tool to consider whether setbacks are appropriate when adjacent to residentially zoned
land. It is also common practice to include the width of the right of way when one is present.
The following is an assessment of the rear (western) setbacks:
Ground floor, vehicle parking spaces, required 1.2m, proposed 6.2m 
First floor, dwelling 4, required 2.2m, proposed 4.6m 
Second floor, dwelling 8, required 5.1m, proposed 7.2m 
Third floor, dwelling 11, required 8.3m, proposed 9.4m 
Page 79
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Fourth floor, dwelling 13, required 11.1m, proposed 12.0m 
It is not considered likely that the building will create any adverse wind affects.
Element 3 – Street Pattern and Street Edge Quality
In a commercial zone, the provision of ground level shops and activated frontages are
necessary and encouraged to foster an attractive, interesting and vibrant shopping strip that
invites and attracts shoppers. The proposal delivers this at the front of the site where it faces
Warrigal Road.
Pedestrian movements within the site are defined, organised and disability accessible. The
common area has been well considered, with general storage, bicycle storage, vehicle
parking and back of house services all provided and conveniently arranged.
Element 4 – Circulation and Spaces
The development incorporates a parking area towards the rear of the lots providing 13
parking space; 11 assigned to the 13 dwellings and 2 assigned to the shop.
The proposed parking layout is functional and safe, ensuring that the various uses supported
within can operate safely and efficiently within the shared space. Bicycle and waste storage
is provided at the ground level (separate to vehicles) which provides a safe environment free
of conflict. All spaces are of appropriate dimensions and the accessways and turning
movements are generally as stipulated at Clause 52.06 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme.
Waste has been adequately catered for, with space allocated to store bins in a single
purpose room (for the dwellings) and within the shop. A private collection is proposed to
service the site. As discussed earlier, Council’s Waste Unit is generally satisfied with the
Waste Management Plan (WMP), subject to inclusion of a condition on any permit which may
issue requiring the provision of an amended WMP which accords with the amended
documents formally submitted to Council on 2 March 2015.
At ground level, residential pedestrian access is provided via a lobby on Mountfield Avenue
where meters and mailboxes are also located. The shop has direct access off Warrigal Road.
Provision is made for a 10,000L water tank collecting rain water from the roof areas to be
reused for toilet flushing. The applicant has supplied a STORM report which indicates that
the proposal satisfies the requirements of Clause 22.18 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme
with regard to Water Sensitive Urban Design treatment. A condition should be included on
any permit which may issue which requires each impermeable area to be documented as to
how it is treated, including confirmation that all toilets are to be connected to the 10,000L
water tank.
Element 5 – Building Layout and Design
A total of 13 dwellings are proposed, with a number of floor plans from 1 bedroom/57m2 up to
2 bedroom/88m2. The design results in efficient floor plans, with a low percentage of the built
form being required for the lift and stair core relative to the net floor area. As the lot has three
boundaries to public space, each dwelling is provided with a balcony/terrace and all
bedrooms and living areas are provided with natural light – no habitable rooms rely on
‘borrowed’ light.
Page 80
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Secure and conveniently accessible storage cages (providing a minimum of 4m3 to each
dwelling) are provided at ground level adjacent to the parking area. Waste is stored efficiently
and can be accessed internally by all building occupants.
To Warrigal Road, the building presents as a 4-storey building with recessed fifth level.
Building detailing, including the introduction of framing elements across the third and fourth
floor aid in visually breaking down the building form, whilst de-emphasising the top floor. At
the rear, where the building adjoins an existing detached dwelling, the 1st through 4th storeys
will be setback 4.6m, 6.2m, 9.0m and 12m respectively from the adjoining dwelling’s
boundary.
Element 6 – Open Space and Landscape Design
The development does not provide any communal areas for recreation or quiet enjoyment.
This is considered appropriate given the small footprint of the development. Each dwelling is
provided with a usable balcony space with various outlooks towards the east, west and
south.
It is considered that the proposal satisfies the relevant objectives of these guidelines.
Waste
It is proposed to utilise a private collection service comprising three 660L bins and two 240L
bins in lieu of fourteen 240L bins. This is considered acceptable subject to conditions
requiring the provision of an updated Waste Management Plan which accords with the
amended floor plans.
Car Parking
Clause 52.06 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme requires that various uses provide
parking, including visitor parking, or that a reduction be sought via a permit. The following
table describes the statutory parking demand and proposed provision:
Statutory Requirement
4 x 1 bedroom
dwellings
9 x 2 bedroom
dwellings
Dwelling visitors
Shop
Proposed
Shortfall
1 per dwelling
4 spaces
2 spaces
2
1 per dwelling
9 spaces
9 spaces
-
1 per 5 dwellings
4 per 100m2
2 spaces
6 spaces
0 spaces
2 spaces
2
4
19 spaces
13 spaces
8
The applicant’s Traffic Transport Assessment report provides vehicle ownership rates for
‘Malvern’ from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS 2011) which shows that average car
ownership within ‘flats, units or apartments’ is:
 For 1 bedroom dwellings = 0.47 cars per dwelling
 For 2 bedroom dwellings = 0.94 cars per dwelling
Based on the proposal to provide 4 x 1 bedroom dwelling (a demand of 2 spaces based on
the data above) and 9 x 2 bedroom dwellings (a demand of 8 spaces based on the data
above), it is argued that the parking provision is acceptable based on the type and size of
dwellings under consideration.
Page 81
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The proximity to high quality public transport, including heavy rail at Holmesglen Railway
Station and priority bus routes along Warrigal Road, will enable occupants to reduce their
dependence on private transport, ensuring that parking demand is adequate and reducing
traffic congestion more broadly.
Visitor Parking
The majority of Mountfield Avenue includes residential parking permit only restrictions, and
clearway parking restrictions apply along Warrigal Road in the vicinity of the subject site (in
the AM and PM peaks). There are 3 unrestricted parking spaces opposite the subject site on
Mountfield Avenue, and after reconfiguration of the existing crossings currently serving the
subject site along Mountfield Avenue, 2 unrestricted parking spaces will be available
adjacent to the subject site. It is considered reasonable to approve the waiver sought for the
2 visitor spaces given the supply of unrestricted spaces in close proximity.
Loading Bay Waiver
Clause 52.07 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme requires that prior to a new building being
constructed for the purposes of manufacture, service or sales, land must be set aside for
loading and unloading of vehicles. It is noted that whilst Warrigal Road is a declared main
road, and clearway parking restrictions apply in the morning (6.30-9.30am) and the afternoon
(4-6.30pm) Monday through Friday, 2P parking restrictions apply adjacent to the subject site
outside of these times. It is considered that given the shop is small the frequency and size of
delivery vehicles will be small, and that these can attend outside of the clearway times.
Given the size of the shop and the site, it is considered reasonable to provide a waiver of the
loading bay requirements.
Bicycle Parking
The table to Clause 52.34-3 specifies that in developments of 4 or more storeys, 1 resident
bicycle space must be provided to each 5 dwellings plus 1 visitor space to each 10 dwellings.
Bicycle parking for shop staff or customers is only required where the shop exceeds 500m2 in
leasable floor area.
Therefore a requirement for 2 resident spaces plus 1 visitor space is triggered by the
Stonnington Planning Scheme. The proposal provides for 3 resident spaces plus 1 visitor
space, satisfying the Stonnington Planning Scheme.
Environmental Sustainable Design
The design of the proposed building provides excellent access to natural light and ventilation.
As a result, all habitable room windows will have direct access to natural light and will
provide good quality amenity throughout. A condition should be included on any permit which
may issue requiring the preparation of a Building User Guide to ensure that the
environmental benefits set out in the supporting documentation are managed by future
occupiers and owner’s corporations.
The architectural plans do not adequately document the treatment requirements to accord
with the STORM report, and a condition should be included on any permit which may issue
requiring these details to be provided.
A condition should also be included on any permit which may issue requiring the PV panels
to be located as far south as possible without being visible from the footpath on the south
Page 82
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
side of Mountfield Avenue. This will maximize solar energy collection without creating
additional visual bulk.
Human Rights Consideration
This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State
Government and which complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
CONCLUSION
Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended
that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:

The proposal represents a site responsive design which will sit comfortably in its
context;

The proposed height is appropriate in an area where policy encourages higher density
development;

Appropriate setbacks are provided where the site adjoins more sensitive residential
sites; and

The proposal provides sufficient parking given proximity to transport and the dwelling
types.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
PD - 0735-14 - 616-618 Warrigal Road Malvern East - 1 of 1
Plans
RECOMMENDATION
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 0735/14 for the land located
at 616-618 Warrigal Road, Malvern East be issued under the Stonnington Planning
Scheme for the construction of a five storey mixed use development comprising shop
at ground level and dwellings over and reduction of parking requirements and waiver
of the loading bay requirements in a Commercial 1 Zone subject to the following
conditions:
1. Before the commencement of the development, three (3) copies of plans drawn
to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the
application plans Council date stamped 2 March 2015 but modified to show:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
A note provided on the plans which indicates that each 2 bedroom
dwelling is to be allocated a parking space and that 2 of the 1 bedroom
dwellings are each to be provided a space (all within the stacker system).
No dwelling is to be provided with more than 1 parking space;
A note provided on the plans which indicates that both of the parking
spaces accessed directly off Mountfield Avenue are to be allocated to the
shop;
A note provided on the plans allocating at least 1 x 4m3 storage cage to
each dwelling;
Notations provided on the plans that any redundant vehicle crossover is
to be removed and kerb, channel and nature strip to be reinstated;
Stacker model and specifications, including clearly confirming platform
width, length and clearance for each space;
Page 83
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)
l)
m)
Confirmation that the ‘access doors’ to the stacker parking bays are
interlocked with the stacker control system so that the stacker system is
only operating when the doors are closed;
The proposed ‘perforated metal’ skin of the ‘access doors’ to the stacker
parking bays be replaced with a solid material to minimise noise
emissions from the stacker units when operating;
Bicycle rack model and dimensions;
PV panels moved south as far as possible but to remain invisible for a
pedestrian standing on the footpath on the south side of Mountfield
Avenue, and the capacity of the panels corrected;
A Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) response in accordance with
condition 3;
A Waste Management Plan (WMP) in accordance with condition 5;
A Building User Guide (BUG) in accordance with condition 6; and
Details of Tree Protection Zones (TPZs) in accordance with condition 7.
2. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and
works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason
(unless the Stonnington Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not
required) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
3. Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1, the
applicant must provide a Water Sensitive Urban Design Response (WSUD)
addressing the Application Requirements of the WSUD Policy at Clause 22.18
to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plans must detail all
treatment methods to be relied upon, including detailing each impervious
surface and which toilets will be plumbed to the water tank.
4. The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives
detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.
5. Concurrent with the endorsement of plans pursuant to Condition 1, a Waste
Management Plan (WMP) must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. The WMP must be generally in accordance with the
WMP submitted with the application, but modified to reflect the changes shown
in the amended plans Council dated stamped 2 March 2015.
6. Concurrent with the endorsement of plans pursuant to Condition 1, a Building
User Guide (BUG) must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible
Authority. The BUG must detail the ongoing management of the common areas
of the building and
a)
b)
c)
d)
Detail the ongoing management of the common areas of the building;
Confirm what the PV panels on the roof will be connected to and their
ongoing maintenance regime;
Include information to new owners and/or occupiers about sustainable
transport choices, including public transport services; and
The building user guide must be given to all new owners and occupiers.
7. Tree Protection details must be shown on all relevant plans to the satisfaction
of the Responsible Authority including:
a)
Tree protection fencing must be erected around each street tree on the
north side of Mountfield Avenue at a radius of 2.0 metres from the base of
the trunk to define a ‘Tree Protection Zone’. The fence must be
Page 84
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
constructed of star pickets and chain mesh or equivalent to at least 1.8m in
height to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The tree protection
fences must remain in place until all construction is completed.
The ground surface of the Tree Protection Zones must be covered by a
100mm deep layer of mulch before the development starts and be watered
regularly to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur
within the Tree Protection Zones without the written consent of the
Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or
waste is to occur within the Tree Protection Zones.
8. Prior to a building permit being issued, a report for the legal point of discharge
must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development
must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with that
report.
9. The level of the footpaths, roads or rights of way must not be lowered or altered
in any way to facilitate access to the site.
10. Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to
be relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the
applicant and subject to the relevant authority’s consent.
11. Prior to occupation of the building or commencement of use, any existing
vehicular crossing made redundant by the building and works hereby permitted
must be broken out and re-instated as standard footpath and kerb and channel at
the permit holder’s cost to the approval and satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
12. All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this
permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority by completion of the development.
13. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
a)
b)
The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
The development is not completed within four years of the date of this
permit.
In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a
request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed
timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.
NOTES:
This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or
occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are
obtained.
The crossovers must be constructed to Council’s Standard Vehicle Crossover
Guidelines unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority.
Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of,
Page 85
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further
written approval of Council.
“Significant tree” means a tree:
a) with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its
base; or
b) with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5
metres above its base; or
c) listed on the Significant Tree Register.
Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is
required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of trees
during construction works.
Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of any street tree without the further written consent of the
Stonnington City Council. Contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 for further
information.
The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not eligible to
receive “Resident Parking Permits”.
At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 stated
that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made
in writing within the following timeframes:
i.
Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the development
allowed by the permit has not yet started; and
ii. Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development allowed
by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.
Attachments - Locality Plans, Site Plan, Floor Plans, Elevations etc.
Page 86
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
5
PLANNING PERMIT APPLICATION 0273/14 - 663 663A 665 667 669 & 691 MALVERN
ROAD, TOORAK – CONSTRUCTION OF A PART FIVE, PART SIX STOREY APARTMENT
BUILDING CONTAINING 18 APARTMENTS ABUTTING MALVERN ROAD AND 17 TWO AND
THREE STOREY TOWNHOUSES TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE
Statutory Planning Manager: Alexandra Kastaniotis
General Manager Planning & Development: Stuart Draffin
Executive Summary
Applicant:
Ward:
Zone:
Overlay:
Date lodged:
Statutory days: (as at council
meeting date)
Trigger for referral to
Council:
Number of objections:
Consultative Meeting:
Officer Recommendation:
Message Consultants
North
Residential Growth Zone – Schedule 2
General Residential Zone – Schedule 10
None
17/04/2014
303
Building greater than four storeys
13 objections received – 7 objections withdrawn – 6 objections
remaining
Yes – 31 July 2014
Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit
BACKGROUND
This application has been with Council for some time. Following the Consultative Meeting the
Applicant spent several months negotiating with the objectors in an effort to address concerns.
Subsequently, a set of Discussion Plans (Revision 06) were submitted to Council in early in
2015. Following the submission of the Revision 06 plans, seven (7) objections were withdrawn.
The Discussion Plans have not been formally substituted (due to the Applicant benefiting from
the transitional provisions of the zone), and as such the advertised plans have not been formally
superseded. The proposal as listed below relates to the advertised plans. The changes as
shown on the Revision 06 plans will be discussed later in this report.
The Proposal
The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by CHT
Architects Pty Ltd and are known as Drawing No’s: TP101, TP102, TP103, TP104, TP105,
TP106, TP107, TP108, TP110, TP111, TP201, TP202, TP202, TP203, TP400, TP401, TP402,
TP403, TP404, TP405, TP406, TP407, TP408, TP409 and are Council date stamped 3 June
2014 (as advertised).
Key features of the proposal are:


Removal of all existing buildings from the land.
Construction of a part five and part six storey apartment building comprising 11 x 3bedroom apartments and 7 x 2-bedroom apartments on the front (south) portion of the
site.
Page 87
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015


Construction of two rows of two and three storey townhouses to the north of the site,
comprising of 16 x 3-bedroom dwellings and 1 x 4-bedroom dwelling.
70 residential car spaces within two basement levels, 0 visitor car spaces, 52 residential
bicycle parking and 4 visitor bicycle parking.
As the development contains two different building typologies, more specific details of each are
provided below:
Apartment Building
 The apartment building is located to the south of the site and will be setback 4.2 metres
from Malvern Road with balconies at Levels 1, 2 and 3 encroaching within this setback.
The protruding balconies will sit 2.25 metres from the street.
 The building is proposed to have an overall height of 16.98 metres to Malvern Road and
approximately 19.9 metres at the rear (north) of the building, due to the slope in the land.
 The building will appear as five storeys when viewed from Malvern Road with the upper
levels recessed. The building will be setback at a minimum distance from the east and
west boundaries by 4.1 metres and 6.5 metres, respectively.
Townhouses
 The townhouses are made up of 8 x two storey buildings positioned towards the western
side of the site and 9 x three storey townhouses along the eastern side of the site.
 The two storey buildings will have heights of between 7.75 metres and 10.11 metres
due to the slope in the land and are setback 4.7 metres from the western title boundary
(across the right-of-way). Private open space is located on the western side these
residences in the form of landscaped terraces.
 The three storey townhouses will vary in height between 9.85 metres and 10.7 metres
and are setback approximately 3 metres from the eastern boundary. Private open space
is located on the eastern side of the residences, again in the form of landscaped
terraces. West facing balconies are provided at Level 2.
 Townhouses 121 and 119 abut the railway line to the north.
 A central landscaped walkway (approximately 4 metres wide) separates the two rows of
townhouses. Pedestrian entries to the townhouses are provided from within this internal
street.
Car Parking

The car parking is to be accessed via an existing crossover to Malvern Road, which is
proposed to be widened.

Two basement levels of car parking are proposed beneath the apartment building
consisting of the following:
Basement 1: 12 car spaces, including 2 x 3-car garages and 1 x 2-car garage.
Basement 2: 25 car spaces, including 2 x tandem garages.


18 apartments are provided a total of 37 car spaces.
The townhouses are provided with 12 x secure 2-car garages and 9 individual spaces
accessed via Basement B2.
17 townhouses are provided a total of 33 car spaces.

General

Site coverage: 77% of the total site area
Page 88
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015

Basement coverage: 69% of the total site area
Site and Surrounds
The subject site is made up of six addresses located on the northern side of Malvern Road. The
site has the following significant characteristics:





The subject site is on the north side of Malvern Road, between Canterbury and Orrong
Roads.
There is a significant fall in the land from the south towards the northern boundary by
approximately 8 metres.
The land extends to a railway cutting along the site’s northern boundary.
The site has an overall combined area of approximately 3,420 square metres and is
currently occupied by single and double storey residential buildings.
Vehicle access to the site under existing conditions is available via a crossover to Malvern
Road at the site's eastern boundary.
The land contains four single storey dwellings and several structures to the rear including
double storey forms. Numerous easements affect the land, including a lane contained on the
title to the site that abuts the western boundary. The lane interfaces with seven single storey
dwellings that abut the eastern side of Canterbury Road. These adjacent lots have rights of
carriageway over the lane and areas of private open space with an outlook towards the subject
site.
The land directly to the west on Malvern Road (No. 661 Malvern Road) contains a part three part four storey brick apartment building.
Three storey flats are to the east of the site and extend into the lot toward the railway cutting. A
rear carport behind the building is situated on the common boundary with the subject site.
Malvern Road carries two-way traffic in an east-west direction. On-street parking exists along
the north side of Malvern Road and is generally unrestricted outside of Clearway times.
Clearways apply along the north side of Malvern Road between 4:30pm-6:30pm MondayFriday, and along the south side between 7am-9am Monday-Friday. A signalised pedestrian
crossing and tram stop is located along the site's frontage to Malvern Road.
Previous Planning Applications
A search of Council records indicates the following relevant planning applications:
Planning Application 0675/12 was refused under delegation on 15 January 2013 on the
following grounds:
1. The proposal fails to adequately respond to State and Local Planning Policy Framework.
2. The proposed building, having regard to its height, scale, massing and setbacks,
constitutes an overdevelopment of the site and does not respond to or respect the
existing or preferred neighbourhood character.
3. The height, scale, massing and direct overlooking would result in significant and
unreasonable amenity impacts to surrounding residential properties.
4. The on-site amenity of the development and internal amenity of dwellings is
unsatisfactory.
5. The proposal does not achieve a high level of sustainable or water sensitive urban
design commensurate with the size of the site.
Page 89
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
6. The car parking arrangements, layout, design and access would impact on traffic
movements within the basement car parks and ROW, the safety of the existing road
network and pedestrians, and surrounding residential properties.
7. The location and design of the basement entry/exit point would result in adverse amenity
impacts on adjacent residential properties.
8. The excessive extent of the basement and building cover precludes the possibility of an
appropriate landscape response for the site.
9. The building pushes too close to the rear boundary and would impact on the operations
of the railway line.
10. Waste arrangements are unresolved.
The application proposed a multi-storey apartment building (to contain 108 dwellings) over eight
levels including basement parking for 115 cars. The height varied due to the slope of the land
and the building was shown generally 5 to 6 storeys above the basement levels. The western
laneway was proposed to be widened to allow for two-way traffic. Two visitor car spaces were
shown on the eastern edge of a widened laneway. Bicycle parking for 69 residents was
proposed along with 7 spaces for visitors.
The applicant appealed Council’s decision to refuse the application (VCAT Reference No.
P137/2013) and in the VCAT Order dated 30 April 2013 Council’s decision was affirmed.
Importantly, the Order makes the following statement in its conclusion for refusing the
application:
The principle of developing the review site is not in issue given the land’s size, main road
abuttal and location characteristics. Many elements of this design response are
acceptable and are not in contest. We give them significant weight. However, they do not
outweigh our finding that the scale and massing of the proposed apartment building is not
acceptable. While we have recognised the setbacks, landscaping and other design
elements that seek to provide an acceptable interface with adjacent residential properties,
particularly to the west, we are not persuaded that the transition from the mostly single
storey dwellings with open and landscaped rear yards to the five and six storey building is
acceptable.
Notably, the VCAT decision also found that:
•
There is no dispute as to the nature of existing development along Malvern Road. It
includes some older dwellings as well as three and four storey apartment buildings from
a range of eras, including recent construction. These sites sit higher in the landform
than the review site and the Canterbury Road lots that fall toward the railway. Taller
buildings are clearly part of the existing character when looking from Canterbury Road to
south toward Malvern Road.
•
The main points of disagreement between the parties relate to the scale and massing of
the proposed development and the consequent degree of visual impact on adjacent
residential properties to the west of the review site.
•
It is agreed between parties at the Hearing, including witnesses, that the existing policy
within the Scheme would recognise the review site as being a strategic redevelopment
site.
•
It is the combination of the proposed height and continuous length of the building down
the site which we have concluded is unacceptable.
•
We are not persuaded that removing the entire level 5 is a solution. One of the
difficulties is that it removes a level at the Malvern Road frontage which is unnecessary.
Page 90
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
•
The Malvern Road streetscape response was agreed by parties at the Hearing as being
acceptable.
•
The retention of the large Red Box at the north-east corner provides an opportunity to
link the landscaped open space with a re-worked right of way as an area of communal
open space.
•
We are satisfied that overshadowing and overlooking have been addressed in
accordance with the guidelines although we appreciate that multiple balconies and
windows may be perceived by some existing residents as intrusive. This is not,
however, a reason to refuse a planning permit.
The findings as detailed above will be discussed in further detail later in this report.
Other permits
 Planning Application 187/99 for use and associated development of 105 unit
accommodation complex for the aged with 72 associated car parking spaces was
refused by Council on 28 April 1999.
 Planning Application 1348/01 for use and development of the land for a retirement
village (105 apartments) was refused by Council on 16 August 2002.
 Planning Permit 676/03 for development of a retirement village was issued on 17 May
2004 at the direction of VCAT. This permit expired on 17 May 2014.
The Title
The site is described as follows:
691 Malvern Road is described on Certificate of Title Volume 07731 Folio 044 as Lot 1 on Title
Plan 127596 and on Certificate of Title Volume 10389 Folio 255 as Lot 1 on Title Plan 011333.
The latter title appears to form a drainage easement.
663A Malvern Road is described as follows:
 Certificate of Title Volume 07731 Folio 043 as Lot 1 on Title Plan 127595. This relates to
the right-of-way.
 Certificate of Title Volume 10238 Folio 446 as Land in Plan of Consolidation 353650.
 Certificate of Title Volume 08972 Folio 016 as Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision 027628.
 There are no other restrictions on this land.
663 Malvern Road is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10389 Folio 253 as Lot 1 of Plan
of Subdivision 038983. This land is affected by a party wall easement.
665 Malvern Road is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10389 Folio 254 as Lot 2 on Plan
of Subdivision 038983. This land is affected by a party wall easement.
667 Malvern Road is described on Certificate of Title Volume 08269 Folio 931 as Lot 1 on Plan
of Subdivision 040000. This land is affected by both a party wall and sewerage easement.
669 Malvern Road is described on Certificate of Title Volume 08373 Folio 236 as Lot 2 on Plan
of Subdivision 040000. This land is affected by a party wall easement.
Page 91
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
No covenants affect the site.
Planning Controls
The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application:
Zones
The land is affected by two zones; one covering the northern portion of the site and the other
covering the southern portion of the site.
Southern section of the site:
Clause 32.07 - Residential Growth Zone (Schedule 2)
Pursuant to Clause 32.07-1 a permit is not required to use the land for dwellings.
Pursuant to Clause 32.07-4 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.
Clause 55 does not apply to a development of five or more storeys, excluding a basement.
Schedule 2 stipulates that a residential building must not exceed a height of 13.5 metres, unless
the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the
building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the height of the building must not exceed 14.5
metres.
The maximum building height for this site, due to the slope in the land, is 14.5 metres.
However the above restrictions does not apply to an application to construct a residential
building made before the approval date of the planning scheme amendment that introduced
Schedule 2 into the planning scheme (19 June 2014). As this application was lodged on 17 April
2014, the transitional provisions apply.
Northern section of the site:
Clause 32.08 - General Residential Zone (Schedule 10)
Pursuant to Clause 32.08-1 a permit is not required to use the land for dwellings.
Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot. A
development must meet the requirements of Clause 55. This does not apply to a development
of five or more storeys, excluding a basement.
Schedule 10 stipulates that a residential building must not exceed 9 metres, unless the slope of
the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5
degrees or more, in which case the height of the building must not exceed 10 metres.
The maximum building height for this site, due to the slope in the land, is 10 metres.
Again, Schedule 10 does not apply to an application to construct a residential building made
before the approval date of the planning scheme amendment that introduced this schedule into
the planning scheme. This application was lodged prior to the introduction of Schedule 10 and
therefore the transitional provisions apply.
Overlays
There are overlays that affect this site.
Page 92
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06- Car Parking
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2, prior to a new use commencing or a new building be occupied the
car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land.
Pursuant to Clause 52.06-3, a permit may be granted to reduce (including reduce to zero) the
requirement to provide the number of car parking spaces required under this clause.
A dwelling requires a rate of 1 car spaces to each one or two bedroom dwelling; or 2 spaces to
each three or more bedroom dwelling; plus 1 car space for visitors to every 5 dwellings for
developments of 5 or more dwellings.
The statutory car parking rate for this development is shown in the table below:
2 bed dwelling
No. of dwellings proposed
7 apartments
3 bed+ dwelling
17 townhouses; and
11 apartments
35
Visitors
Total
Statutory rate required
7
56
7
70
This development proposes a total of 70 car spaces. Therefore, no reduction in the statutory
parking rate is technically required. However, the Applicant has confirmed that no on-site visitor
parking is to be provided and therefore, a reduction in the visitor parking rate is sought.
Clause 52.29- Land adjacent to a Road Zone, Category 1 or a Public Acquisition Overlay for a
Category 1 Road
A permit is required to alter access to a road in a Road Zone, Category 1. Applications must be
referred to VicRoads pursuant to Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act.
Clause 52.34 - Bicycle Facilities
Pursuant to Clause 52.34-1 bicycle facilities should be provided in accordance with the
requirements at Clause 52.34-3 and 52.34-4. The development is required to provide 1
residential space for every 5 dwellings and 1 visitor space for every10 dwellings. 11 bicycle
spaces are required. More than the statutory rate is provided within this development.
Clause 52.35- Urban Context Report and Design Response for residential development of four
or more storeys
Pursuant to Clause 52.35-1 an application for a residential development of four or more storeys
must be accompanied by an urban context report and design response.
Relevant Planning Policies
Clause 15.01
Clause 15.02
Clause 16.01
Urban Environment
Sustainable Development
Housing
Page 93
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Clause 18.02
Movement networks
Clause 21.03
Clause 21.05
Clause 21.06
Clause 21.08
Clause 22.18
Vision
Housing
Built Environment and Heritage
Infrastructure
Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design) Policy
Clause 65 Decision Guidelines
Amendment C175 – Draft Neighbourhood Character Local Policy
Amendment C175 has been prepared to introduce a new Neighbourhood Character Policy into
the local section of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. This policy will clarify the preferred
neighbourhood character for an area and assist in ensuring that a development proposal
respects and reinforces the preferred character.
The Neighbourhood Character Local Planning Policy includes the preferred character
statements, design objectives and design responses to be taken from the precinct profiles.
A Panel Hearing was set down for 15 and 16 April 2014. At the conclusion of the Hearing, the
Panel determined to adjourn the matter pending the gazettal of Stonnington's new residential
zones. The new zones were gazetted on 19 June 2014. The Panel Hearing reconvened on 2
October 2014 providing further opportunities to hear the submissions and Council’s closing
submission.
Council received the Panel Report on 26 November 2014 and released the report on 5
December 2014. The Panel Report recommends that the Amendment be adopted as exhibited
subject to changes.
At its meeting on 2 February 2015, Council considered the recommendations of the Panel and
resolved to adopt the amendment with changes.
Based on the resolution of Council, the subject site falls with the Garden Suburban 1 category.
The Statement of preferred neighbourhood character is as follows:
The Garden Suburban 1 (GS1) precinct comprises leafy streetscapes with a range of
Victorian, Edwardian or Interwar era and contemporary buildings set in established
garden surrounds. In typical streets regular front and side setbacks provide space
around buildings and allow for small, well designed garden areas that contribute to the
landscape quality of the street. New buildings or additions offer innovative and
contemporary design responses while complementing the key aspects of form, general
one-two storey scale and design detail of the older buildings. Low, visually permeable
front fences retain views to gardens and dwellings from the street. Areas within a
Residential Growth or Mixed Use Zone or within a substantial change area will
accommodate more development with a more compact setting but with space for
canopy trees and other vegetation and high quality, responsive design.
Based on the design guidelines of the GS1 the proposal is deemed to be generally in
accordance with the preferred neighbourhood character. Importantly, the site is within a
substantial change area which can accommodate more development.
Page 94
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Advertising
The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment
Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing 4
signs on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily.
The site is located in North Ward and objections from six (6)* different properties have been
received. The concerns can be broadly summarized as:










Height
Loss of light
Car parking issues during construction
Noise and air pollution
Car parking
Out of character with the area
Density
Overlooking / loss of privacy
Traffic impacts on Malvern Road
Overdevelopment
* It is noted that 13 objections were initially received; however 7 objections have since been
unconditionally withdrawn, as will be discussed below.
A Consultative Meeting was held on 31 July 2014. The meeting was attended by Councillors
Chandler and Koce, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer.
Following this meeting the Applicant spent several months negotiating with objectors to address
some of the concerns raised. Discussion plans were submitted to Council on 15 January 2015.
These plans are known as Revision 06 plans dated 5 November 2014. The plans have also
sought to address Council Officers concerns and the referral comments.
The changes that have been incorporated on the Revision 06 plans can be summarised as
follows:











Apartment floor to floor heights reduced from 3.3m to 3m to address building bulk;
Apartment building reduced in height from RL52.28 to RL 50.78, resulting in a reduction of
1.3 metres (previously 16.98 metres and now 15.45 metres in height);
Reduction in the upper level apartment from 245sq m. to 205 sq m. Reductions achieved
through:
Western wall of the upper floor level setback from the western boundary 12.465
metres;
Increased northern setback to Apartment 501 by 4 metres;
Introduction of 2 visitor car spaces;
Deep planting areas introduced along the western townhouses;
Bicycle spaces shown throughout the development;
Bin enclosure for Townhouses introduced;
Acoustically treated fence as per acoustic report introduced to the east and west
townhouses;
New remote controlled automatic gate to R.O.W (access to Canterbury Road houses to
be maintained) at the request of the objectors;
Note regarding compliance with approved acoustic engineering report and visual/acoustic
screening to A/C condensers added;
Revised kitchen layouts to apartments 101 and 104 to address ESD concerns;
Page 95
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015











Addition of privacy screening to apartment 104 balcony;
Reduction in the depth of canopies on the East Townhouses to improve daylight
amenities;
Introduction of a cautionary traffic control sign to Malvern Road;
Creation of alcove and planter box to the west façade ;
Introduction of planter boxes along the north facing apartment balconies;
Roof/Balcony drainage area clarified;
Revised western facade to West townhouses;
North facing ground level windows to townhouse 121 revised to glass blocks and north
facing 1st floor windows to townhouse 121 removed;
Height of townhouse boundary fences clarified;
Size of windows over the East townhouses kitchens increased; and
Shadow diagrams updated.
Following the submissions of these discussion plans (Revision 06), all 7 objections from the
Canterbury Road residents were withdrawn unconditionally. These plans were not formally
substituted under Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (due to the Applicant
benefiting from the transitional provisions of the zone) and as such, hold no statutory weight.
However, it is considered that all of the above changes are favourable and should be required
via conditions of any permit that issues.
Referrals
VicRoads
No objection subject to the following conditions:
1.
Prior to the commencement of the permitted development, a detailed functional
layout drawing for the proposed access must be submitted to and approved by
VicRoads and the Responsible Authority showing:
a.
Details of the widened access laneway at Malvern Road. The functional
layout drawing must include details of appropriate signage and line
marking enforcing a left in / left out access arrangement from Malvern
Road to / from the development.
b.
Swept path analysis of appropriate design vehicles entering and exiting
the site concurrently.
2.
Provision for vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward direction must be
available at all times to the satisfaction of the VicRoads.
3.
Before the use of the permitted development:
a.
The laneway and cross-over in accordance with the approved functional
layout plan must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
b.
Any redundant vehicle crossovers on Malvern Road must be removed
and the kerb, channel, footpath and nature strip reinstated to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
VicTrack
VicTrack has no objection to the granting of a planning permit, subject to conditions.
Page 96
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Infrastructure Department
Council’s Infrastructure Department require conditions relating to the legal point of discharge
and drainage design; the existing footpath levels at the property line of Malvern Road must not
be lowered or altered (to vehicular access); and all vehicular crossings made redundant by the
development must be removed at the owner’s cost and to the satisfaction of Council.
As always water tanks are encouraged.
Right-of-way
The widened section of the right-of-way should remain within the development and must not
become a road. Council has no wish to accept responsibility and liability for the future
maintenance of the widened section. Therefore, this widened section should remain in the
ownership of the owner’s corporation and should be delineated on the submitted plans. The
body corporate must accept responsibility for the maintenance of this widened section.
Asset Management Department
The Right of Way is a Laneway on Council’s Register of Public Roads and is under the care and
control of Council. The section of the Right of Way that is Council’s responsibility is the
bluestone section, which is a nominal width of 3.5 metres according to the old database.
Right of Ways are often privately owned and the titles usually are in the name of the original
subdivider, but they often vest in Council if they are considered by Council to be a Public
Highway. If the road is constructed to Council standards, maintained by Council and used by the
public over a long period of time, then the road satisfies this criteria. The road appears to satisfy
this criteria, with the exception of the last 30 metres which has been gated off.
Transport and Parking (based on Discussion Plans)
Car Parking Provision
Car parking allocation to be submitted specifying the allocation of individual parking spaces to
individual dwellings, in particular within the basement car park for the apartment building.
Visitor parking
The Transport and Parking Unit recommends that the full visitor parking provision of seven (7)
visitor parking spaces be provided in this instance.
Other Design Matters
 The headroom clearance at the entrance to the car park has not been clearly shown on
the plans, and should be confirmed at a minimum clearance of 2.2m
 Revised material is to be submitted showing adequate lines of sight will be provided
between vehicles exiting the development’s car park and other vehicles accessing the
RoW.
 Door opening movements should be altered to ensure no doors open into parking areas
or parking aisles.
 It is recommended that some protection from circulating vehicles be provided for
pedestrians exiting the lifts, using bollards or similar.
 The double garages for townhouses are to be fully dimensioned and are to be 6.0m long
by 5.5m wide.
Page 97
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
 The desire to provide secure garages within the development appears to have lead to
some compromised design which may impact usability. The stairwells within some
garages appear to impact parking bays.
 There are also bicycle parking racks overhanging parking bays throughout the
development, and it is unclear if this will impact the bays.
 The plans provided do not include a longitudinal section along the ramps to allow for
assessment. A longitudinal section including all grades, lengths of grades, and levels is
to be provided to allow for assessment.
 A longitudinal section of the RoW should also be submitted for assessment. This
longitudinal section is to include details of the grades and grade changes along the
RoW, including changes in grade where the RoW changes direction, and at the
entrance to the car park
 With the provision of 56 onsite bicycle parking spaces as shown on plans the minimum
statutory requirements have been exceeded.
 Revised plans are to be fully dimensioned to demonstrate that the allocated area is
sufficient to accommodate the amount of bicycle parking facilities proposed and plans to
be fully dimensions (including all design details such as widths, lengths, etc) to
demonstrate compliance with the minimum design requirements.
Council’s Arborist (Comments based on advertised plans)





There are many mature trees located at this site, many of which are worthy of retention in
the landscape.
The proposed design only allows for the retention of the 2 mature Lemon Scented Gums
on the east boundary of the site, and a Red Box Gum on the northern boundary. Any
trees retained on site will require a TMP
The extensive size of the basement construction removes the ability to retain the bulk of
the mature vegetation along the northern boundary, and the stand of Silky Oaks in the
centre of the site.
The extensive size of the basement construction also reduces the inclusion of large trees
planted in-ground for a large percentage of the northern and western perimeter of the site.
This also restricts the ability to soften the proposed built form, which appears to be quite
imposing to the surrounding properties.
Although several trees are shown as retained, and the basement excavation has been set
back near these specimens, actual construction occurs well within the TPZ’s of all 3 trees.
How is this being designed to be sympathetic to the root systems of these trees?
Landscape Plan

The bulk of the landscape inclusion is in situ. Soil volumes have not been provided to
determine how the landscaping can be sustained toward maturity.
Council’s Sustainability Officer (based on Discussion Plans)
Revise site plans/elevations and/or landscape plans to:





Provide window to second floor bathrooms of eastern row townhouses
Show the locations of operable windows on elevations ensuring appropriate crossventilation opportunities are available to each unit and at each floor for townhouses.
Confirm extent of site permeable/impermeable areas
Annotate roof plans to confirm drainage areas connected to the rainwater tanks as per
MUSIC tool.
Confirm location of proposed Ecosol sand filter
Page 98
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015



Confirm type and coverage of pergola proposed to third floor north facing apartment
windows
Depict location of waste room on landscape plans
Update Sustainability Management Plan to:
Confirm if glazing and insulation types recommended in Acoustic and Vibration
reports accord with fabric assumptions used to derive unit and townhouse energy
ratings.
Include a site plan confirming extent of permeable/impermeable areas considered
for the MUSIC tool
Provide information on the purpose and location of the Ecosol Sand Filter
Urban Designer (Comments based on advertised plans)
Council’s Urban Designer has reviewed the plans and is of the opinion that the development
should be reduced in height and the apartment building should be stepped down to the North, to
reflect the fall of the land. This would reduce the visual bulk presented to the private open
spaces of the properties to the West (particularly No’s 4 & 6 Canterbury Road).
The approach to the provision of car-parking for the town-houses has the effect of precluding
the possibility of integrating deep-soil canopy-tree planting to the West and North of the
development.
It is the Urban Designer’s opinion that the proposed approach of providing minimal vegetation in
raised planter boxes above the ‘ground-floor’ structural slab, is not an acceptable form of
landscaping for large residential developments on large sites.
The front of the building, including the projecting balconies, should align with the principal faces
of the two adjoining buildings (No’s 661 and 693 Malvern Road).
The Discussion Plans have been reviewed by Council’s Urban Designer who noted that the
revised plans have gone some way to address the concerns with regard to the height of the
building and moderating the bulk to the north. However, concerns remain with the extent of
basement and the front setback.
Waste
A comprehensive Waste Management Plan prepared by Leigh Design Pty Ltd and dated 30
April 2014 accompanied this proposal. This document responded well to the waste
management challenges presented in the plans I viewed, i.e., those prepared by CHT Architects
Pty Ltd and date stamped by Council 3 June 2014.
Any Planning Permit issued for this development must include a clause specifically requiring the
submission and approval of a Waste Management Plan. Once a Planning Permit has been
issued for the development, a Waste Management Plan (similar to that previewed here) should
be submitted for approval.
KEY ISSUES
For the purposes of this assessment the plans referred to are the Discussion Plans (Revision
06) as these plans have addressed numerous objector and Council Officer concerns. The
changes shown by these plans will be required by way of conditions.
Page 99
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Strategic Justification
In assessing this application, consideration must be given to the relevant State and Local
Planning Policy Framework. In addition, an assessment must have regard to the guidelines for
Higher Density Residential Development for developments of more than five storeys.
The overarching policies and objectives at both a State and local level encourage urban
consolidation in established urban areas and high density residential development in and
around neighbourhood activity centres and close to public transport. These strategies call for
well-designed higher-density development that respects neighbourhood character, improves
housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency.
Council’s Vision states:
Higher density development is directed to locations with the highest accessibility to
public transport and services; being sites in and beside activity centres, beside main
roads with trams and Smart buses and beside railway stations.
Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) identifies the site as being within a substantial
change area. These areas are defined as land with immediate abuttal to a main road which is a
tram / bus priority route, such as Malvern Road (refer to Council’s Strategic Framework Plan).
As the site is located on an arterial road where a high proportion of medium and high density
housing already exists, it is anticipated that the site can accommodate a higher level of
development than the residential hinterland to the north-east and north-west, away from
Malvern Road. This position is also confirmed within Council’s draft Neighbourhood Character
Policy (C175).
Importantly in the VCAT Order dated April 2013, the Tribunal noted that:
The parties agree that the review site is extremely well located with respect to services
and public transport. It is in a location where higher density housing may be supported
through existing policy in the Stonnington Planning Scheme and where higher density
housing is proposed to be directed through proposed local policy (Amendment C161).
In this regard it is considered that the site is strategically well located to cater for increased
housing density. Further discussion on the previous VCAT decision is provided below.
Previous VCAT Decision
It is important to note that the previous plans to which the VCAT comments relate proposed a
single building across the entire site over seven habitable levels and three basement levels. The
extent of development proposed by this current application has been substantially reduced. For
clarity an approximate comparison is provided:
VCAT Plans 2013
Current 2015
Discussion Plans (Rev 6)
No. dwellings
108
35
No. of car spaces
117
70
Max. building height
RL 50.7
RL 50.78
Street wall to Malvern Road 9.77m setback approx. 2.9m 10.1m setback 2.55m from the
from street to face of balcony
street to face of balcony
Building height as it 15.7 metres
15.45 metres
presents to Malvern Road
setback approx. 10.9 metres setback approx. 4.6 metres
from Malvern Road
from Malvern Road
Page 100
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Length of the apartment Approximately 100 metres
building on the land
Approximately 35 metres,
including projecting balconies
Where the VCAT plans proposed one single apartment building over the full depth of the site;
this proposal includes two different building types that are physically separated within the centre
of the site. The two building types include the part five and six level apartment building that
fronts Malvern Road and the two and three storey attached townhouses to the rear. This is a
considerable reduction in the scale and mass of buildings on the site.
The VCAT Order from April 2013 notes the following positive attributes of the earlier proposal:
We find the proposal has adopted a number of appropriate and meritorious design
elements. They include:
 The widened laneway to create a point of access to the development, retain access
rights for existing residents, and achieve very good separation from abutting sites.
 The adoption of design modules through changes recommended by Mr Sheppard to
assist to break up the building mass and breadth and to respond to the fall of the
land. We find that the change of materials emphasising this is an effective device.
 The principle of recessing the upper floors and creating recessed and reveals in the
building.
 The notion of landscaping along the western edge of the building with canopy trees
to soften the building form and supplement the green corridor associated with the
rear of the Canterbury Road properties.
 The ability to develop toward the rear of the site given the railway is not sensitive.
 The notion of enhancing the building by the use of external landscaping including
planter boxes to balconies and vertical planting, although we consider more could be
done to achieve a useable area of communal open spaces for residents.
 The principle of graduating and stepping the building down the site.
Many of these positive design responses have been maintained as part of this new application
and the main concerns, relating to the scale and massing of the proposed development and the
consequent degree of visual impact on adjacent residential properties to the west, have been
overcome. This will be further discussed throughout the report.
Built Form
Although there are two building types proposed, ResCode standards do not apply as the overall
development is more than five storeys. As such, Clause 15.01-1 and the Design Guidelines for
Higher Density Residential Development apply.
With regard to Clause 15.01-1 it is noted that the site is not currently vacant or neglected and
does not contain heritage fabric. It is also not located within any immediate proximity to a
Heritage Overlay or historical buildings of any significance. Furthermore, the proposed height of
the development will not impact on or diminish or obstruct views to any surrounding landmarks.
Context
As highlighted earlier in this report, the subject site is located within a residential area and on a
main arterial road. Public transport is directly accessible on Malvern Road and the Hawksburn
activity centre is located approximately 300 metres to the west of the site. These attributes, as
confirmed by VCAT in 2013, make this site an ideal location for providing increased housing to
cater for future population growth.
Page 101
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Building Height
As previously mentioned, the site is affected by two zones which apply mandatory heights
controls of 14.5 metres (to the south) and 10 metres (to the north). Due to the transitional
provisions within the Schedules to the zones, these mandatory maximum building heights do
not apply to this application. However, the heights as proposed by the Discussion Plans
(Revision 06) do not substantially exceed the maximum building heights.
The Apartment Building is to have a height to Malvern Road of 15.45 metres, and 18.36 metres
at the northern end of the building, due to the slope in the land. While the townhouses will have
the following heights:
 West – between 7.19 metres and 10.09 metres due to the slope in the land
 East – between 9.85 metres and 10.7 metres due to the slope in the land
Based on the above, the majority of the built form to the north of the site complies with the
current mandatory height controls, while the apartment building as it presents to Malvern Road,
will exceed the current maximum height of the zone by less than a metre (0.95m). While the
rear section of the apartment building is higher; the development has been well articulated on
the north and west elevations to reduce visual bulk impacts on Canterbury Road residents.
Subsequently, all objections from properties within Canterbury Road have been withdrawn.
Although the building will be higher than the directly adjoining properties, the upper levels have
been well setback from the title boundaries to ensure that the upper levels are recessive.
As acknowledged in the previous VCAT decision for this site there are taller buildings in Malvern
Road and the height of this apartment building will not be incongruous in the wider streetscape.
While the previous decision for an apartment building on this site was refused by VCAT, the
number of dwellings now proposed has been drastically reduced by 73 residences, to 35.
Given that the site comprises of six addresses to Malvern Road, this is a rare opportunity to
undertake a consolidated development within an inner city context, on a tram / bus priority route
and within close proximity of several large activity centres. While the buildings are slightly higher
than the zone permits, they are considered to be acceptable for a strategic redevelopment site
such as this. Particularly, as the development will not unreasonably impact on the amenity of the
adjoining properties.
Malvern Road
Malvern Road consists of many different built forms and there are evident taller buildings in the
street. The previous VCAT decision noted that, “the Malvern Road streetscape response was
agreed by parties at the Hearing as being acceptable”.
This development proposes a building of a very similar height to that already considered by the
Tribunal, although the upper levels are located closer to Malvern Road than the previous
scheme. Under the previous proposal, the top floor was setback 10.9m from the street at a
height of 15.7 metres. The current proposal is of a commensurate height but provides a setback
of 4.6 metres to the street at the upper level.
While the height to Malvern Road is not considered to be problematic, the projecting balconies
at Levels 1, 2 and 3 are deemed to push too close to Malvern Road. To address this, it is
recommended that the front wall and projecting balconies be pushed back to align with the
principal faces of the two adjoining buildings (No’s 661 and 693 Malvern Road) as
recommended by Council’s Urban Designer. This is to be addressed through a condition.
Page 102
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The presentation of the building with balconies orientated to the street will encourage good
activation with the public realm, as well as passive surveillance. The upper floor includes large
eaves (a canopy) over the terrace that wraps around the top floor level. While the canopy
provides shading to the upper floor windows, it is a dominant feature on top of the building that
emphasises the height of the building when viewed from the street. This is to be addressed via
a condition that reduces the canopy to the south where windows do not require shading.
Subject to conditions, the building’s presentation to Malvern Road is deemed to be acceptable.
Eastern Interface
The three storey apartment building to the east at 693 Malvern Road contains 18 apartments,
some of which have an outlook to the west towards the subject site. West facing habitable room
windows within 693 Malvern Road are largely setback between 6.4 metres and 8.1 metres from
the new development.
The full length (35 metres) of the new apartment building will sit opposite residences within 693
Malvern Road. The eastern wall of the apartment is setback from the eastern boundary as
follows:
Basement B1:
Ground:
Level 1:
Level 2:
Level 3:
Level 4:
4.6 metres
4.1 metres
4.1 metres (balconies setback 3 metres)
4.1 metres (balconies setback 3 metres)
9.2 metres (balconies setback 4.1 metres)
12.5 metres (balconies setback approximately 9 metres)
These setbacks ensure that there is a clear separation distance between the west facing
habitable room windows within 693 Malvern Road and the new apartment building.
Furthermore, windows and balconies within the new development with an outlook to the east
have been screened to limit unreasonable overlooking (discussed later in this assessment). The
design of the eastern elevation is deemed to be well articulated with balconies, indentations and
will not present with excessive visual bulk to the east.
Additionally, there are four x 3-storey townhouses located opposite the apartment building at
693 Malvern Road. The townhouses are of a similar height to the apartment building and have
been setback approximately 3 metres from the boundary and 6.4 metres from habitable room
windows within 693 Malvern Road. Based on ResCode guidelines, these setbacks would
comply with the objectives of Standard B17 (Side and rear setbacks) and would fully comply
with Standard B19 for daylight to existing windows which requires a setback of half the height of
a new wall. The setbacks are deemed to be sufficient to ensure that no unreasonable amenity
impacts on the properties to the east occur.
Western Interface
Given the site interfaces with seven single storey dwellings that sit on the eastern side of
Canterbury Road, this is the most sensitive interface. The previous scheme considered by
VCAT noted the importance of finding a balance with regard to the level of visibility of any new
built form from this aspect. Where the previous building refused by VCAT extended for the
entire length of the site (approximately 100m), this proposal has reduced the high density
apartment building to a length of approximately 35 metres; about 1/3 of the length previously
proposed. The result is that the highest building now sits predominantly opposite 661 Malvern
Road and No. 4 Canterbury Road. The remaining properties in Canterbury Road are located
opposite double storey townhouses.
Page 103
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
With regard to the apartment building, the Discussion Plans (Revision 06) have sought to
address the concerns of the most sensitive interface, No. 4 Canterbury Road. The plans have
created an alcove and planter box to the western façade, introduced planter boxes along the
north facing apartment balconies, increased the northern setback to Apartment 501, rearranged
the balconies on Level 3; and reduced the apartment floor to floor heights to further reduce
massing and bulk. The overall building height has been reduced by approximately 1.3 metres.
Following the submission of the Discussion Plans, objections from all Canterbury Road
residents were withdrawn. This is taken to mean that the amendments have adequately
addressed the concerns, particularly those of No. 4 Canterbury Road who was most concerned
with impacts of visual bulk from the 5 to 6 storey form.
From a planning perspective the variations are deemed to be positive and will improve the
building’s presentation to the west. The western wall of the building will be setback largely 6.1
metres from the western site boundary and will be well articulated through the use of a varied
palette of materials, solid and transparent surfaces and the addition of vegetation and planters.
The western wall will be visually interesting and will be sufficiently setback to avoid having an
unreasonable impact with regard to overshadowing or loss of daylight to windows.
As shown on the Discussion Plans (Revision 06) the upper floor level has been reduced in area
and the western wall is to be setback 12.465 metres from the western boundary. This is
deemed to be an adequate distance from the adjoining private open spaces to ensure that the
building bulk will not overwhelm or dominate these spaces. The reduction in the bulk to the
north-west is evident on the west elevation via a red line and it is clearly an improvement on the
advertised plans.
Subject to conditions, the building’s presentation to the private open spaces of the Canterbury
Road residences is deemed to be acceptable and has overcome the concerns of the previous
application by significantly reducing the built form to the north and stepping the building down
towards the more sensitive interfaces.
Northern Interface (Railway Line)
The buildings to the north abut the railway line, with two new residences to be constructed up to
the rear boundary of the site. The scale of development, being a two and a three e townhouse
against the northern boundary is deemed to be acceptable, subject to the residences being
appropriately treated to protect future residents against noise and vibration.
Noise and Vibration
An Acoustic Report has been prepared by Burton Acoustic Group dated 20 August 2014 that
includes numerous recommendations to protect against noise emissions from the abutting
railway line. A condition of approval will require that the acoustic report be submitted for
endorsement and all recommendations contained at Section 4 be shown on the plans for
endorsement.
It is noted that the discussion plans (Revision 06) have been amended to include the
recommendations of the acoustic report including, an acoustically treated fence to the east and
west townhouses; notes added regarding compliance with approved acoustic engineering
report; north facing ground level windows to townhouse 121 revised to glass blocks; north facing
1st floor windows to townhouse 121 removed; and visual/acoustic screening to A/C condensers
added.
A Vibration Assessment has also been carried out by SLR Consulting Australia Pty Ltd Revision
0 and dated 4 July 2014. This document provides details of monitoring undertaken on the
Page 104
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
subject site which confirms that vibration levels will exceed the nominated criteria and the
Australian Standard (AS 2670.1) by small to moderate amounts in the townhouses closest to
the railway corridor. Section 7.1.3 of this report details several methods to address the
concerns of vibration. The Applicant is to employ the recommendations of this report and
provide details of the measures undertaken on the plans for endorsement.
Landscaping
Concept landscape plans have been provided by the Applicant, along with updated Discussion
Landscape Plans Revision D that make minimal changes from the advertised plans, but
incorporate a new planter along the western elevation of the apartment building.
The majority of the existing vegetation on site is proposed to be removed. Three trees on site
are proposed to be retained. There was some discussion regarding the retention of the large
Red Box within the north-east corner of the site within the VCAT Order from April 2013. It was
noted that
The retention of the large Red Box at the north-east corner provides an opportunity to
link the landscaped open space with a re-worked right of way as an area of communal
open space, as discussed at the Hearing.
This application retains the large Red Box and incorporates it into an area of private open space
associated with Townhouse 121. The basement has been designed to ensure a considerable
setback is provided to the structural root zone of this tree. As per the advice of Council’s
Arborist, Tree Management Plans (TMP) will be required as a condition of approval for all trees
to be retained.
The concept landscape plans propose evergreen screening hedges along the eastern side of
the right-of-way with 6 metre high compact evergreen magnolias proposed within the private
open spaces of the western townhouses. Along the eastern boundary of the site, compact
ornamental pears are proposed to grow up to 10 metres in height.
Due to the high level of impervious surfaces proposed by this development, much of the
landscaping is proposed to be in situ. Council’s Arborist has noted that soil volumes have not
been provided to determine whether the trees can be sustained to maturity. This will be
addressed through a condition of approval.
Overall the landscape response is constrained by the extent of site coverage. However, along
the east and west boundaries many different types of landscaping is proposed, including trees
of between 6 to 10 metres in height, as well shrubs, grasses and climbers. The response is
considered to be acceptable to this strategic redevelopment site and street trees will assist in
softening views of the development from Malvern Road.
Amenity Impacts
Overshadowing (of private open space and the public realm)
Due to site being on the northern side of the street, shadows from the new development will
predominantly fall over Malvern Road and into the site itself. Shadows to the west will be
increased at 9am to the backyard of No 4. Canterbury Road; however by 10am the shadows will
have moved so that at least 60sq m. of private open space is unaffected by shadows. No
shadows will extend to the other properties private open space (to the west) after 10am. The
extent of shadow cast to the west between 10am and 3pm will not be unreasonable. If
ResCode were applicable, this development as it relates to the west would comply as all
Page 105
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
adjoining private open spaces will receive a minimum of five hours of sunlight between 9 am
and 3 pm on 22 September (Equinox).
In the middle of the day shadows will fall over Malvern Road and the site itself. Some objections
have been received from No. 684 Malvern Road, on the southern side of the street. The shadow
diagrams confirm that shadows will barely extend past the footpath on the northern side of
Malvern Road. As such, there will be no loss of daylight to the properties on the southern side of
Malvern Road on the Equinox.
As for the afternoon shadows to the east, some of the adjoining apartments have small terraces
that face west. The shadow diagrams provided show that shadows will not affect these
properties until 3pm, where shadows will then affect the ground and first floor level apartments.
If ResCode were applicable, this development would comply as the adjoining apartments to the
east will not be affected by this proposal between 9 am and 2 pm on 22 September (Equinox).
Although there will be some overshadowing impact, this will not occur until 3pm which is
considered to be reasonable for a higher density development within a dense urban
environment.
Overlooking
The Higher Density Design Guidelines stipulate that “existing dwellings should be protected
from potential overlooking in accordance with the requirements of Clause 55 of planning
schemes”. Using ResCode as a guide, the relevant Standard (B22) states that direct views into
windows or balconies within 9 metres from a new balcony or window are unreasonable and
should be screened to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level.
East
The Discussion Plans show all balconies and windows on the eastern elevation at Ground,
Level 1 and Level 2 as being screened to 1.7 metres above finished floor level with a perforated
metal screen with no more than 25 % transparency. At Level 3 the terrace is located 4.1 metres
from the boundary and 9.6 metres from a habitable room window to the east. Applying Standard
B22, this terrace does not require screening. Again at Level 4 the terrace is setback in excess of
9 metres from the eastern boundary and approximately 13 metres from an adjoining habitable
room window and no screening is required.
As for the townhouses with an outlook to the east, all windows with any potential for overlooking
have been screened with obscure glass or high sills (1.7m above finished floor level) to accord
with Standard B22.
North
The apartments orientated to the north also include north-facing balconies. These balconies are
screened along the east and west sides where overlooking opportunities exist to the adjoining
properties. However, the balconies within the centre of the apartment building will not allow for
direct views within 9 metres. The Discussion Plans have also been updated to show planters
along the northern face of the north-facing balconies with plants up to 1.5 metres to further
assist in filtering some views of adjoining properties, beyond 9 metres.
West
Along the western elevation, windows at Ground, Level 1 and Level 2 have been screened with
perforated metal screens with no more than 25% transparency as per the eastern elevation.
This will limit unreasonable views.
Page 106
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
At Level 3 only a small section of the balcony associated with Apartment 403 is screened to 1.7
metres. The balconies of Apartments 402 and 403 may allow for views within 9 metres of a
sensitive interface to the west. More details are needed to ensure no unreasonable overlooking
occurs. This will be addressed via conditions.
The balcony to Level 4 is setback in excess of 9 metres from a sensitive interface and no
screening is required.
As for the townhouses that face west, the first floor windows have been shown to have fixed
angled louvre privacy screens that will successfully limit unreasonable views into the areas of
private open space to the west.
Internal Amenity
This development compromises of large two, three and four bedroom dwellings in the form of
apartments and townhouses. Apartments will vary in area between 103 sq. m and 205 sq. m.
Dwellings have been orientated to the north, east, south and west. All habitable rooms have
been provided access to natural light and ventilation. All apartments are provided with at least
14.9 sq. m of balcony space or a private outdoor garden. The apartment on Level 4 is provided
with a balcony area of 210 sq. m.
The townhouses are provided with individual entries from within the central walkway and all
rooms are provided access to natural light. The media room within the basement is also
provided a highlight obscure glass window facing the right-of-way. Courtyards and balconies are
provided and are in excess of 25 sq. m. These spaces are easily accessible from living areas.
The main entry to the apartment building is provided from Malvern Road and will provide secure
access to the lobby and lifts for the apartments. The lobby will continue through to the rear
internal street to the townhouse entries. The entrance is secure and will provide an adequate
sense of address.
All dwellings are provided car parking, bicycle parking and storage areas ranging in size
between 4 cubic metres and 25 cubic metres.
The development is deemed to provide a high level of on-site amenity to future residents.
Car Parking and Traffic
Car Parking Provision
Council’s Transport and Parking Department has recommended that the full visitor parking
provision of seven (7) visitor parking spaces be provided for this development. While there are a
sufficient number of car spaces available on site to meet the statutory rate, the Applicant seeks
to provide 68 on-site spaces to the residences and two visitor spaces. While it would be
preferable to see the statutory rate provided for visitors, the likelihood of owners/occupiers of
these large inner city residences possessing only one vehicle is unrealistic. It is expected that
future occupants of this building will own two vehicles and as such, it is considered to be
reasonable to expect that short term visits to the building utilise on-street parking or public
transport. Being located on a main road it is anticipated that on-street parking will be available to
cater for short term visitor parking needs.
As has been the case for many other higher density developments within the municipality, a
reduction of 5 visitor spaces is considered reasonable and will not adversely impact on the
surrounding road network.
Page 107
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Furthermore, the previous VCAT decision found a reduction in visitor parking was acceptable for
this site.
Right-of-Way
Council’s Traffic Engineers have raised some concerns with the widening of the right-of-way
and the installation of a gate. As per the advice of Council’s Infrastructure Department, the
widened section of the right-of-way should remain within the development and must not become
a road. As confirmed by Council’s Asset Management Department, the laneway is listed on
Council’s Register of Public Roads and is under the care and control of Council. Therefore, the
laneway must not be gated. This will be addressed through a condition of the permit to remove
all notes relating to a new security gate across the lane.
The extended right-of-way is to have a width of 6.1m between the basement entry and Malvern
Road which will comfortably accommodate two-way traffic in accordance with the Australian
Standards.
VicRoads have reviewed the variations to the crossing into the site and have advised that a leftin left-out access arrangement must be implemented. This has been noted on the Discussion
Plans along with a sign warning exiting vehicles of the tram and pedestrian crossing 10m to the
left of the altered crossing.
Council’s Traffic Engineers have recommended that adequate lines of sight be provided
between vehicles exiting the development’s car park and other vehicles accessing the right-ofway. The Applicant’s Traffic Consultant has responded to this and has advised that:
Vehicle and pedestrian movements to the ROW north of the proposed access will be
minimal with no more than two dwellings with car parking accessed in this location. If
required by Council a convex mirror could be installed as a condition of permit to
improve sight distance at entry to the basement.
A convex mirror will be required by way of conditions to address any safety concern.
Traffic Generation
Traffic surveys undertaken by the Traffix Group on behalf of the Applicant found that during the
peak AM and PM periods (being the hours of 7.45am - 8.45am and 5.30 - 6.30pm), the existing
right-of-way carries very low traffic volumes (a maximum of 2 entry movements during PM peak
hour).
The proposed development is conservatively expected to generate in the order of 6 vehicle trips
per dwelling per day, which is consistent with other apartment and townhouse developments in
the inner suburban areas. This equates to a total daily rate of 210 vehicle trip ends per day
(based on 35 dwellings).
This is expected to generate in the order of 21 vehicle trip ends in the AM and PM peak hour.
This level of traffic can be easily accommodated by the surrounding road network. It is
estimated that Malvern Road carries in the order of 16,000 vehicles per day. As confirmed by
the Traffic Impact Assessment undertaken by Traffix Group:
The peak hour traffic impacts equate to approximately 1 vehicle movement each 2-3
minutes which will have negligible impacts on the operation of the nearby road network.
Page 108
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Based on the above it is considered that the level of traffic to be generated by this development
will be reasonable and will not adversely impact on traffic along Malvern Road. Furthermore,
VicRoads have reviewed the application plans and has advised that the development must
restrict the access to the right-of-way to left in / left-out. This will further ensure that the
development will not adversely impact on the traffic flows within Malvern Road.
Car Parking Layout
Subject to the recommendations listed in the Referrals section of this report, the car parking
layout is acceptable. The recommendations which relate head room, car parking and garage
dimensions, doors opening into parking aisles and protection for pedestrian exiting the lifts, will
form conditions of any permit that issues.
Bicycle Parking
Bicycle parking has been shown on plans but has not been dimensioned. A condition will
require that all bicycle spaces be shown dimensioned and designed in accordance with the
minimum requirements of the Planning Scheme and/or the Australian Standards.
Water Sensitive Urban Design
In accordance with Council’s local Stormwater Management Policy (Clause 22.18), this
development will be provided with rainwater tanks. A Water Sensitive Urban Design Response
has been provided within the SMP. There are several details needed to confirm that this
arrangement is satisfactory, yet this can be addressed through conditions. There is no
fundamental concern with the level of on-site water retention proposed.
Waste Collection
A Waste Management Plan submitted by the Applicant has been reviewed by Council’s Waste
Department who have not raised any waste related concerns. The plan confirms that ‘waste
shall be collected within the development. The collection contractor shall transfer bins between
the stores and the Waste Truck.’ The Applicant has advised that the basement has been
sufficiently designed to cater for a waste vehicle.
A Waste Management Plan will be required via conditions for endorsement.
Objections
The objector concerns have been duly noted throughout this report. The following is provided in
response to the matters not mentioned throughout this assessment:
Light spill
A condition will require that all external lighting must be designed, baffled and located so as to
prevent any adverse effect on adjoining land.
Human Rights Consideration
This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and
Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State
Government and which complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
CONCLUSION
Page 109
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that
the proposal be supported for the following reasons:





The site is located in a substantial change area on a tram / bus priority route making it
ideally located to accommodate higher density residential development.
Subject to conditions, the development will not unreasonably impact on the surrounding
residential properties.
The new buildings are deemed to be compatible with the character of the area and well
articulated so as not to present excessive visual bulk to the adjoining interfaces.
Adequate car parking is provided in accordance with the Stonnington Planning Scheme
and traffic generation will not adversely impact on the surrounding street network.
The proposal has satisfactorily overcome the previous concerns and has responded to
the finding of the previous Tribunal hearing (VCAT Reference No. P137/2013) for this site.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
PD - 0273-14 -663 663A 665 667 669 691 Malvern Road Toorak - 1 of 2
Plans
2.
PD - 0273-14 -663 663A 665 667 669 691 Malvern Road Toorak - 2 of 2
Plans
RECOMMENDATION
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 0273/14 for the land located at
663, 663A, 665, 667, 669 & 691 Malvern Road, Toorak be issued under the Stonnington
Planning Scheme for construction of a multi dwelling development in a General
Residential Zone and Residential Growth Zone; a reduction in the statutory car parking
requirement; and alter access to a Road Zone Category 1 subject to the following
conditions:
1.
Before the commencement of the development, three (3) copies of plans drawn to
scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans
submitted with the advertised plans Council date stamped 3 June 2014 but
modified to show:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
Plans to be amended to reflect the changes as shown on the discussion
plans dated 5 November 2014 and known as Revision 06 but further modified
in accordance with the following Condition 1 requirements;
Allocation of individual parking spaces to individual dwellings shown on
plans;
The front of the building, including the projecting balconies, pushed back to
align with the principal faces of the two adjoining buildings (No’s 661 and 693
Malvern Road) with no change to other setbacks;
The eave along the southern side of the building at the uppermost level to be
removed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;
A convex mirror to be installed to improve sight distance at the entry to the
basement to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;
All car parking spaces and garages to be shown dimensioned to comply
with Clause 52.06-8 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme;
Door opening movements altered to ensure no doors open into parking areas
or parking aisles;
Protection from circulating vehicles for pedestrians exiting the lifts, using
Page 110
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
i)
j)
k)
l)
m)
n)
o)
p)
q)
r)
s)
t)
u)
v)
w)
bollards or similar;
Headroom clearance at the entrance to be shown on the plans, and confirmed
at a minimum clearance of 2.2m;
The type of bicycle parking is to be clearly identified, and all dimensions are
to be shown on plans. If a proprietary product is to be used, manufacturer’s
specifications are to be provided.
Columns to be shown dimensioned in accordance with Diagram 1 of Clause
52.06-8 of the Planning Scheme;
A longitudinal section including all grades, lengths of grades, and levels is to
be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;
A longitudinal section of the right-of-way. This longitudinal section is to
include details of the grades and grade changes along the right-of-way,
including changes in grade where the right-of-way changes direction, and at
the entrance to the car park;
Plans to confirm the internal radius of the ramp between basement levels to
be provided at 4 metres;
Plans to remove all reference to the security gate within the right-of-way;
Note to be added to plans confirming that the widened section of right-of-way
must remain in private ownership and the widened section is to be clearly
delineated on the plans;
Provide window to second floor bathrooms of eastern row townhouses. Any
new windows must be screened in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause
55;
Location of operable windows to be shown on all elevations ensuring
appropriate cross-ventilation opportunities are available to each unit and at
each floor for townhouses;
Confirm extent of site permeable and impermeable areas;
Roof plans to confirm drainage areas connected to the rainwater tanks as per
MUSIC tool;
Confirm type and coverage of pergola proposed to third floor north facing
apartment windows;
Sections confirming the extent of overlooking that will occur to the west from
the balconies of Apartments 402 and 403. Where there are views of a sensitive
interface within 9 metres screening must be incorporated in accordance with
the requirements of Standard B22 (Overlooking) of Clause 55.
Changes as required by the approved Acoustic Report (Condition 3), Train
Vibration Assessment (Condition 4), Landscape Plan (Condition 6), Tree
Management Plan (Condition 8), Waste Management Plan (Condition 10),
Water Sensitive Urban Design Response (Condition 12), and Sustainable
Management Plan (Condition 14);
all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
2.
The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and
works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless
the Stonnington Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without
the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
3.
Prior to the endorsement of the plans, an acoustic report must be submitted to and
approved by the Responsible Authority to demonstrate how the dwellings will be
acoustically treated to minimise noise transmission from the adjacent train lines to
the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
4.
Prior to the endorsement of the plans, a vibration assessment must be submitted
to and approved by the Responsible Authority to demonstrate how the dwellings
Page 111
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
will be treated to minimise vibrations from the adjacent train lines to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
5.
Prior to the occupation of the development approved under this permit, a report
from the author of the Acoustic Report and Train Vibration Assessment, approved
pursuant to this permit, or a similarly qualified person or company, must be
submitted to the Responsible Authority. The report must be to the satisfaction of
the Responsible Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the
Acoustic Report and Train Vibration Assessment have been sufficiently
implemented in accordance with the approved plan.
6.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a landscape plan to be prepared by a
landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must
be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the
landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The
landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be
provided. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the landscape concept
plans TP01, TP02, TP03, TP04 and TP05 prepared by Jack Merlo Design and
Council date stamped 3 June 2014, but modified to show:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
The changes as shown on the updated landscape plans Revision D Council
date stamped 15 January 2015;
Details of all planters above ground level within the apartments;
Soil volumes for all in-situ plantings confirming that all vegetation proposed
can be sustained;
Location of proposed Ecosol sand filter;
Location of waste room to be shown on Landscape Plans;
Consistency with the architectural plans.
all to the satisfaction of the Responsibility Authority
7.
Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on the
endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction
of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants
are to be replaced.
8.
Concurrent with the endorsement of development plans a tree management plan
prepared by a suitably qualified arborist must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. When approved, the tree management plan will form part of
this permit and all works must be done in accordance with the tree management
plan.
The tree management plan must detail measures to protect and ensure the viability
of the two (2) mature Lemon Scented Gums on the east boundary of the site, and
the Red Box Gum on the northern boundary.
Without limiting the generality of the tree management plan it must have at least
three sections as follows:
a)
Pre-construction – details to include a tree protection zone, height barrier
around the tree protection zone, amount and type of mulch to be placed
above the tree protection zone and method of cutting any roots or branches
which extend beyond the tree protection zone.
Page 112
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
b)
c)
During-construction – details to include watering regime during construction
and method of protection of exposed roots.
Post-construction – details to include watering regime and time of final
inspection when barrier can be removed and protection works and regime
can cease.
Pre-construction works and any root cutting must be inspected and approved by
the Parks Unit. Removal of protection works and cessation of the tree
management plan must be authorised by the Parks Unit.
9.
No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within
the Tree Protection Zone without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.
No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the Tree
Protection Zone.
10.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, a Waste Management Plan must be
submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Waste Management
Plan must be generally in accordance with the Waste Management Plan prepared
by Leigh Design and dated 30 April 2014 and must include:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
Dimensions of waste areas
The number of bins to be provided
Method of waste and recyclables collection
Hours of waste and recyclables collection NB. These should correspond with
our Local Laws
Method of presentation of bins for waste collection
Sufficient headroom within the basement to allow the passage of waste
collection vehicles
Sufficient turning circles for the waste collection vehicles to drive out in
forward gear from within the basement NB. This subsection only to be used
for collection from basement
Strategies for how the generation of waste and recyclables from the
development will be minimised
When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the
permit. Waste collection from the development must be in accordance with
the plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
11.
Every rateable tenement is liable to pay a garbage charge irrespective of the level
of waste collection services provided to the tenement by Council.
12.
Concurrent with the endorsement of plans, the applicant must provide a Water
Sensitive Urban Design Response addressing the Application Requirements of the
Water Sensitive Urban Design Policy to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority. All proposed treatments included within the Water Sensitive Urban
Design Response must also be indicated on the plans.
13.
The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives detailed
in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.
14.
Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1 a
Sustainable Management Plan (SMP) must be submitted to and approved by the
Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SMP will be endorsed as part of the
planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design
initiatives outlined in the SMP to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
Amendments to the SMP must be incorporated into plan changes required under
Page 113
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Condition 1. The report must be generally in accordance with the Sustainable
Design Assessment prepared by Ark Resources dated 3 December 2014 but
modified as follows:
a)
b)
c)
Confirm if glazing and insulation types recommended in Acoustic and
Vibration reports accord with fabric assumptions used to derive unit and
townhouse energy ratings;
Include a site plan confirming extent of permeable / impermeable areas
considered for the MUSIC tool;
Provide information on the purpose and location of the Ecosol Sand Filter.
All works must be undertaken in accordance with the endorsed Sustainability
Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations to
the Sustainable Management Plan may occur without written consent of the
Responsible Authority.
15.
Prior to the occupation of the development approved under this permit, a report
from the author of the Sustainability Management Plan, approved pursuant to this
permit, or similarly qualified person or company, must be submitted to the
Responsible Authority. The report must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority and must confirm that all measures specified in the Sustainability
Management Plan have been implemented in accordance with the approved plan.
16.
Any external lighting must be designed, baffled and located so as to prevent any
adverse effect on adjoining land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
17.
Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film)
designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in
accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority thereafter for the life of the building.
18.
The existing footpath levels at the property line of Malvern Road must not be
lowered or altered (to vehicular access).
19.
Prior to the commencement of any works over any easement, the permit holder
must obtain approval from the relevant authorities to remove and/or build over the
easements pertaining to the site to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
20.
A report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a
drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified
Engineer in accordance with that report prior to a building permit being issued. The
drainage must be constructed in accordance with the Engineer’s design.
21.
All vehicular crossings made redundant by the development must be removed at
the owner’s cost and to the satisfaction of Council.
22.
Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to be
relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the applicant
and subject to the relevant authority’s consent.
23.
All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this permit
must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority by
completion of the development.
Page 114
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
24.
Prior to occupation, access for persons with disabilities must be provided in
compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 and such access must be
maintained at all times the building is occupied or in use.
25.
All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or
screened so as not to be visible from any of the surrounding footpaths and
adjoining properties (including from above) and shall be baffled so as to minimise
the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section
48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible
Authority.
VicRoads Conditions
26.
Prior to the commencement of the permitted development, a detailed functional
layout drawing for the proposed access must be submitted to and approved by
VicRoads and the Responsible Authority showing:
a) Details of the widened access laneway at Malvern Road. The functional layout
drawing must include details of appropriate signage and line marking enforcing
a left in / left out access arrangement from Malvern Road to / from the
development.
b) Swept path analysis of appropriate design vehicles entering and exiting the site
concurrently.
27.
Provision for vehicles to enter and exit the site in a forward direction must be
available at all times to the satisfaction of the VicRoads.
28.
Before the use of the permitted development:
a) The laneway and cross-over in accordance with the approved functional layout
plan must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
b) Any redundant vehicle crossovers on Malvern Road must be removed and the
kerb, channel, footpath and nature strip reinstated to the satisfaction of the
Responsible Authority.
End VicRoads Conditions
VicTrack Conditions
29.
All railway infrastructure (including overhead power and supporting
infrastructure for trains) must not be interfered with or damaged during the
construction period. Any damage to railway infrastructure as a consequence of
the construction period must be rectified to the satisfaction of VicTrack and the
Rail Operator at the full cost of the permit holder.
30.
All reasonable steps must be taken to ensure that there is no disruption to train
services. Any foreseen disruption to the rail operation during the construction
period requires the approval of Metro Trains Melbourne.
31.
No entry onto railway land is permitted without the written consent of the rail
operator and the common boundary with VicTrack land must be fenced at the
owner’s expense to prohibit access to the rail corridor.
32.
No drainage or effluent must enter VicTrack land and must be connected to the
legal point of discharge.
Page 115
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
33.
Any wall to be built on the railway reserve boundary must be cleaned and
finished using a graffiti proof finish or alternative measures to prevent or reduce
the potential for graffiti Any graffiti that appears on the wall must be cleaned or
removed as soon as practicable to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
The cost of any clean−up or removal of the graffiti from the wall must be paid for
by the developer and/or future owners of the land.
34.
No excavation, filling or construction must take place on the common boundary
between the subject land and VicTrack land without the prior approval of
VicTrack and the Rail Operator.
35.
No waste, soil or other materials from the works are to be stored or deposited on
VicTrack land.
36.
All works, including hoardings, must be undertaken within the subject land and
must not encroach onto VicTrack land.
37.
No lighting is to be erected (permanent or temporary) that spills light onto the
railway tracks or which interferes with the visibility of signals and rail lines by
train drivers
38.
Building materials (including glass/window treatments) along the rail corridor
must be non−reflective and avoid red and green colour schemes that may
interfere with driver operations.
39.
Plant and tree species must be of the type that will not cause any future
overhang onto VicTrack land or disturbance of railway operations.
40.
No permanent or temporary ground anchors are permitted within VicTrack land.
41.
All reasonable steps (including appropriate screening to balconies) must be
taken to ensure that objects cannot be projected into the rail corridor to the
satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
42.
The development is located adjacent to an operating railway corridor, where train
services may operate 24 hours a day. 7 days a week. It is recommended that
windows and built form that incorporate noise attenuation materials (i.e. double
glazing and appropriate wall attenuation materials) to reduce amenity impacts
should be considered.
End VicTrack Conditions
43.
This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
a)
b)
The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.
The development is not completed within four years of the date of this permit.
In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request
may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes
for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.
NOTES:
This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or
Page 116
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are
obtained.
Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further
written approval of Council.
“Significant tree” means a tree:
i.
with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its
base; or
ii. with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5
metres above its base; or
iii. listed on the Significant Tree Register.
Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is
required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of
trees during construction works.
Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,
damage to or pruning of any street tree without the further written consent of the
Stonnington City Council. Contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 for further
information.
The crossover must be constructed to Council’s Standard Vehicle Crossover
Guidelines unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority. Separate
consent for crossovers is required from Council’s Building and Local Law Unit.
The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not eligible to
receive “Resident Parking Permits”.
At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987
stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a
request is made in writing within the following timeframes:
i.
Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the
development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and
ii. Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development
allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.
Page 117
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
6.
DRAFT CULTURAL DIVERSITY POLICY 2015-2019
Manager Aged, Diversity, Health & Animal Management: Penny Pavlou
General Manager Social Development: Connie Gibbons
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to present the Cultural Diversity Policy 2015-2019 and the draft
Stonnington Statement of Commitment to Cultural Diversity to Council for adoption.
BACKGROUND
The City of Stonnington is one of the most diverse in metropolitan Melbourne. The
community includes residents from 143 countries who speak 108 different languages, with
increases in seven of the Indian languages. The culturally diverse community is equally
distributed across the municipality. This rich diversity is one of the things that makes the City
of Stonnington a great place to live.
The demographic profile of Stonnington continues to change. According to the 2011 Census
data, 20.3% of the overall population was born in a non-English speaking country. The
largest non-English speaking country of birth is India followed by China, Greece, Malaysia,
Indonesia and Italy. The dominant language spoken at home other than English in the city is
Greek followed by Mandarin, Cantonese, Italian and Hindi. Overall, 21.3% speak a nonEnglish language at home.
One of the significant changes observed from between the 2006 Census and the 2011
Census has been the change in the communities of growth. While the Greek community
remains the largest language group spoken at home in Stonnington after English, this group
is continuing to grow older, with little population renewal. Increases in younger people
between the ages of 15-30 who were born in India, Malaysia and China are leading the
communities of growth in Stonnington.
The draft Cultural Diversity Policy and Stonnington Statement of Commitment to Cultural
Diversity was presented to Council on 1 December 2014 and was endorsed for further
community comment and feedback.
DISCUSSION
Community consultation was undertaken between 27 January and 27 February 2015. The
draft Policy and Statement of Commitment was made available at Council’s Service Centres,
Libraries and Child Care Centres, as well as on Council’s website. Copies of the draft Policy
and Statement of Commitment were sent to the culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD)
clubs and all agencies that were consulted in the development of the draft Policy and
Statement of Commitment. A special meeting was also conducted with the Stonnington
Ethnic Services Committee
Feedback from the Community Consultation Process
At a special meeting conducted with the Ethnic Services Committee on 26 February, the
clubs expressed strong support and reaffirmation for the Policy . In particular, they
supported Council’s Statement of Commitment and for the Key Actions that have been
identified for implementation over the next four years.
Following the consultation period, Council received feedback from two agencies and one
individual. The feedback is as follows:
Page 119
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Department of Human Services (Centrelink)
 Will the Policy consider employment opportunities for local residents and will Council
encourage local employers to employ local residents?
 Will Council deliver cross cultural training to community members, and not just Council
staff?
 Will there be other celebration opportunities other than the Flavours Festival to celebrate
community harmony?
 Will New Resident kits be available in formats other than written?
Inner South Community Health Service:
 Has Council has considered Indigenous Communities? which the Council already has a
separate Plan.
 There could be more emphasis on empowering culturally diverse communities to actively
participate in the plan.
 There could be more emphasis on GLBTI communities.
Resident:
 Questions about the Cultural Diversity Grant Program and if all people are protected by
the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act and the Racial Discrimination Act
The Manager of Aged, Diversity, Health and Animal Management has written to these
agencies in response to their comment and feedback, and relevant considerations have
made in the draft Policy where applicable. No changes to the draft Policy were required.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The following Council plans, policies and strategies have helped to inform the development
of the draft Cultural Diversity Policy:
 Council Plan 2013-17
 Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing 2013-17
 Youth Strategy 2010-14
 Access and Inclusion Plan 2014-17
 Older Persons Strategy 2008
 Arts and Cultural Strategy 2011-15
 Recreation Strategy 2014-2024
 Reconciliation Action Plan 2012-2016
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
The cost to implement the Cultural Diversity Policy 2015-2019 and the Stonnington
Commitment to Cultural Diversity will primarily be met within existing budget parameters.
However, as for the training component, a detailed plan will be developed And $20,000 has
been allocated in the draft 2015/16 Council budget for this program.
CONCLUSION
The City of Stonnington is committed to service excellence for all residents. Council has a
long commitment to its culturally and linguistically diverse communities, recognising that
diversity is an important factor in enhancing our society, culture and economy. The
community includes a diverse population with residents from 143 countries who speak 108
Page 120
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
different languages. This rich diversity is one of the things that makes our city a great place
to live.
The draft Cultural Diversity Policy 2015-2019 and the draft Stonnington Commitment to
Cultural Diversity provides a framework for a whole of organisation approach to culturally
responsive service planning and development and continues Council’s tradition of
responsiveness to the culturally diverse communities of Stonnington. Officers have
developed a proposed range of actions in response to consultations and research. These
actions reflect the key areas of communication and information, culturally responsive service
provision, community strengthening and workforce development.
The draft Cultural Diversity Policy 2015-2019 was made available for further feedback and
comment in the period 27 January to 27 February. The overall feedback from the community
is strong support for the Policy, and Council’s position and direction regarding its
commitment to cultural diversity.
It is recommended that Council adopts the Draft Cultural Diversity Policy 2015-2019 and the
draft Stonnington Commitment to Cultural Diversity.
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
This recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
Draft Cultural Diversity Policy
Excluded
2.
Stonnington Statement of Commitment to Cultural Diversity
Excluded
3.
Draft Cultural Diversity Policy Community Consultation Feedback
Excluded
RECOMMENDATION
That Council adopts the draft Cultural Diversity Policy 2015-2019 and the Stonnington
Commitment of Cultural Diversity.
Page 121
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
7.
AMENDMENT C184 - PUBLIC ACQUISITION OVERLAY, PRAHRAN - CONSIDERATION OF
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE PLANNING PANEL AND ADOPTION
Manager City Strategy: Susan Price
General Manager Sustainable Future: Karen Watson
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider the recommendations of the Planning
Panel on Amendment C184 – Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran and decide whether to
adopt the amendment with or without changes.
Council resolved at its meeting on 18 August 2014, to defer this report for two cycles. The
purpose of the deferral was to allow additional investigation and consideration of the
amendment.
Council resolved at its meeting on 15 September 2014 to defer this report to first enable
consideration of the Panel’s recommendations for Amendment C186 ‘Increase to Open
Space Contributions’ in March 2015. Council’s decision in response to the Panel’s
recommendations regarding Amendment C186 is discussed later in this report.
The report has been updated as follows:
 Additional section on ‘Amendment C186 Open Space Contributions’ to highlight the
Panel’s recommendations for this Amendment.
 Revised anticipated timeframes outlined in the ‘Financial and Resource Implications’
section.
 Update to ‘Legal Advice and Implications’ section to highlight that Amendment C184
is considered seriously entertained.
BACKGROUND
At its meeting on 5 August 2013, under Confidential Business, Council resolved to seek
authorisation from the Minister for Planning to prepare and exhibit Amendment C184.
The Amendment proposes to apply a Public Acquisition Overlay (Schedule 3 – Public Open
Space) on the following individual parcels of land:
 22 Regent Street, Prahran (Lot 1 on TP693894V)
 25 Regent Street, Prahran (Lot 1 on TP689257C)
 22 Mount Street, Prahran (Lot 1 on TP749184W)
 27 Mount Street, Prahran (Lot 1 on TP605791E)
 34 Clifton Street, Prahran (Lot 1 on TP321047U)
Refer to Attachment 1 for a Locality Map showing the specific sites.
Purpose of Amendment C184
The area bounded by Clifton, King, Bangs and High Streets, Prahran, is an area which will
undergo significant urban renewal as envisaged through Chapel reVision Structure Plan
(adopted by Council 7 July 2014). Currently, the building stock is generally constructed to
title boundaries and, as a result, there is very little open space available to residents.
Page 123
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The strategic intent of the Amendment is that by applying a Public Acquisition Overlay to the
sites, the land is identified for future open space which will provide valuable passive areas as
well as creating an east west pedestrian connection between Bendigo Street through the
Director of Housing site (Bangs Estate) to Chapel Street. This is envisaged in the Chapel
reVision Structure Plan and supporting documents.
Applying the public acquisition overlay reserves the land for a public purpose and ensures
that changes to the development of the land do not prejudice the purpose for which the land
is to be acquired. Pursuant to the Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986, Council
must appropriately reserve the land in a Public Acquisition Overlay before commencing to
acquire any interest in the land. The Planning Scheme Amendment is required to facilitate
this process.
If the Amendment is approved by the Minister for Planning, a further formal resolution of
Council would be required to negotiate with any landowners to proceed with the purchase or
acquisition of a property in line with any agreed process by Council.
The process for this to occur is contained within the Planning and Environment act 1987 and
Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986.
Exhibition
The Amendment was placed on formal exhibition from 21 November 2013 to 23 December
2013 in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Due to the complex and sensitive nature of the Amendment, before commencing formal
exhibition, letters were sent to the landowners of the specific sites affected. This informal
notification was followed with one on one meetings with Council officers, upon request.
As part of the formal exhibition process, letters were sent to Prescribed Authorities and
affected owners and occupiers. Notice appeared in the Stonnington Leader (19 November
2013) and Government Gazette (21 November 2013). Amendment documents were also
available for viewing at Prahran Town Hall and on Council’s and the Department of
Environment, Land, Water and Planning’s websites. During the exhibition period, Council
received eight (8) submissions generally opposed to the Amendment.
Individual
submissions were received on behalf of owners of four of the five affected properties, two
from occupiers of affected properties and a further two received from adjoining neighbours.
All submissions were referred to Planning Panels Victoria.
Panel Hearing and Report
The key issues from submissions that were considered by the Panel included:
 Insufficient consultation
 Alignment and pedestrian link
 Usability of site for future open space
 Loss of business and compensation
 Safety and security implications
The Panel Report responds to these issues in Chapters 3 to 5 of the Panel Report
(Attachment 2).
The Panel Report also includes extracts of concept plans for the PAO sites to demonstrate to
the Panel that the selected sites may be developed as attractive additions to the open space
network and pedestrian links. A full copy of the concept plans is included as Attachment 2b.
Page 124
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The Panel concluded that the Amendment is sound. The Panel ‘empathises with affected
property owners, it also feels that the proposed PAO and its design intent will provide
ultimately a more suitable outcome for future residents based on lengthy strategic planning
for the site’.
The Panel recommends that Amendment C184 to the Stonnington Planning Scheme should
be adopted with minor changes to reflect the approval of Amendment C161 during the
process. This is in line with Council’s submission to the Panel. The Panel Report was
circulated to submitters on 23 July 2014 and released publically on 28 July 2014. The Panel
Report is available on Council’s website.
Strategies for Creating Open Space
In February 2015, municipality-wide consultation was undertaken to test the direction of
Council’s Strategies. The findings of this consultation were considered at the 2 March 2015
Council Meeting. The process confirmed that 91% of respondents believe it is important for
Council to create open space now and over 60% of respondents supported the use of a PAO
as a tool for creating open space.
Amendment C172 Panel Hearing
The Panel Hearing to consider Amendment C172 ‘Chapel Street Activity Centre Permanent
Planning Controls’ and submissions to the Amendment, was recently undertaken. No
submissions were made about the east-west link shown.
DISCUSSION
Council must now formally consider the Panel’s recommendations before deciding how to
proceed with the Amendment. The Panel Report recommends that Amendment C184 be
adopted as exhibited and notes that Council has demonstrated strong strategic and policy
support for the Amendment and its aspirations to provide enhanced open space areas for the
community.
At the start of the Report, the Panel notes that:
‘During exhibition of the Amendment, on 5 December 2013, Amendment C161 to the
Scheme (MSS Review) was approved by the Minister for Planning and gazetted into the
Scheme. Amendment C161 updated the Municipal Strategic Statement and included
deleting Clause 22.01 (Open Space Policy) meaning it is no longer necessary to amend the
Clause through Amendment C184’.
As a result, an updated Explanatory Report and Instruction Sheet were prepared and
included in Council’s submission to the Panel Hearing. The updated Explanatory Report and
Instruction Sheet are included as Attachment 3. The changes to these documents reflect the
changes to Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) introduced as part of Amendment
C161.
This constitutes a minor change to the exhibited documents to the exhibited documents as
presented at Panel, however the substantive element of the Amendment being the
application of the Public Acquisition Overlay remains the same.
The change put forward by Council at the Hearing and recommended by the Panel is
required to ensure that the current Amendment documents (which include the Explanatory
Report and Instruction Sheet) are up to date.
Page 125
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Amendment C186 Open Space Contributions
On 23 March 2015, Council considered the recommendations of the planning panel
appointed to consider the submissions to Amendment C186 ‘Increase to open space
contributions’. Council resolved to adopt the Amendment, with changes, proposing an open
space contribution rate of 8% for South Yarra, Prahran, Windsor and Armadale, and an open
space contribution rate of 5% for the balance of the Municipality. In accordance with Section
35 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the Minister for Planning may approve an
amendment or part of an amendment with or without changes.
The Panel acknowledged the need and shortfall of open space in the west of the
municipality.
Ministerial Direction 15
In accordance with Ministerial Direction 15, Council must make a decision on Amendment
C184 within 40 business days of the date it receives the Panel’s report unless an exemption
is sought. Council received the Panel’s report on 7 July 2014 and a decision was required to
be made by 1 September 2014.
On 16 October 2014, Council received an exemption from the Minister for Planning to comply
with the above timeframes.
Adoption of Amendment
It is recommended that Council adopt Amendment C184, with changes, being the updated
Explanatory Report and Instruction Sheet, presented at Panel (Attachment 3) and the
proposed PAO Map (Attachment 1).
Refer to Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 for the amended documents which are consistent
with the Panel’s recommendation
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
A number of Council policies support the Amendment and these include, Chapel reVision,
the City of Stonnington Council Plan 2013-2017, the Municipal Strategic Statement in
particular Clauses 21.06-5 Public Realm and Pedestrian Access and 21.07 Open Space and
Environment.
The Amendment is further supported by the adopted Public Realm Strategy (2010) and
Strategies for Creating Open Space (2013). This Amendment seeks to advance the
implementation of these key Council plans with the Panel noting that the proposal seeks to
implement key parts of the Strategies for Creating Open Space (2013) to proactively improve
the provision of open space within Stonnington.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
The costs associated with the processing of Amendment C184 were included within the
2013/2014 Strategic Planning budget.
Amendment C184 timeline:
October 2013
December 2013
June 2014
April 2015
Mid-2015
Min Direction
15*
Authorisation
Exhibition
Panel
Page 126
Adoption
Approval
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
*In accordance with Section (8) of Ministerial Direction 15, if a planning authority submits an
adopted amendment to the Minister in accordance with the requirements of section 31 of the
Act, the Minister must made a decision on the amendment within 40 business days of
receiving the adopted amendment.
The Minister may exempt him/herself from this requirement.
LEGAL ADVICE & IMPLICATIONS
Legal advice has been sought at various stages of the process, as required.
Amendment is considered to be seriously entertained planning proposal.
The
CONCLUSION
Amendment C184 proposes to apply a Public Acquisition Overlay (Schedule 3 – Public Open
Space) over five (5) individual parcels of land between Bangs and Clifton Streets, Prahran to
identify Council’s intent to acquire these parcels of land for future public open space.
Implementing the Strategies for Creating Open Space demonstrates Council’s commitment
to preserving and enhancing the amenity for existing and future residents and providing
better open space areas, recreational infrastructure and public realm improvements.
The Panel report on Amendment C184 recommends adoption of the Amendment as
exhibited. It is considered that Council accept the Panel’s recommendation and adopt the
Amendment, with changes, being the updated Amendment documents presented at Panel.
A report was prepared for the Council meeting on 18 August 2014. Council, at this meeting
deferred the report for two cycles requesting that the matter be listed for further discussion
and a report be brought back to Council on 15 September 2014. At this meeting, Council
deferred the report until March 2015 following consideration of the Panel’s recommendations
for Amendment C186.
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
This recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
SF - Amendment C184 - Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran - Attachment
1
Excluded
2.
SF - Amendment C184 - Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran - Attachment 2
Excluded
3.
SF - Amendment C184 - Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran - Attachment
2B
Excluded
4.
SF - Amendment C184 - Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran - Attachment 3
Excluded
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Notes the release of the report of the Planning Panel to the public on Amendment
C184 Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran.
2. On considering the independent panel report, adopts Amendment C184 Public
Acquisition Overlay, Prahran to the Stonnington Planning Scheme, with changes,
Page 127
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
(pursuant to Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987) as identified
in Attachments 1 and 3.
3. Submits the adopted Amendment C184 Public Acquisition Overlay, Prahran to the
Minister for Planning for approval, in accordance with Section 31(1) of the Planning
and Environment Act 1987.
4. Advises all submitters of Council’s decision in relation to Amendment C184 Public
Acquisition Overlay, Prahran.
Page 128
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
8.
AMENDMENT C212 - MALVERN ROAD BURKE ROAD NEIGHBOURHOOD ACTIVITY
CENTRE PLANNING CONTROLS
Manager City Strategy: Susan Price
General Manager Sustainable Future: Karen Watson
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is for Council to consider:
 The submissions received on Amendment C212 to the Stonnington Planning Scheme.
 Whether to request the Minister for Planning appoint an independent Panel for
Amendment C212 and refer submissions to the Panel for consideration.
 A response to submissions received.
BACKGROUND
Amendment
On 15 December 2014 Council resolved to adopt the Draft Malvern Road - Burke Road
Neighbourhood Activity Centre Urban Design Framework and seek Ministerial authorisation
to prepare a planning scheme amendment for planning controls to implement the UDF.
Amendment C212 seeks to ensure that future development of the Malvern Road - Burke
Road Activity Centre (Activity Centre) resulting from the Burke Road Level Crossing Removal
Project (LCRP) enhances the activity centre and avoids causing unreasonable impacts on
surrounding residential areas. It proposes to introduce the following controls over land
located within the Activity Centre and the adjoining rail corridor:




A new Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 15).
A new local policy for the Activity Centre (Clause 22.22).
Minor changes to the MSS.
Inclusion of the Malvern Road – Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre Urban
Design Framework (UDF) as a reference document.
Exhibition
The Minister for Planning granted Council authorisation to prepare Amendment C212 on 9
January 2015.
Amendment C212 was exhibited from 12 February to 17 March 2015. Notification and
exhibition of the amendment was carried out via the following measures including:
 Letters sent to the owners, occupiers, and prescribed authorities on 9 February 2015.
 Public viewing file of amendment documentation at Prahran Town Hall and Malvern Town
Hall.
 Full amendment documentation on Department of Transport, Planning and Local
Infrastructure (DTPLI - now Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning) and
Stonnington websites.
The Draft UDF was also available for viewing with Amendment C212 (see Attachment 1).
Page 129
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
DISCUSSION
Fourteen submissions were received during the exhibition period. A map showing the
location of the submitters is included in Attachment 2.
The key issues raised in the submissions, and proposed responses to these issues, are
addressed below. A more detailed response to specific issues raised in submissions is
provided in Attachment 3.
Key Issues Raised in Submissions
Scale of Development (Height and Setbacks)
Issue Summary
Residential submitters are seeking reduced heights particularly in Precincts B and C with a
mandatory height of six storeys stepped down the hill and increased setbacks over four
storeys
VicRoads are seeking removal of the 4 metre building setback from Carroll Crescent and to
remove the one storey height limit within Precinct D. VicTrack is seeking flexible precinct
boundaries between precincts B and D as the final footprint of the development site has not
been determined.
Officer Response
The heights and setbacks proposed in Amendment C212 are consistent with the UDF and
existing four storey development and proposed seven storey development within the activity
centre. They are also considered appropriate given the setting and context of the activity
centre which adjoins main roads, a railway line and the Residential Growth Zone on
Glenarm Road which permits four storey development. The preferred height of development
with frontage to Glenarm Road is six storeys with the lower three storeys setback 4 metres
from the front property boundary and the upper three storeys setback a further 5 metres (9
metres from the front property boundary) to enable a transition towards the residential area
on the western side of Glenarm Road.
Precinct B
The proposed eight storey building height limit will appear lower than the VCAT approved 7
storey development on the corner of Malvern and Burke Road due to the fall of the land
(approximately 5 metres). Upper level setbacks are considered appropriate to reduce visual
bulk near to residential properties.
Precinct C
Changes are proposed to the 4 metre building setback from Glenarm Road to exclude the
footpath and landscaping. This will address the irregular road alignment and provide a further
ground level setback. It is also proposed to amend the wording within DDO15 to ensure that
development steps down with the slope of land.
Precinct D
A 4 metre building setback from Carroll Crescent is proposed to be removed due to
insufficient space following the proposed railway realignment. The one storey height limit was
proposed to limit large scale development and is recommended to be replaced with a permit
trigger for a larger scale station, mixed used development and strengthened design
guidelines. This will enable an assessment of the impacts of any future development on
residential amenity and the station forecourt.
Page 130
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Precinct Boundaries
The boundaries between precincts B and D are proposed to remain as exhibited and any
changes could be discussed by VicTrack at the Panel hearing.
Mandatory Height
Planning Practice Note 60 Height and setback controls for activity centres advises that
mandatory height controls will only be considered in exceptional circumstances which do not
apply in this case.
Permit Exclusions for Rail, Road and Tramway Works
Issue Summary
VicRoads and VicTrack are seeking removal of the permit requirement for rail, road and
tramway works from the schedule to the Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 15).
Officer Response
It is considered appropriate to exempt rail, road and tramway works from requiring a planning
permit under proposed DDO15 to ensure that maintenance and improvements to critical
transport infrastructure can be made.
However, it is not considered appropriate for this exemption to apply to development which
may have a more significant impact on residential amenity and open space within the station
forecourt. Therefore, multi-deck car parking buildings, buildings associated with train stabling
and large scale station development (above 2 storeys and 350m2 in area), are proposed to
still require a planning permit in the DDO.
Traffic Congestion and Car Parking
Issue Summary
Submitters have questioned whether the Level Crossing Removal Project will reduce traffic
congestion and whether new development resulting from DDO15 will add to traffic
congestion and increased parking demand.
Officer Response
Traffic congestion is anticipated to reduce as a result of the LCRP. New development is
required to provide car parking on site and will not be eligible for resident parking permits.
Further investigations will be undertaken prior to the Panel hearing regarding vehicle access
to the activity centre to support additional development.
Use of 9 Glentilt Road / Open Space
Issue Summary
Submitters are concerned that VicTrack land leased for a nursery (9 Glentilt Road) will be
developed for commuter car parking and have requested that the nursery and substation are
used as a park. Height controls are also sought for the nursery site.
Submitters are also seeking increased open space within the activity centre.
Officer Response
VicTrack has advised that the substation will be retained and that land at 9 Glentilt Road will
not be developed as part of the LCRP as it is leased for a nursery until 2022. It is
recommended that VicTrack land at 9 Glentilt Road is removed from the amendment
including the map in DDO15. The existing RGZ controls which apply to 9 Glentilt Road are
not proposed to change as part of this amendment.
Page 131
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
The landscaped station forecourt proposed as part of the LCRP will provide sufficient open
space within the activity centre. Council Officers will continue to work with VicRoads to
ensure that the station forecourt acts as a community meeting place and that high quality
landscaping and materials are used.
Changes to the UDF
Issue Summary
Submitters have expressed concern that changes to the August 2014 UDF were influenced
by the State Government and do not reflect community views.
Officer Response
The UDF was prepared in consultation with the community. In December 2014, Council
adopted changes to the UDF including new provisions for the eastern side of Glenarm Road
to provide certainty for future development and protect residential amenity.
Changes were also made to the UDF to reflect changes to the LCRP. The submission and
Panel hearing process for C212 provide further opportunities for community views to be
considered by both Council and the Panel.
Summary of Changes Recommended to Amendment
Key changes recommended to the amendment include:
 Refinement of objectives and strategies in DDO15, Clause 22.22 and Clause 21.06.
 Inclusion of planning permit exemptions for rail and tramway works (excluding stations
over 2 storeys and 350m2 in area and buildings associated with train stabling and multideck car parking) with associated strengthening of policy in DDO15 regarding future
development in the station precinct.
 Refinements to Precinct Design Guidelines regarding slope, street level setbacks,
landscaping requirements, weather protection and underground car parking.
Attachments 4, 5 and 6 contain the proposed changes (in tracked changes) to the exhibited
versions of Schedule 15 to the Design and Development Overlay, Clause 21.06 and Clause
22.22 in response to submissions received.
Other Issues
Many issues raised in submissions (including the commuter car park, retention and planting
mature trees, freeway noise and pedestrian and bicycle safety) relate to the LCRP and other
road and rail management issues. These issues will be passed onto VicRoads for
consideration in the detailed project design and delivery stage.
A series of other issues raised relate to changes to local parking restrictions, preventing new
development from accessing resident parking permits and the quality of any new apartments
and are not directly related to Amendment C212.
Next Steps
Council must forward submissions received on Amendment C212 to an independent Panel, if
it is not prepared to vary the amendment to address the issues raised in submissions, and it
intends to continue with the amendment process.
Council needs to make a formal request to the Minister for Planning to appoint a Panel, after
which Planning Panels Victoria will confirm the hearing dates.
In accordance with Ministerial Direction No. 15, Council must request the appointment of a
Panel under Part 8 of the Act within 40 business days after the closing date of submissions
(by 19 May) unless an extension of time is sought by Council.
Page 132
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Pre-set dates for a directions hearing and Panel hearing were arranged prior to exhibition.
The following hearing dates have been set:
 Directions Hearing, week of: 1 June 2015
 Panel Hearing, week of: 22 June 2015
On receipt of the Panel report for Amendment C212, a report will be prepared for Council
consideration of the Panel's recommendations.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The Amendment is consistent with the following liveability strategy in the Council Plan (20132017):
Balance the competing demands of maintaining residential amenity and
population growth through appropriate planning.
The Amendment is consistent with the objectives for planning in Victoria in section 4 of the
Planning and Environment Act 1987:
To provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use and development
of land.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
The financial cost of planning scheme amendments has been included in the budget of
Council’s Strategic Planning Unit for 2014/2015.
Timeline - Amendment C212:
January 2015
12 February to 17 June 2015
March 2015
Authorisation
Exhibition
Panel
September
2015
November
2015
Adoption
Approval
LEGAL ADVICE & IMPLICATIONS
Council will seek legal advice at various stages of the planning scheme amendment process
as required.
CONCLUSION
Amendment C212 was prepared to manage the impacts of development within the Malvern
Road - Burke Road Activity Centre anticipated following the LCRP. Amendment C212 has
been exhibited and 14 submissions have been received from residents and authorities. The
majority of submissions received relate to the scale of development proposed and the
preferred height and setbacks and details about the LCRP.
It is recommended that an independent Panel is requested to consider the amendment and
that all submissions are referred to this Panel. Council’s position to the Panel is
recommended to be based on the response to the submissions outlined in this report.
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
This recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
Page 133
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
ATTACHMENTS
1.
SF - Amendment C212 - Malvern Road Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity
Centre Planning Controls –1 of 6
Excluded
2.
SF - Amendment C212 - Malvern Road Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity
Centre Planning Controls – 2 of 6
Excluded
3.
SF - Amendment C212 - Malvern Road Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity
Centre Planning Controls – 3 of 6
Excluded
4.
SF - Amendment C212 - Malvern Road Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity
Centre Planning Controls – 4 of 6
Excluded
5.
SF - Amendment C212 - Malvern Road Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity
Centre Planning Controls – 5 of 6
Excluded
6.
SF - Amendment C212 - Malvern Road Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity
Centre Planning Controls – 6 of 6
Excluded
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Requests the Minister for Planning appoint a Panel pursuant to Section 23 of the
Planning and Environment Act 1987 to hear and consider submissions to
proposed Amendment C212 to the Stonnington Planning Scheme.
2. In its submission to the Panel hearing, adopts a position in support of Amendment
C212 generally in accordance with the officer's response to the submissions as
contained in Attachments 3 - 6 of this report.
3. Advises the submitters to proposed Amendment C212 of Council’s decision.
4. Refers the submissions and any late submissions to the Panel appointed to
consider Amendment C212.
Page 134
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
9.
AMENDMENT C215 BURKE ROAD LEVEL CROSSING REMOVAL PROJECT
INCORPORATED DOCUMENT
Manager City Strategy: Susan Price
General Manager Sustainable Future: Karen Watson
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to:

Brief Council on the planning approval sought by VicRoads for the Burke Road Level
Crossing Removal Project.

Seek Council’s support for the Ministerial planning scheme amendment process.
BACKGROUND
On-going Council Role in Project
VicRoads has consulted Council regarding its role as stakeholder in the project design, land
manager of Gardiner Reserve and Council roads, and planning authority for use and
development for the Burke Road Level Crossing Removal Project (LCRP).VicRoads has
advised that it intends to continue to engage with Council regarding final project design and
continue to hold regular liaison meetings to address issues as the project progresses.
VicRoads has also advised that it intends to continue to engage with residents regarding
sensitive interface issues including commuter car parking and occupation of Gardiner
Reserve.
Planning Approval Request
VicRoads has advised Council that it intends to seek a Ministerial planning scheme
amendment to introduce an incorporated document to provide project approval for the LCRP.
VicRoads is seeking Council’s support for the Ministerial planning scheme amendment
process..
Planning Approval Requirements
The primary use and development of the LCRP does not require planning approval because
most of the proposed works are located within the Road Zone 1 (RDZ1) and the Public Use
Zone 4 (PUZ4). These zones generally provide for road, tramway and rail use and
development without the need for a planning permit.
Some elements of the LCRP may require planning approval (dependent on the final design)
including:

Use and development of land for offices, car parking in a Public Park and Recreation
Zone (Gardiner Reserve).

Change in access to Road Zone 1 due to possible changes in Carroll Crescent/Burke
Road intersection or access to commuter car parking).
Page 135
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015

Advertising on tram stops.
Other elements of the LCRP may require planning approval but this cannot be determined as
the final project design has not been completed.
Planning Scheme Amendment Process and Approval Mechanism
The Minister for Planning may prepare a planning scheme amendment at any time.
Ministerial planning scheme amendments are typically prepared under section 20 (4) of the
Planning and Environment Act 1987 whereby the Minister for Planning is the planning
authority and no public exhibition of the amendment is required.
VicRoads is seeking a Ministerial planning scheme amendment (C215) under section 20 (5)
of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 which enables consultation with local government.
Amendment C215 is proposed to change the Schedule to Clause 52.03 Specific Sites and
Exclusions of the Stonnington Planning Scheme and introduce an incorporated document.
The proposed incorporated document will replace all relevant provisions of the Stonnington
Planning Scheme for the project and provide project approval for the LCRP instead of a
planning permit.
Incorporated documents are currently included in the Stonnington Planning Scheme for a
range of projects including the Cranbourne Pakenham Rail Corridor Project, the M1
Redevelopment Project and other larger scale private developments including 661 Chapel
Street. Incorporated documents are commonly used for transport related projects across
metropolitan Melbourne and have been used for several recent grade separation projects
(Springvale, Mitcham and North Road). The Ministerial amendment process under section 20
(5) differs from the process used for other private and transport developments under section
20 (4) as it enables consultation with Council.
VicRoads has prepared a draft incorporated document for the LCRP seeking feedback from
Council Officers. It describes the scope of the LCRP as including a new railway station,
station forecourt, new railway and tram lines, new tram stop and shelters, relocation of timber
signal box, new station car parking, roadworks, an upgraded substation, use of Gardiner
Reserve for a construction depot, bicycle storage and access and associated signage and
includes a map showing the extent of the project area. The project scope excludes any
private development of the nominated value capture site which is adjacent to existing shops
and buildings at Burke Road through to Glenarm Road.
The draft incorporated document exempts the use and development of land for the LCRP
from requiring a planning permit within the nominated project area. It is also proposed to
include conditions regarding use and development proposed by the LCRP project scope.
Proposed conditions relate to minimising the amount of native vegetation to be removed,
payment of offsets for native vegetation removal. It also includes conditions requiring
preparation of management plans and strategies prior to construction (on matters including
traffic management, heritage management of the timber signal box, environmental
management, construction management and drainage) in consultation with Council. The
requirement to consult Council when preparing these plans will enable Council to raise any
issues of concern and influence the final content of these plans and strategies. The Minister
for Planning may also consult with Council or any other relevant authority further when
deciding whether these plans are satisfactory.
Page 136
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Community Engagement
VicRoads consulted the community in 2013/14 to inform preparation of the LCRP reference
design and has undertaken further community engagement through staffed information
booths for the LCRP from February - March 2015. VicRoads has reported that the majority of
attendees were positive about the LCRP and perceived benefits (faster travel times, reduced
congestion, and a more attractive precinct) and generally viewed the potential construction
impacts as short term inconvenience for long term gain). Key areas of interest to the
community were identified as being:

Bike paths and potential pedestrian underpass under Burke Road.

Final design details - the look and feel of the plaza and station precinct, tree planting
and landscaping, treatment of the cutting.

Traffic management planning/detours during main works.

Location of the access point to Gardiner Park during occupation.

Location of the access point to the new commuter car park.

Duration and details of construction.
The key findings of community engagement for the LCRP are proposed to be submitted to
the Minister for Planning so that the community’s views can be taken into account when
considering the proposed incorporated document and reviewing any plans and details
regarding the LCRP.
DISCUSSION
There are three options available to Council to respond to VicRoads request for support for
the Ministerial planning scheme amendment process (Amendment C215):

Option 1 - Do nothing (do not write in support of the proposed Ministerial amendment
process).

Option 2 - Write in support of the Ministerial amendment process and provide feedback
on the incorporated document.

Option 3 - Write in opposition to the Ministerial amendment process and incorporated
document.
In all cases the Planning and Environment Act 1987 gives the Minister for Planning the
discretion to proceed with Amendment C215.
Option 1 would remove Council from the LCRP planning approval process and would not
enable Council to inform the content of the incorporated document. It would also adversely
affect the existing collaborative working relationship with VicRoads which will be invaluable to
ensure that community concerns are being represented as the LCRP progresses.
Page 137
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Option 2 would record Council support for the Ministerial amendment process. This option
would enable Council to have input into the preparation of plans and strategies required in
the incorporated document and the final project design. It would also maintain the ongoing
positive working relationship with VicRoads for the LCRP
Option 3 would record Council opposition to removing responsibility for planning approval
from Council and oppose use of an incorporated document for project approval.
It is recommended that Council adopt Option 2 and write to VicRoads in support of the
Ministerial amendment process.
This option is considered appropriate for the following reasons:

The LCRP is of State significance in improving rail performance and freeway access.

The existing zones (PUZ and RDZ1) support the principal use and development.

Under a section 20 (5) Ministerial amendment process Council is consulted and can
represent the views of the community. Community views regarding the LCRP are well
known through consultation on the LCRP and on proposed Amendment C212 for the
Malvern Road – Burke Road Neighbourhood Activity Centre Planning Controls.

The Ministerial amendment process has been successfully applied to other grade
separation projects such as the Springvale Level Crossing Removal Project.

VicRoads has formally committed to ongoing consultation and liaison with Council.

Feedback can be provided on any unresolved matters with the incorporated document
to the Minister for Planning.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The proposed incorporated document has no policy implications for the Stonnington Planning
Scheme as it relates to a project approval rather than introducing any new policy
requirements.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
The Ministerial planning scheme amendment process has less financial and resource
implications for Council than a standard planning scheme amendment process.
However, some Officer resources have been required in providing input to the incorporated
document to ensure that it addresses all relevant concerns.
LEGAL ADVICE & IMPLICATIONS
No specific advice has been sought on use of this planning approval mechanism. It is a
legitimate planning approval mechanism and has previously been used within the City of
Stonnington.
Page 138
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
CONCLUSION
Planning permit requirements for the LCRP are limited due to the PUZ4 and RDZ1 zoning
which enables road, rail and tramway use and development without planning approval.
Use of an incorporated document for project specific approval for matters requiring a
planning permit is a legitimate planning approval mechanism which is often used for
infrastructure projects. The Ministerial amendment process involves consultation with Council
and is intended to consider the views of the community identified during recent community
engagement on the LCRP.
VicRoads has consulted Council Officers during preparation of the draft incorporated
document. The incorporated document is proposed to include conditions to address relevant
planning matters and require that plans and details are prepared in consultation with Council.
VicRoads has also provided further reassurance that both Council and community views will
continue to be sought and considered throughout the LCRP.
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
This recommendation complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and
Responsibilities Act 2006.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council:
1. Prepares a letter to VicRoads providing support for the proposed Ministerial
planning scheme amendment to introduce project specific controls for the Level
Crossing Removal Project under section 20 (5) of the Planning and Environment
Act 1987.
2. Authorises the CEO or his delegate to provide final feedback to VicRoads on
appropriate wording for the Burke Road Level Crossing Removal Project
Incorporated Document.
Page 139
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
10. CONSIDERATION OF DONATION TO BAIRO PITE CLINIC
Manager Governance and Corporate Support: Fabienne Thewlis
General Manager Corporate Services: Geoff Cockram
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to consider a donation to the Bairo Pite Clinic in Timor-Leste.
BACKGROUND
Councillors recently attended a fund raising and information function for the Bairo Pite Clinic
which outlined the need for support for their 55 in-patient beds and nurses.
DISCUSSION
Bairo Pite Clinic sees the support of in-patient beds and nurses as the first of priorities
amongst many. The in-patient bed support includes the medication, medical supplies,
medical staff, pathology, utilities, food and laundry. The nurses work 12 hour shifts and are
often the sole source of income for their family.
Apart from the in-patient clinic there is an extensive out-patient consulting service which sees
between 200 and 300 people each day, a busy ante-natal care unit, a labour ward where
over 100 babies are delivered each month, an out-patient supervised TB clinic, HIV
diagnosis, counselling and treatment, daily mobile clinics to outlying communities, a dental
clinic and the training of community birth attendants and village health workers.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Council has been a long-term supporter of Timor-Leste.
FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS
Any donation would be an unbudgeted item.
CONCLUSION
While the Council has not made allowance in this year’s budget for such a donation, it may
still consider this a worthwhile cause to support with a one-off payment.
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
This recommendation has been considered and meets the obligations of the Victorian
Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.
RECOMMENDATION
That Council give consideration to making a donation of $5,000 to the Bairo Pite
Clinic.
Page 141
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
11. SOCIAL JUSTICE DISCUSSION PAPER
Manager Communications & Community Planning: Matt Clear
General Manager Sustainable Future: Karen Watson
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to present a discussion paper on social justice and seek
endorsement of a social justice principles statement.
BACKGROUND
The attached draft Social Justice Discussion Paper was prepared as a result of a Councillorprompted Budget Activity for 2013/14, as follows:
Key Strategic
Objective – Prosperity
A prosperous community, recognised as a creative city, and a
premier visitor and retail destination.
Strategy
Develop relationships with key business stakeholders to foster
opportunities that will provide positive outcomes for the
community, including social justice and equity.
Budget Activity
Provide a framework that enable Council services and programs
to be assessed to ensure that they support human rights and
equity, reduce disadvantage and connect out community.
Measure
Implement a Social Justice Framework.
Source: Council Plan 2013-2017 Year One p.50
The development of the discussion paper comprised a literature review and consultation with
staff and key external organisations.
Consultation
Nine local organisations, and Council staff from the Social Development, Sustainable Future
and Economic and Cultural Development Divisions, were consulted about their perceptions
of social justice and its relationship to the community and Council. Cr Davie provided
valuable input into the development of the draft concepts.
There was strong agreement among those consulted that social justice is about:
 Fostering and promoting a more inclusive society, particularly for people/groups that are
most likely to be marginalised or vulnerable.
 Ensuring all Stonnington residents have a sense of belonging, of being connected to a
community, and treated with respect and dignity.
Page 143
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
Literature and Policy Review
A review identified that Council already provides many social justice-promoting strategies,
plans, activities and programs.
At the highest level, social justice principles are included through the legislative framework
within which local government sits.
These include:
 Local Government Act 1989
 Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities 2006
 Council Plan 2013-2017
 Municipal Public Health and Wellbeing Plan 2013-17 and the
 Access and Inclusion Plan 2014-2017.
The social justice-affirming requirements of these high-level documents cascade into many
other Council policies, activities and programs (please refer to Appendix 1 page 8 for a
comprehensive list).
DISCUSSION
Investigations for the discussion paper indicate that there may be a lack of knowledge in the
community about the breadth of Council’s social justice-promoting activities. To address this,
Council can:
 Acknowledge what Council is already achieving in the area of social justice and promote
this to the community.
 Develop a simple, pragmatic means to ensure that social justice is supported and
promoted.
To this end, the following principles have been developed:
The City of Stonnington is Committed to the Following
Principles of Social Justice:
Access
• Residents have fair / equal access to the resources and services
provided by Council.
• Barriers to the resources and services provided by Council are
reduced for those in need.
• Independent access is supported.
Equity
• Barriers to equity are reduced as far as practicable.
Human Rights
• Human rights are recognised, respected and promoted.
Participation in Decision Making
• Residents have the opportunity for genuine,
participation in decisions affecting their lives.
meaningful
Social Inclusion
• Council activities and programs recognise community diversity
and encourage participation.
Page 144
GENERAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
It is recommended that the above statement be published in the Council Plan 2013-2017
Year Four and on Council’s website. However, there are a number of ways it can be
expressed. It can be referred to as a ‘charter’, a ‘framework’, or a ‘policy statement of
principles’.
These terms can infer different interpretations. The intent of a ‘policy statement’ is most
likely to be widely understood.
Council’s achievements in the area of social justice will be reported in the Annual Report,
beginning with the 2017/18 publication.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The recommendations include an addition to the Council Plan. They are consistent with the
Council Plan’s Key Strategic Objectives.
CONCLUSION
A review has identified that Council provides many social justice-promoting strategies, plans,
activities and programs.
A social justice policy statement has been developed for publication in the Council Plan
2013-2017 Year Four and on Council’s website.
Council’s achievements in the area of social justice will be reported in the Annual Report,
beginning with the 2017/18 publication.
HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION
This report, and its recommendations, complies with the Victorian Charter of Human Rights
and Responsibilities 2006.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
SF - Social Justice Discussion Paper - 1 of 1
Excluded
RECOMMENDATION
That Council note the discussion paper on social justice and endorse the social
justice policy statement.
Page 145
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS
20 APRIL 2015
o)
Confidential
1.
CIVIC PRECINCT PROJECT - CONSTRUCTION TENDER REPORT
Manager Public Spaces & Capital Works: Rick Kwasek
Confidential report circulated separately.
Page 147