city of kingston ordinary council meeting minutes 23

250
City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010 1 Agenda for Ordinary Meeting of Kingston City Council held at 7.00pm at the Cheltenham Office, 1230 Nepean Highway, Cheltenham, on Monday 23 August 2010. 1. Apologies 2. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meetings Minutes of Council Meeting 26 July 2010 and Minutes of Special Council 16 July 2010 3. Foreshadowed Declaration by Councillors or Officers of any Conflict of Interest 4. Petitions 5. Presentation of Awards 6. Reports from Village Committees Page 5 7. Reports from Delegates Appointed by Council to Various Organisations 8. Question Time 9. Environmental Sustainability Reports M 146 Town Planning Application Decisions – July 2010 Page 10 M 147 Planning Application KP775/09 Mordialloc Timber Yard Page 16 M 148 Planning Application KP852/09 Mordialloc Timber Yard Page 44 M 149 Planning Application KP72/10 Mordialloc Timber Yard Page 75 M 150 Planning Application KP137/10 – 238 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village Page 106 M 151 Planning Application KP09/865 – 31 Como Parade East, Mentone Page 134 M 152 Planning Application KP404/09 – 180-184 Kingston Road, Heatherton Page 158 M 153 Gazettal Approval for Kingston Roads for B Double Routes Page 185 M 154 Dog Control Enforcement Order Page 188 M 155 Climate Change & Biodiversity Reference Group Membership Page 192 M 156 Stormwater Drainage Improvements along Mentone Foreshore Page 194 M 157 Amendment to Recreational Vehicle Local Law Page 207 M 158 Storage of Aerosol Cans Local Law Page 212 M 159 Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy Page 215 M 160 Municipal Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan Page 219 M 161 Draft Tree Management Policy Page 222 10. Community Sustainability Reports M 162 Proposal to Become a Fair Trade Council Page 227 M 163 Positive Aging Annual Review Page 232 11. Organisational Development & Governance Reports M 164 Expenditure of Ward Funds Schedule – August 2010 Page 237 M 165 Media Guidelines Page 240 12. Corporate Services Reports M 166 Adoption of Financial Statements to 30 June 2010 Page 176 M 167 2010 General Valuation Page 243 M 168 Adopt 2010/11 Annual Budget Page 165 M 169 Investment Policy Report Page 245

Upload: others

Post on 18-Dec-2021

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

1

Agenda for Ordinary Meeting of Kingston City Council held at 7.00pm at the Cheltenham Office, 1230 Nepean Highway, Cheltenham, on Monday 23 August 2010. 1. Apologies 2. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meetings

Minutes of Council Meeting 26 July 2010 and Minutes of Special Council 16 July 2010 3. Foreshadowed Declaration by Councillors or Officers of any Conflict of Interest 4. Petitions

5. Presentation of Awards

6. Reports from Village Committees Page 5 7. Reports from Delegates Appointed by Council to Various Organisations

8. Question Time 9. Environmental Sustainability Reports M 146 Town Planning Application Decisions – July 2010 Page 10 M 147 Planning Application KP775/09 Mordialloc Timber Yard Page 16 M 148 Planning Application KP852/09 Mordialloc Timber Yard Page 44 M 149 Planning Application KP72/10 Mordialloc Timber Yard Page 75 M 150 Planning Application KP137/10 – 238 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village Page 106 M 151 Planning Application KP09/865 – 31 Como Parade East, Mentone Page 134 M 152 Planning Application KP404/09 – 180-184 Kingston Road, Heatherton Page 158 M 153 Gazettal Approval for Kingston Roads for B Double Routes Page 185 M 154 Dog Control Enforcement Order Page 188 M 155 Climate Change & Biodiversity Reference Group Membership Page 192 M 156 Stormwater Drainage Improvements along Mentone Foreshore Page 194 M 157 Amendment to Recreational Vehicle Local Law Page 207 M 158 Storage of Aerosol Cans Local Law Page 212 M 159 Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy Page 215 M 160 Municipal Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan Page 219 M 161 Draft Tree Management Policy Page 222 10. Community Sustainability Reports M 162 Proposal to Become a Fair Trade Council Page 227 M 163 Positive Aging Annual Review Page 232 11. Organisational Development & Governance Reports M 164 Expenditure of Ward Funds Schedule – August 2010 Page 237 M 165 Media Guidelines Page 240 12. Corporate Services Reports M 166 Adoption of Financial Statements to 30 June 2010 Page 176 M 167 2010 General Valuation Page 243 M 168 Adopt 2010/11 Annual Budget Page 165 M 169 Investment Policy Report Page 245

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

2

13. Notices of Motion M 170 Cr Peulich – Upper House Enquiry on Public Transport and Proposed

Delegation on Kingston’s Public Transport Needs Page 249 14. Urgent Business 15. Items in Camera

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

3

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of the Kingston City Council held at the Cheltenham Office at 1230 Nepean Highway, Cheltenham, on Monday 23 August 2010 at 7:00 pm Present: Cr Steve Staikos (Mayor) Cr Donna Bauer (Deputy Mayor) Cr Arthur Athanasopoulos Cr Ron Brownlees Cr Lewis Dundas Cr John Ronke Cr Paul Peulich Cr Trevor Shewan Cr Rosemary West OAM In Attendance: John Nevins – Chief Executive Officer

Mauro Bolin – General Manager Community Sustainability Paul Franklin – General Manager Corporate Services Tony Rijs – General Manager Environmental Sustainability Jason Stubbs – General Manager Organisational Development and Governance Angela Hughes – Acting Manager Planning Newton Gatoff – Acting Manager Governance and Performance Planning

1. Apologies Nil. 2. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meetings Crs Ronke/Brownlees That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting on 26 July 2010 and the Special Council Meeting on 16 August 2010 be confirmed.

Carried 3. Declaration by Councillors or Officers of any Conflict of Interest Cr Bauer disclosed an interest in relation to agenda item M165 as the report refers to matters which are connected to members standing at the forthcoming Parliamentary State Elections Cr Brownlees disclosed an interest in relation to agenda items M168 Part A, as his wife is an employee of the City of Kingston, Library Department.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

4

4. Petitions Nil. Cr Dundas entered the Chamber at 7.10pm 5. Presentation of Awards

Mordialloc Red Cross Unit

Members of the Mordialloc Red Cross, including Glenn Kirk, Jean Pearson, Betty Uren , Esme Girloff and Judy Murphy Barbara Gunston were presented with certificates of appreciation following an address by Mayor Staikos who commented that there were over 200 years of combined service represented:-

“It has come to Council’s attention that after many selfless years of service to the

Mordialloc community, the quartet of Betty Uren, Judy Murphy, Jean Pearson, and

Esme Gerloff, otherwise known as the Mordialloc Red Cross Unit, have decided to

call it a day.

Over many years of service to our community they have helped hundreds of families

ravaged by fire and flood, knocked on thousands of doors to raise money, taught

generations of children first aid and made countless cups of tea for blood donors.

Based on a recent newspaper article, between them they have served the community

for a combined total of 164 years.

President Betty Uren

Secretary Judy Murphy

Treasurer Esme Gerloff

Assistant treasurer Jean Pearson

Glenn Kirk

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

5

Barbara Gunston

There is no doubt that it was an emotional decision for the group, being such an

enormous part of each of your lives. I’m sure that you have seen some heart-

wrenching scenes played out in front of your eyes over the years.

The friendship between yourselves and with the wider community cannot be

underplayed. Your dedication to helping one another, the community and the Red

Cross, has been a precious commodity and one greatly appreciated by the Council

specifically, and the community in general.

It is a great reminder to us all of the value of the spirit of volunteering in our

community. I take this opportunity to reiterate that our volunteers must continue to be

supported and acknowledged. The alternative result is that not only would the

community miss out, but individuals would also miss out on the value and experience

of knowing you are helping others.

6. Reports from Village Committees

PRESENTATION OF VILLAGE COMMITTEE REPORTS

6(a) Cheltenham Village Committee Chairperson - Joe Astbury

Report of Meeting held on 3 August 2010 La Trobe Street Railway Crossing Village Committee Motion:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

6

The Village Committee Recommends that Council investigate the options of acquiring the land between La Trobe Street and Booker Street from VicTrack for public open space and add it to the existing park in Booker Street. Officer Comment Officers across a number of Council departments will assess the appropriateness of Council pursuing such an acquisition, before seeking Councils instructions on this matter. This will include reference to the local requirements for open-space in the Cheltenham, the viability of extending Booker Street Reserve and the potential value of the site. Crs Brownlees/West That Officers be requested to carry out preliminary investigations for Council’s consideration before any formal communication is made to VicTrack

Carried Highlight: Nil.

6(b) Mordialloc Village Committee Chairperson - Allan Locke

Report of Meeting held on 3 August 2010 Highlight: Nil

6(c) Mentone/Parkdale Village Committee Chairperson – Claire Houston

Report of Meeting held on 3 August 2010 Highlight: Presentation by Jonathan Guttmann and the Mentone Structure Plan

6(d) Clayton South Village Committee Chairperson – Chris Frangopoulos

Report of Meeting held on 3 August 2010

Meeting cancelled due to lack of a quorum

6(e) Patterson Lakes/Carrum Village Committee Chairperson – Pat King

Report of Meeting held on 4 August 2010

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

7

Village Committee Motion That Council respond to community’s need to safely and conveniently access the Patterson River by upgrading the unofficial tracks leading up to Patterson River from Daimen, Westley, Riversdale, True, Tennyson and Valetta Streets, and the footpath along Launching way. The Committee recommends an upgrade to similar standard as Riversdale Ave. Cr Ronke disclosed a direct interest in relation to this agenda item as he is the owner of a premises in Riversdale Street. Cr Ronke left the Meeting at 7.15pm Cr Shewan disclosed a direct interest in relation to this agenda item as he occupies premises in Westley Street. Cr Shewan left the meeting at 7.15pm Officer Comment Access to the shared track on the top of the levee bank to Patterson River from the end of Council's streets are typically informal and generally created historically as a wear path by local residents. Any notion of formal construction of such paths is understood to be the responsibility of Parks Victoria, as they manage the shared track on the top of the levy bank. Council's Infrastructure Department recently undertook major drainage upgrading works, by installing a significant pump well at the end of Riversdale Avenue. This work extended into the Patterson River drainage reservation. As a result of the location of the pump well council's works impacted on the existing informal access track to Patterson River at this location. Accordingly, it was necessary for Council to repair such informal access track. Mindful of the low level of formation/construction of the previous access track/goat track, Council’s repair works were undertaken to a similar standard. Any formal construction/improvement would be required to comply with full design standards. Formal access to the shared path on top of the levy, is supported in Council's Cycling and Walking Plan, however the number of formal access points will be limited. Investigation of the most suitable location to provide an upgraded formal access point is being currently undertaken in consultation with Parks Victoria. When these discussions on a preferred concept and ongoing maintenance arrangements are completed, a report will be brought to Council and the Village Committee. Crs Bauer/Peulich That the Village Committee be advised 1. The existing works undertaken to the Riversdale Avenue Access track were repair works arising from the upgrading of drainage infrastructure, and were intended as a formal upgrading, and 2. Providing formal community access to the Patterson River Reserve is supported and planning is currently being undertaken in consultation with Parks Victoria, to identify the optimal locations. Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

8

Cr’s Ronke and Shewan entered the chamber at 7.17pm

6(f) Clarinda/Oakleigh South Village Committee Chairperson – David Oakley

Report of Meeting held on 4 August 2010 Highlights: 1. Attendance and participation in the meeting by Jennifer McNabb, from

Clayton Clarinda Arts Inc, co-ordinator of the Pottery Studio at Melaleuca Drive

2. Attendance of Cr. Paul Peulich at the meeting 6(g) Aspendale/Edithvale/Aspendale Gardens/Waterways Village Committee

Chairperson – Ken Carney Report of Meeting held on 5 August 2010

Highlight: Council’s Fair Trade Initiative

6(h) Chelsea/Chelsea Heights/Bonbeach Village Committee Chairperson –Nigel McGillivray

Report of Meeting held on 11 August 2010

Meeting cancelled due to lack of a quorum 7. Delegates Reports Metropolitan Transport Forum Cr Shewan presented his report which referred in part to international cities who are closing freeways in an effort to reduce congestion. Crs West/Brownlees That the report be noted

Carried 8. Question Time The Mayor, Cr Staikos, informed the meeting that question time would take place at approximately 8.00pm.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

9

9. Environmental Sustainability Reports M 146 Town Planning Application Decisions – July 2010 Approved By: Tony Rijs-General Manager, Environmental Sustainability Author: Ian Nice – Manager, Planning Attached for information is the report of Town Planning Decisions for the month of July 2010. A summary of the decisions is as follows:

Type of Decision Number of Decisions Made

Percentage (%)

Planning Permits 69 83 Notice of Decision 6 7 Refusal to Grant a Permit 4 5 Other - Withdrawn (2) - Prohibited (0) - Permit not required (2) - Lapsed (0)

4 5

Total 83 100 (NB: Percentage figures have been rounded) Recommendation That the report be noted. Crs Brownlees/ Athanasopoulos That the report be noted

Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

10

Planning Decisions July 2010

APPL. No. PROPERTY ADDRESS SUBURB

APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED

PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION

KP-259/2010 31 White Street PARKDALE 4/05/2010 1/07/2010FOUR (4) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-605/2009 290 Como Parade West PARKDALE 10/09/2009 1/07/2010 CAR WASH Refused

KP-752/2009 36 Jean Street CHELTENHAM 17/11/2009 1/07/2010

THIRTY-FOUR (34) DWELLINGS (AS AMENDED) Refused

KP-725/2009 142 Nepean Highway ASPENDALE 4/11/2009 1/07/2010

MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT Refused

KP-499/2009 1 Monica Avenue BONBEACH 27/07/2009 1/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-800/2009 1 Eila Close CHELTENHAM 1/12/2009 1/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-415/2010 91 White Street MORDIALLOC 28/06/2010 2/07/2010

CONSTRUCT A DWELLING ON LAND DESIGNATED WITHIN A SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY Permit Issued

KP-692/2009 10 Roseberry Avenue CHELSEA 20/10/2009 2/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-187/2010 7 Collins Street MENTONE 1/04/2010 6/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS

Notice of Decision

KP-206/2010 274-276 Wickham Road HIGHETT 12/04/2010 6/07/2010

FACTORY WAREHOUSE - EXTENSION Permit Issued

KP-338/2010 13 Friendship Square CHELTENHAM 2/06/2010 7/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-675/2009 19 Houston Street MENTONE 14/10/2009 8/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-403/2010 4 Royal Terrace HIGHETT 25/06/2010 8/07/2010TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-850/2009 126 Warrigal Road MENTONE 22/12/2009 8/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-23/2010 42 Clay Street MOORABBIN 15/01/2010 9/07/2010THREE (3) DWELLINGS

Notice of Decision

KP-74/2010/A 138 Warrigal Road MENTONE 28/05/2010 9/07/2010

FIVE (5) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-534/2009/A 7 Vincent Street EDITHVALE 29/06/2010 12/07/2010THREE DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-667/2009 40 Matthieson Street HIGHETT 12/10/2009 12/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

11

KP-325/2010 7-9 Como Parade West MENTONE 28/05/2010 13/07/2010

CHANGE OF USE - BEAUTY SALON Permit Issued

KP-847/2009/A 7 Collins Street MENTONE 2/07/2010 14/07/2010TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-853/2009 2-4 Nepean Highway MENTONE 22/12/2009 14/07/2010 MA

Permit Not Required

KP-290/2009 1 Albany Crescent ASPENDALE 5/05/2009 14/07/2010

TWO DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-238/2010 101-105 Edithvale Road EDITHVALE 22/04/2010 14/07/2010

TWENTY - SIX (26) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-323/2010 33 Stewart Avenue PARKDALE 27/05/2010 14/07/2010

CONSTRUCT A DWELLING ON LAND DESIGNATED WITHIN A SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY Permit Issued

KP-239/2010 151 Balcombe Road MENTONE 22/04/2010 15/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-404/2010 1 Helena Street CLAYTON SOUTH 28/06/2010 15/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-306/2010 11-15 Mentone Parade MENTONE 20/05/2010 15/07/2010

BUILDINGS & WORKS - REFURBISH AND EXTENSION TO SCHOOL BUILDINGS Permit Issued

KP-364/2010 9/06/2010 15/07/2010Construction of a shed Permit Issued

KP-367/2010 246 Boundary Road BRAESIDE 11/06/2010 15/07/2010

ADVERTISING SIGN Permit Issued

KP-141/2010 69 Brownfield Street MORDIALLOC 16/03/2010 15/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-863/2009 57 Catherine Avenue CHELSEA 23/12/2009 15/07/2010

THREE (3) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-130/2010 680 Nepean Highway CARRUM 12/03/2010 15/07/2010

Section 32 Plan - Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit Issued

KP-573/2008/A 1 38-40 Bowman Street ASPENDALE 1/04/2010 16/07/2010

THREE (3) DOUBLE STOREY DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-937/2006 9 Birdwood Street PARKDALE 12/12/2006 16/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-872/2007/A 20 Immerset Drive

CHELSEA HEIGHTS 19/04/2010 16/07/2010

AMENDMENT - BALCONY TO Permit Issued

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

12

DWELLING

KP-320/2010

BUILDING 39 1486-1550 Centre Road

CLAYTON SOUTH 26/05/2010 16/07/2010

CONSTRUCT COVERED AREA/SHELTER Permit Issued

KP-835/2009 55 Fifth Street PARKDALE 21/12/2009 16/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-318/2010 14-22 Fairchild Street HEATHERTON 25/05/2010 16/07/2010

SHADE SAIL TO OUTDOOR EATING AREA Permit Issued

KP-283/2010 SHOP 9 450 Nepean Highway CHELSEA 13/05/2010 16/07/2010

BUILDINGS & WORKS - CONSTRUCT FENCE TO CONTAIN RUBBISH COLLECTION Permit Issued

KP-427/2010 1 Coorong Circle WATERWAYS 2/07/2010 16/07/2010SINGLE DWELLING Permit Issued

KP-856/2009 15 White Street PARKDALE 23/12/2009 16/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-747/2009 109 White Street MORDIALLOC 13/11/2009 19/07/2010

BUILDINGS AND WORKS (RAINWATER TANK) Permit Issued

KP-508/2007 598A Nepean Highway BONBEACH 13/07/2007 20/07/2010

ALTS & ADDS - DECK Permit Issued

KP-757/2009 20 Barker Street CHELTENHAM 19/11/2009 20/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-720/2009 52 Seventh Street PARKDALE 29/10/2009 20/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-14/2010 29 Westall Road CLAYTON SOUTH 13/01/2010 20/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-159/2010 312-314 Lower Dandenong Road MORDIALLOC 23/03/2010 20/07/2010

CONSTRUCT BRIDGE Permit Issued

KP-416/2010 52 Waterside Drive WATERWAYS 28/06/2010 21/07/2010

SINGLE DWELLING Permit Issued

KP-414/2010 9 Barmah Place WATERWAYS 29/06/2010 21/07/2010SINGLE DWELLING Permit Issued

KP-347/2009/A 19 Elliott Street CHELTENHAM 29/10/2009 21/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Withdrawn

KP-304/2010 31 Rayhur Street CLAYTON SOUTH 19/05/2010 22/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-30/2010 22 Eulinga Road CLARINDA 19/01/2010 22/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-406/2010 30 Tennyson Avenue

CLAYTON SOUTH 28/06/2010 22/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-229/2010 1 4 Peace Street HIGHETT 20/04/2010 22/07/2010CARPORT TO DWELLING Permit Issued

KP-168/2010 8 Williams Street MENTONE 24/03/2010 22/07/2010TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-457/2010 44 Rennison Street PARKDALE 8/07/2010 22/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

13

KP-390/2010 18 Garfield Street CHELTENHAM 23/06/2010 22/07/2010THREE (3) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-162/2010 42-44 Malcolm Road BRAESIDE 25/03/2010 22/07/2010

CONSTRUCT FACTORIES/WAREHOUSES/SHOWROOMS & OFFICES Permit Issued

KP-80/2010 46 Beach Road MENTONE 18/02/2010 22/07/2010

BUILDINGS & WORKS (TENNIS COURT & PAVILION)

Notice of Decision

KP-385/2010 38 Mount View Road HIGHETT 21/06/2010 22/07/2010

TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-348/2010 1 522 Nepean Highway BONBEACH 4/06/2010 22/07/2010

CHANGE OF USE/REDUCTION IN CARPARKING

Permit Not Required

KP-593/2009 9 Bear Street MORDIALLOC 3/09/2009 22/07/2010

THIRTY-FOUR (34) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-412/2010 20-22 Como Parade West MENTONE 29/06/2010 23/07/2010

ADVERTISING SIGN Permit Issued

KP-329/2010 326 Highett Road HIGHETT 31/05/2010 23/07/2010

AMEND RED LINE PLAN - VARIATION TO LIQUOR LICENCE Permit Issued

KP-930/2008/A 37A Springs Road

CLAYTON SOUTH 2/07/2010 23/07/2010

LIQUOR LICENCE - AMENDMENT TO LIQUOR LICENCE RED LINE DRAWING Permit Issued

KP-172/2010 7 598-618 Main Street MORDIALLOC 26/03/2010 23/07/2010

BUILDINGS & WORKS IN A HERITAGE OVERLAY NEW WINDOW TO SHOP Permit Issued

KP-413/2010 11 Barmah Place WATERWAYS 29/06/2010 23/07/2010

SINGLE DWELLING ON LAND DESIGNATED WITHIN AN LSIO Permit Issued

KP-575/2002/A SHOP 3 21 Thompson Road

PATTERSON LAKES 18/05/2010 23/07/2010

RESTAURANT - REDUCTION IN CARPARKING Permit Issued

KP-142/2010 17 Montgomery Street MORDIALLOC 16/03/2010 23/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS

Notice of Decision

KP-360/2010 14 Franklin Avenue CHELSEA 8/06/2010 23/07/2010

SINGLE DWELLING Permit Issued

KP-777/2009 11 Barbara Street MOORABBIN 24/11/2009 23/07/2010FOUR (4) DWELLINGS

Notice of Decision

KP-405/2009 267 Spring Road DINGLEY VILLAGE 22/06/2009 26/07/2010

7 ADDITIONAL AGED CARE Withdrawn

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

14

UNITS

KP-706/2009 3 Egret Drive CHELSEA HEIGHTS 26/10/2009 27/07/2010

ADVERTISING SIGN Permit Issued

KP-451/2010 29 Brownfield Street PARKDALE 8/07/2010 27/07/2010

SINGLE DWELLING ON LAND DESIGNATED SPECIAL BUILDING OVERLAY Permit Issued

KP-373/2010 110 Warren Road MORDIALLOC 15/06/2010 28/07/2010

EXT TO DWELLING (VERANDAH) Permit Issued

KP-683/2009 2 Foy Lane CHELSEA 15/10/2009 28/07/2010TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-95/2010 208 Balcombe Road MENTONE 23/02/2010 28/07/2010

SEVEN (7) DWELLINGS Refused

KP-61/2010 582 Main Street MORDIALLOC 9/02/2010 29/07/2010BUILDINGS & WORKS Permit Issued

KP-48/2010 11 Wannan Street HIGHETT 1/02/2010 29/07/2010

WAREHOUSE/OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WITH REDUCED CAR PARKING REQUIREMENTS

Notice of Decision

KP-84/2010 2 66 Warrigal Road PARKDALE 19/02/2010 29/07/2010

TWO (2) DWELLINGS Permit Issued

KP-381/2010 14 Dactyl Road MOORABBIN 18/06/2010 29/07/2010TWO (2) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

KP-377/2010 411 Nepean Highway CHELSEA 15/06/2010 29/07/2010

ADVERTISING SIGN Permit Issued

KP-336/2010 15 Chapel Road MOORABBIN 2/06/2010 29/07/2010THREE (3) LOT SUBDIVISION Permit Issued

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

15

M 147 Planning Application KP775/09 – Mordialloc Timber Yard APPLICANT Gattini & Partners ADDRESS OF LAND No. 2 (Crown Grant – Crown Allotment 5A on TP75868U)

Park Street, Mordialloc PROPOSAL Eleven (11) Dwellings PLANNING OFFICER Sebastian Lorenzo REFERENCE NO. KP-779/2009 RELEVANT STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 12: Metropolitan Development Clause 14: Settlement Clause 15: Environment Clause 16: Housing Clause 18: Infrastructure Clause 19: Particular Uses & Development

RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy Clause 22.14: Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy Clause 22.16: Heritage Policy

ZONE Clause 32.04: Mixed Use Zone OVERLAYS Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 9

and Schedule 10 Clause 45.03: Environmental Audit Overlay

PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities Clause 55: Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings

GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines OTHER Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006: Cultural Heritage Management

Plan (CHMP) RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA

Increased Housing Diversity

DECISION DATE BY STATUTORY DAYS CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES / DATE RECEIVED

1st April, 2010

1.0 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL’S FAILURE TO

DETERMINE: 1.1 The applicant has lodged an application with the Victorian Civil and Administrative

Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine this application for planning permit within the required statutory time frame.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

16

1.2 As such, Council is unable to formally determine the proposal though it must, however, form a view on the proposal which must be presented before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

1.3 The purpose of this report, therefore, is to outline to Council its Officers views with respect to the appropriateness or otherwise of this proposal, and provide a recommendation to Council with regard to the position Council should take at the hearing.

2.0 KEY ISSUES 2.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to:

Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass, neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc);

Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic movements etc);

Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns, and visual impact concerns etc); and

Policy Considerations. 3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS 3.1 The subject site forms part of a larger parcel of land known as the ‘Mordialloc Timber Yard’

with the street addresses of No. 2-4 Bear Street, No 76 Albert Street and No. 2 Park Street, Mordialloc. The Mordialloc Timber Yard comprises two (2) Crown Grant Allotments. The title details of these are provided below:

Crown Grant: Crown Allotment 1A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc

– TP70491U; and Crown Grant: Crown Allotment 5A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc

– TP75868U.

3.2 This application is located on Crown Allotment 5A on TP75868U and known as No. 2 Park Street, Mordialloc. The site is irregular in shape and size with a frontage of 152.27 metres to Park Street, a frontage of 88.64 metres to Albert Street, a maximum depth of approximately 44 metres and an area of approximately 7682m2.

3.3 The subject site contains a number of buildings which are currently used for commercial and

industrial purposes. The subject site is relatively flat with only a marginal fall in a north-south direction. The subject land does not contain any significant vegetation and is provided with vehicle access along both Park Street and Albert Street.

3.4 The subject site is also encumbered by a 2 metre wide sewerage and drainage easement. 4.0 TITLE DETAILS 4.1 There appears to be a restriction listed on the Certificate of Title. However, the restriction

stipulates that mining on the subject site must not be restricted subject to the grating of

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

17

leases and the like. It is considered that the proposed development is not considered to result in any breach of this restriction.

5.0 PROPOSAL 5.1 The Mordialloc Timber Yard is proposed to be re-developed in three (3) different stages.

Details of the each stage are provided below with a more detailed description of the current Stage 1 (KP779/09) provided further below;

Stage 1: KP779/09 – located in the south-east corner of the overall site and consists of

eleven (11) dwellings; Stage 2: KP852/09 – located in the middle section of the overall site and consists of a

four (4) storey plus basement residential apartment building with ninety-five (95) dwellings proposed; and

Stage 3: KP72/10 – located in the north-west most section of the overall site and consists of a three (3) storey with under croft / semi-basement level with retail / showroom at ground floor level and offices above.

5.2 Stage 1: It is proposed develop the south-east most part of the site for eleven (11) dwellings.

Dwellings will primarily front Park Street with only dwelling 2 and dwelling 4 not provided with direct Park Street frontage. Dwellings are three (3) storeys in height with the provision of roof top decks provided for dwellings 5 – 11. Dwellings are a mix of two (2) and three (3) bedrooms with office / study areas also provided for each dwelling. A number of dwellings are provided with split living rooms and dining / kitchen areas. Private open space is generally provided in the form of an elevated terrace or balcony areas with some dwellings provided with additional ground floor courtyards or roof top decks.

5.3 Each dwelling is provided with a double garage located at ground floor and access via a

common driveway. Garages are generally located fronting the Frankston Railway line to reduce their dominance on the Park Street property frontage. Two (2) visitor car parking spaces are provided on site as part of the Stage 1 re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard. The common driveway provides a break in the development with dwelling 1 and dwelling 2 located to the north of the common driveway with the remaining dwellings are located towards the south of the common driveway.

5.4 Stage 1 of the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard consists of a parcel of

land of approximately 2054m2. The total building area is approximately 984m2 giving a site coverage of approximately forty-eight (48%) percent.

6.0 PLANNING CONTROLS 6.1 The subject site is located within a Mixed Use Zone and is subject to A Design and

Development Overlay Schedule 9 and Schedule 10. The subject site is also affected by an Environmental Audit Overlay.

7.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

18

7.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.04 – Mixed Use Zone of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot.

7.2 Pursuant to Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay Schedule 10 of the Kingston

Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is required to vary the performance criteria of Table 1 of this Schedule.

8.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 8.1 Council records indicate that there is no relevant planning history relating to this site.

However, as noted above, this application is Stage 1 of an overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard containing a total of 3 Stages. Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10) are currently under consideration by Council.

9.0 AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION BEFORE NOTIFICATION 9.1 Amendments to the application were made by the applicant on 1st April, 2010. The

amendments were largely made in response to Council further information letter dated 17th December, 2009.

9.2 The amendments made to the application were considered satisfactory and Council,

therefore, directed that the application proceed to advertising. 10.0 ADVERTISING 10.1 Stage 1 (KP779/09) of the Mordialloc Timber Yard Re-development was advertised

concurrently with the proposed Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10) by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Five (5) objection(s) to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows: Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass,

neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc); Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic

movements etc); and Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns, and

visual impact concerns etc). 11.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 11.1 A preliminary conference for Stage 1 (KP779/09), Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3

(KP72/10) was held concurrently on Wednesday 26th May, 2010 with the relevant Planning Officer, Ward Councillor(s), the Permit Applicant and objectors in attendance. Each Stage was discussed individually with the above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

11.2 While positive discussions and suggestions were made, the above concerns were unable to

be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

19

12.0 REFERRALS 12.1 The application was referred to the following external authorities. Where appropriate

amended applications have been re-referred. The referral responses below relate to the current/amended application only:

VicTrack; EPA Victoria; Department of Transport; and Department of Sustainability and Environment.

12.2 It is noted that no response was received from VicTrack or EPA Victoria. However, the Department of Transport and the Department of Sustainability and Environment advised of no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being included on any permit issued.

12.3 The application was referred to the following internal departments within Council (where appropriate amended applications have been re-referred): Council’s Development Engineer; Council’s Vegetation Management Officer; Council’s Heritage Advisor; Council’s Roads and Drains Department; Council’s Health Department; Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer; Council’s Urban Designer; Council’s Strategic Planning Department; Council’s Waste Management Officer; and Council’s Traffic Engineer.

The relevant comments from each of the abovementioned departments are detailed below. Development Approvals Engineers: Council’s Development Approvals Engineers advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable drainage conditions being placed on any permit issued. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Vegetation Management Officers: Council’s Vegetation Management Officer advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable vegetation conditions being placed on any permit issued. It is noted that the landscape plans submitted as part of the application were considered to be satisfactory by Council’s Vegetation Management Officers. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Council Heritage Advisor: Council’s Heritage Advisor advised of no objection to the proposed development. It is considered that the proposal does not raise any issues with respect to the nearby heritage listed buildings and places. Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisors advised that while the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard was quite large, there would be no impact on the heritage significance of adjoining and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

20

nearby heritage listed places and buildings. No conditions were required in relation to heritage matters. Roads and Drains Department: Council’s Roads and Drains Department advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions requiring the applicant to construct all public paths which abut the subject site in accordance with Council requirements / details and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Health Department: Council’s Health Department advised of concerns with regard to potential noise issues give the site’s proximity to the Frankston Railway Line. However, these could be addressed through the inclusion of suitable conditions on any permit issued. Environmental Sustainability Officer: Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer advised of no objection to the proposed development, however provided a number of suggestions to improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of the proposed development. These include the use of double glazed windows, solar treatments to east and west facing windows, the use of water and energy efficient fixtures and fittings. This has been considered and a number of these elements have been provided as conditions within Council’s recommendation. Urban Designer: Council’s Urban Designer advised of no objection to the proposed development, however provided a number of suggestions to improve the built form and reduce visual bulk and mass. These elements were incorporated at the early design stage and therefore the current proposal does not raise significant urban design issues. As part of a condition on any permit issued, the applicant is required to submit a full colour and building materials schedule which better reflects the coastal village and history of Mordialloc. Strategic Planning Department: Council’s Strategic Planning Department advised of no objection to the proposed development. Further, it was advised that the separation of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard into three (3) different built forms with typical low density townhouse residential development located in the southern most section of the site, a medium density residential apartment development through the middle section of the site and a commercial / retail development in the northern most section of the site was appropriate from a land use, amenity and policy perspective. No conditions were required in relation to strategic planning matters. Maintenance Contracts and Waste Department: Council’s Maintenance Contracts and Waste Department advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of a suitable condition requiring the applicant to submit a Waste Management Plan being placed on any permit issued. This condition is included as part of Council officers recommendation. Traffic Engineers: Council’s Traffic Engineers initially objected to the proposed development. However, through discussions and the submission of additional information by the applicant and other Council Officers it was advised that subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions being placed on any permit issued, the development should be supported.

13.0 RELEVANT POLICIES

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

21

13.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 12 (Metropolitan Development) Clause 14 (Settlement) Clause 16 (Housing) Clause 19 (Particular Uses and Development)

13.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.03 (Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium) Clause 21.04 (Vision) Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy) Clause 22.14 (Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy)

13.3 Zoning The site is located in the following Zone:

Clause 32.04 (Mixed Use Zone)

13.4 Overlays

The following Overlay Controls apply to this site:

Clause 43.02 (Design and Development Overlay) DDO9 – 2-4 Bear Street, 2 Park Street and 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc DDO10 – Mordialloc Activity Centre Clause 45.03 – Environmental Audit Overlay

13.5 Particular Provisions

Clause 52.34 (Bicycle Facilities) Clause 55 (Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings)

13.6 General Provisions

Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)

13.7 Other – Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006

Cultural Heritage Management Plan 14.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 14.1 While the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard is proposed in three (3)

individual stages, it is considered that each stage interacts and informs the next. Therefore, while each stage is assessed individually against the relevant provisions of the Kingston

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

22

Planning Scheme, there are various elements of each proposal which require an understanding of the other stages proposed and how the overall re-development is consistent with the various provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. Therefore, it is considered appropriate that this assessment be read in conjunction with the Council reports prepared for Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10).

14.2 State and Local Planning Policy Framework

The State Planning Policy Framework are rather broad policies which are essentially the framework by which local policies are derived from. The following is, therefore, a brief comment of the relevant polices. Clause 12 – Metropolitan Development: Clause 12.01: A More Compact City: This seeks to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing settlement patterns, and investment in transport and communication, water and sewerage and social facilities, and locate a substantial proportion of new housing in or close to activity centres and other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and transport. Clause 12.05: A Great Place To Be: This seeks to create urban environments that are of better quality, safer and more functional, provide more open space and an easily recognisable sense of place and cultural identity. It promotes issues of good urban design, recognition and protection of cultural identity, neighbourhood character, sense of place heritage, improvement of community safety. Clause 12.06: A Fairer City: This seeks to increase the supply of well located and affordable housing by encouraging a significant proportion of new development, including development activity centres and strategic redevelopment sites, to be affordable for households on low to moderate incomes. Clause 12.07: A Greener City: This seeks to minimise impacts on the environment by reducing the amount of waste generated, reducing energy usage, manage water use and reduce the impact of stormwater on bays and catchments. In general, the proposal is considered to satisfy the above listed objectives. The site is within a major activity centre and would provide for additional housing which can take full advantage of public transport, commercial facilities and recreation facilities, all with minimal reliance on car usage, and therefore, lesser energy consumption. Clause 14 – Settlement: One of the key objectives under Clause 14.01 of the Kingston Planning Scheme aims ‘to ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, institutional and other public use’. The proposal is considered to satisfy this objective by maintaining the commercial component of the site (Stage 3 of the Mordialloc Timber Yard Re-development) while providing a new residential component (Stage 1 and Stage 2) on the site in the form of apartment and townhouse dwellings. Clause 15 – Environment

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

23

Clause 15.06: Soil Contamination: This clause seeks to ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely. An Environmental Audit Overlay is applicable to the subject site, and through the provision is suitable environment conditions, will ensure that the sensitive use is appropriate. Clause 15.12: Energy Efficiency: The key objective of this Clause is ‘to encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions’. Further, planning and responsible authorities should: Promote energy efficient building; Promote consolidation of urban development and integration of land use and transport;

and Encourage retention of existing vegetation or revegetation as part of subdivision and

development proposals. It is considered that the nature of the proposed development generally accords with the above strategies for general implementation. An Ecological Sustainable Design (ESD) report has been submitted by the applicant and assessed by Council’s Environmental Planning Department who advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to suitable conditions. Clause 16 – Housing Clause 16.02: Medium Density Housing: This policy aims to encourage the development of well-designed medium density housing which respects the character of the neighbourhood, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency of housing. This virtually repeats those matters previously discussed. Clause 17 – Economic Development Clause 17.01: Activity Centres: The key policy objectives includes an aim ‘to encourage the concentration of major retail, commercial, administrative, entertainment and cultural developments into activity centres (including strip shopping centres) which provide a variety of land uses and are highly accessible to the community’. The proposal would provide a mix of retail and commercial opportunities fronting Bear Street (Stage 3) on the site while encouraging the concentration of various uses within the Mordialloc Activity Centre. Clause 18 – Infrastructure Clause 18.02: Car Parking And Public Transport Access To Development: This policy aims to ensure that new developments are provided with good access and that new

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

24

developments take advantage of all available modes of transport to minimise impact on existing transport networks and the amenity of the surrounding areas. The proposal is located in close proximity to the Mordialloc Railway Station. There is excellent access to railway services as well as bus services. The site is located within the Mordialloc Activity Centre and therefore takes advantage of pedestrian movements within the Activity Centre. Car parking is also provided in the form of a single basement level. Overall is considered that the site’s location in within the Mordialloc Activity Centre takes advantage of all major forms of public and private transportation services available (including train, bus, private vehicle, walking, bicycle etc). Clause 19.03: Design and Built Form It is policy to achieve high quality urban design and architecture that reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of the community. Pursuant to Clause 19.03 the following design principles are relevant to this application: Context: It is policy that: development must take into account the natural, cultural and strategic context of its

location. The site is located within the Mordialloc Activity Centre which has been identified as a Major Activity Centre in the Kingston Planning Scheme. A more intensive type of development is expected within all activity centres, particularly those identified as Principal or Major Activity Centres. It is considered that the proposal adequately satisfies the above provision. The Public Realm: It is policy that: the public realm, which includes main pedestrian spaces, streets, squares, parks and

walkways, should be protected and enhanced. The site is currently occupied by commercial / industrial buildings and used built to the sites boundaries and offers no visual or physical connection to the street. The proposed development is in accordance with the zoning of the land and the removal of the existing buildings will introduce and activate the site’s Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street property frontage with the existing urban area. Further it is considered that the public realm will be enhanced by the proposed development with improved pedestrian spaces and walkways. Safety: It is policy that: new development should create urban environments that enhance personal safety and

property security and where people feel safe to live, work and move in at any time. The proposal does not appear to raise any issues in this respect and overall safety should be improved via improved surveillance from the outdoor living areas of the dwellings to Bear

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

25

Street, Albert Street and Park Street below. Further, given part of the development is orientated to the railway line, this is provide for improved safety and surveillance of this area thereby limiting anti-social behaviour such as vandalism along the railway line. Landmarks, Views and Vistas: It is policy that: landmarks, views and vistas should be protected and enhanced or, where appropriate,

created by new additions to the built environment. It is considered that the proposal does not appear to raise any issues in this respect. Concerns have been raised by objectors with regard to the heritage listing of the Water Tower, Mordialloc Railway Station and Masonic Hall, however, it is considered that that proposal will in no way detrimentally impact on these heritage listed buildings. Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisors did not object to the proposal and advised that while the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard was quite large, there would be no impact on the heritage significance of adjoining and nearby heritage listed places and buildings. Pedestrian Spaces: It is policy that: the design of the relationship between buildings and footpaths and other pedestrian

spaces, including the arrangement of adjoining activities, entrances, windows, and architectural decoration, should enhance the visual and social experience of the observer.

It is considered that the proposal has adequately addressed the above provision. Various elements have been included into the overall design of the building which enhances the relationship between the building, public spaces and existing character of the Mordialloc Activity Centre. The proposal provides an active street frontage to the Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street that will vastly improve the existing conditions with respect to pedestrian amenity. The vehicular entry points and basement car park / rear parking ensures that the streetscape is not dominated by accessways or car parking facilities. Heritage: It is policy that: new development should respect, but not simply copy, historic precedents and create a

worthy legacy for future generations. As noted above (landmarks, views and vistas) the proposal does not raise any concerns with respect to the any potential impact on the heritage places and buildings located in close proximity to the subject site. Consolidation of Sites and Empty Sites: It is policy that: new development should contribute to the “complexity” and diversity of the built

environment; and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

26

site consolidation should not result in street frontages that are out of keeping with the “complexity” and “rhythm” of existing streetscapes.

The proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the “complexity” and “rhythm” of the Mordialloc Activity Centre by seeking to incorporate elements such as the building materials and commercial interfaces at the ground floor. Light and Shade: It is policy that: the enjoyment of the public realm should be enhanced by a desirable balance of sunlight

and shade; and

this balance should not be compromised by undesirable overshadowing or exposure to the sun.

The form and articulation of the development creates variations in the light and shade over public and private areas. Shadows cast by the development generally fall over the subject site or the adjoining railway line to the west of the subject site. Energy and Resource Efficiency: It is policy that: all buildings, subdivisions and engineering works should promote more efficient use of

resources and energy efficiency. It is considered that the proposed development addresses the above policy. Council Officer’s have worked closely with the applicant and architects to achieve a greater level of solar access to the development as a whole. Subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, it is considered that this development and buildings should be energy sufficient. Architectural Quality: It is policy that: new development should aspire to the high standards in architecture and urban design;

and

any rooftop plant, lift over-runs, service entries, communication devices, and other technical attachment should be treated as part of the overall design.

It is considered that the proposal demonstrates a high level of architectural and urban design merit. The provision of three separate building forms (Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3) across the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard with a variety of quality materials and colours achieves good articulation, visual interest and is a contemporary design response for the site. Landscape Architecture: It is policy that: recognition should be given to the setting in which buildings are designed and the

integrating role of landscape architecture. There is no existing vegetation located on the site. The development of this land for creates an opportunity to revegetate the site. Some areas of deep soil planting have been provided

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

27

within the sites frontage in the form of large landscaping areas between “fingers” of built form at ground floor level. The extensive basement limits the amount of meaningful planting available. Overall it is submitted that the proposed development generally satisfies the aforementioned State strategies and policy direction. Specifically, the subject site is located on a large parcel of land earmarked for Mixed Use purposes, whereby residential development is an ‘as of right’ use under the zoning provisions. The site enjoys convenient and direct access to community facilities, various modes of transportation and everyday essential services.

14.3 Local Planning Policy Framework

The Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) contains Council’s strategic direction, the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), which is an extension of the direction established by the SPPF, and the local policies that implement the LPPF. Within Clause 21 (MSS) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the following five (5) clauses are submitted as being the most relevant to the consideration of the proposal: Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium; Clause 21.04: Vision; Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use; Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy; Clause 22.14: Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy After reviewing the relevant strategic directions that emerge from the abovementioned Clauses, the following can be summarised: Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium identifies the need for the

Municipality to provide suitable housing stock that meets future housing demands and to sustain an appropriate mix of supporting urban infrastructure. It is further stated that recent pressures for new development, consolidation and medium density housing has resulted in change to the amenity and character of local areas. It is acknowledged that careful management will be required in order to integrate urban consolidation objectives with an understanding of specific character issues applicable to certain neighbourhoods.

Within Clause 21.04-3: Strategic framework plan (Clause 21.04 Vision), provides for the

strategic direction for future land use planning and development within the City of Kingston. This Policy includes a Strategic Land Use Framework Plan, which identifies the location of where specific land use outcomes are anticipated, supported and promoted. Further, it also illustrates potential ‘development opportunity areas’, where significant land use change might be expected, along with defining areas where land use constraints may restrict future development.

With specific regard to this application, the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan identifies Mordialloc as a “Primary Activity Node” as well as an area for the promotion of “Medium Density Housing.” Furthermore, redevelopment opportunities for sites such as the one before Council rarely come about in the municipality and, therefore, it is important that we take advantage of these sites to cater for our housing projections and to reduce pressures on surrounding residential areas. Accordingly, the major strategic direction identified on the Framework Plan, within Clause 21.04-3, which is of relevance to this application, is as follows:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

28

Locations for promotion of medium to higher density housing opportunities within areas designated for increased housing diversity and activity centres;

Larger residential opportunity sites where new residential development (including medium density housing) should be pursued.

The City of Kingston’s MSS at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) of the Kingston Planning

Scheme, seeks to provide guidance to development in residential zoned land, mixed use zoned lands and land within activity centres. The Residential Land Use Framework Plan illustrates the range of housing outcomes sought across the City of Kingston.

Relevant objectives and strategies in Clause 21.05-3: Residential Land Use include:

o Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity notes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character.

o Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood.

o To provide a range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing housing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. This is to be achieved through encouraging residential development within activity centres via mixed-use development, and on transitional sites at the periphery of activity centres.

o To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. This is to be achieved through promoting new residential development, which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood.

o To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development. To be achieved through promoting medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations.

o To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses.

o To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities. o To recognise and response to special housing needs within the community. o Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and

quality of life for future occupants.

It is considered that the proposed development is generally consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates an adequate standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, as well as for occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area.

Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use), effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

29

In summary, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework. Importantly, the proposal delivers on specific objectives relating to the development of larger opportunity sites which seek to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations as well providing diversity in housing choice to assist in meeting the anticipated future population forecasts.

Clause 22.14 Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy: The Mordialloc Activity Centre

Policy is relevant in the assessment of this application. This Clause builds upon the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework of the Kingston Planning Scheme and seeks to provide design guidance and policy direction in the implementation of the Mordialloc Pride of the Bay: A Structure Plan for the Future of Mordialloc, 2004. As relevant to this application, it is policy to: o Land Use: Where a permit is required for the use of land within the policy area, it is

policy to: Encourage active commercial premises at ground level and inactive uses such as

offices, and residential at upper levels. Provide housing opportunities within the Activity Centre to capitalise on the

area’s transport, open space and retail assets. Promote a diverse range of housing types and sizes within areas identified for

increased residential and mixed development. Encourage the provision of service and commercial accommodation to address

the needs of visitors to Mordialloc and the surrounding region. Encourage the provision of aged care accommodation.

o Built Form: Where a permit is required for the development of land within the

policy area, it is policy to: Ensure development is designed to reinforce Mordialloc’s coastal village

attributes, heritage features and environmental qualities. Ensure development preserves important views, vistas and landmarks currently

enjoyed of existing heritage built forms and natural attributes. Encourage buildings to interact with the street by providing entrances, windows

and other details that maximise movement and surveillance. Require balconies and roof decks to integrate with the building and provide

minimal visual impact when viewed from the street and surrounding area. Balconies and roof decks should not overlook into surrounding private open space areas, habitable room windows or cause overshadowing. Encourage all development to:

o Be of a high architectural and urban design standard that presents integrated building forms, that have a sense of address and clearly articulated facades, and sensitively designed building form.

o Apply design techniques and detail that will integrate a building with its surrounding streetscape, natural landscape and heritage without replicating or mimicking historical detailing.

o Highlight key corners, entries or landmarks through design projection, detailing and massing that presents to both street frontages and the site’s surroundings.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

30

o Ensure that service infrastructure is appropriately sited into the design and obscured from the public domain.

o development and design including solar orientation, use of storm water management systems and natural ventilation.

Ensure building heights, setbacks and massing achieves solar access to pathways, public open spaces and forecourt areas.

Require developments, where relevant, to respond to the principles, siting and design guidelines set out in the Siting and Design Guidelines for Structures on the Victorian Coast, 1998.

o Access: Where a permit is required for the use and development of land within the policy area, it is policy to: Encourage the development of an interchange between modes of transport

including buses and the station area, commuter drop off points, park and ride, and bike locker facilities.

Rationalise private vehicle and traffic access through, to and within the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

Consolidate and simplify vehicular points of access to and off-street car parking facilities.

Reinforce east-west pedestrian connection between the foreshore area, Main Street and established area east of Albert Street.

Provide a series of safe and highly amenable pedestrian routes. The subject site also falls within Precinct 3 of the Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy. In addition to the general policies, in the Timber Yard Redevelopment Precinct it is policy to: o Precinct 3: Timber Yard Redevelopment

Draw the commercial core east across Main Street and the railway line through the provision of a new approximately 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor.

Encourage linked retail and commuter trips through the co-location of commuter and retail parking with an upper level deck above the new retail attractor with ramp access from Albert Street.

Promote the development of a mixed use commercial development on the south west corner of the intersection of Bear Street and Albert Street that creates an identifiable gateway.

Ensure the provision of an 8-12 metre reservation east of the railway line to

accommodate a future 3rd

railway line. Encourage the provision of aged care housing. Encourage surveillance of Park Street through the provision of balconies, bays,

porches or colonnades from the residences and the provision of individual entrances to the pathway.

Discourage the number of vehicular access points to Park Street. Encourage the extension of the pedestrian footpath on the west side of Park

Street to provide access to the adjoining open space areas. As previously discussed, this application should be read in conjunction with the reports and recommendations of Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10) currently before Council. A number of the policy directions and objectives addressed or satisfied in the

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

31

remaining stages of the Mordialloc Timber Yard re-development. However, specifically, the following can be said with regards to the current Stage 1 (KP779/09) in response to the abovementioned policy directions of the Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy: Although three (3) storeys in height, it is considered that the development is

generally consistent with the residential densities (conventional lower density residential development) found along Park Street, Mordialloc;

The proposal provides a diverse range of dwelling types, sizes and layouts which can accommodate families, couples and singles;

The proposal provides additional residential opportunities within the Mordialloc Activity Centre in close proximity to various modes of transportation as well as the necessary day to day community services used by residents;

The proposal preserves existing views and vistas to heritage listed places / buildings while retaining the coastal village attributes through building colours and materials;

The development provides for the passive surveillance and interaction with Park Street by providing suitable courtyards / raised terraces and entries direct from Park Street;

Overshadowing and overlooking to adjoining and surrounding properties have been adequately address to prevent adverse amenity impacts on the surrounding area;

Setbacks from the street and railway reserve are considered appropriate having regard to the alignments of Park Street, the location of dwellings on surrounding properties and the future development of a 3rd railway line;

Traffic, car parking and vehicle access to the site is adequately provided for and should not cause adverse amenity or safety implications to the surround road networks or adjoining properties.

Overall, it is considered that the proposed development of the southern most section of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard for eleven (11) dwellings is appropriate and adequately addresses and satisfies the policy directions and objectives of Clause 22.14 – Mordialloc Activity Centre of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

14.4 Zoning Provisions Clause 32.04: Mixed Use Zone: The purpose of the Mixed Use Zone is to provide for a range of residential, commercial, industrial and other uses which complement the mixed use function of the locality. In this instance, the provision of residential townhouse development on the southern most part of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard is appropriate given the residential nature of properties opposite the site to the east. A planning permit is required for the development of 2 or more dwellings.

Schedule The proposal meets the additional requirements listed in the Schedule to the Mixed Use Zone.

14.5 Overlay Provisions

Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

32

Schedule 9: 2-4 Bear Street, 2 Park Street and 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc: The purpose of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay is as follows:

To encourage the redevelopment of the land for a mix of residential use and commercial

and local services, with the latter preferably located along Bear Street. To ensure that the combination of uses, their densities, and the scale and character of any

redevelopment are compatible with the amenity of the surrounding area. To ensure that the development of the land does not have an adverse impact on local

traffic conditions. To achieve a high quality urban design outcome that is reflective of the site’s gateway

location to the Mordialloc Activity Centre. To ensure an appropriate transition between the core commercial centre of Main Street

and the surrounding residential environment of the Park Street and Albert Street area. To ensure that the land is developed in an orderly manner.

Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay requires that an Urban Context Report be prepared and endorsed by the Responsible Authority which identifies the development opportunities and constraints of the site. The report must provide an adequate response against the following: The State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework, and zone

and overlay objectives; Existing and preferred built form and character of adjacent and nearby buildings; Land use mix and subdivision pattern; Energy efficiency, waste management and water sensitive urban design initiatives; Ground floor street frontages, including visual impacts and pedestrian safety; Traffic impacts and car parking requirements; Vistas; Noise attenuation associated with the railway interface; Stages of construction; Landscaping opportunities; and Drainage infrastructure. The responsible authority must have regard to the Urban Context Report before approving any application for permit. An Urban Context Report was prepared by Craig Czarny of Hansen Partnerships Pty Ltd and submitted to Council as part of the application documentation. In general, it is considered that the Urban Context Report submitted adequately satisfies the requirements of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay. The Urban Context Report identifies the opportunities and constraints of the site and provides an urban design response against the proposed built form and policy context for each individual stage. Therefore, it is considered that the requirements of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay have been adequately satisfied and the Urban Context Report prepared by Hansen Partnerships Pty Ltd should be endorsed to form part of any permit issued. This can be included as a condition on any permit issued.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

33

Schedule 10: Mordialloc Activity Centre: The subject site falls within Precinct 3 of the framework plans under this Clause. Table 1 to Schedule 10 of the Design and development Overlay provides policy direction with regard to maximum building height as well as performance criteria which should be met as part of any development. Precinct A3 requires that new development on the subject site should be a maximum of four (4) storeys (14 metres) in height. Furthermore, the performance criteria states that any fourth (4th) storey must be recessed and not be visible from Park Street. The proposal is generally in accordance with Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay. The proposal will not exceed four (4) storeys or a maximum height of 14 metres at any point. Stage 1 of the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard is a maximum of three (3) storeys with no part of this development to exceed a height of 11.8 metres from natural ground level. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay. Clause 45.03: Environmental Audit Overlay: This overlay requires that before a sensitive use commences or before the construction or carrying out of buildings and works in association with a sensitive use commences one of the following must occur:

A certificate of environmental audit must be issued for the land in accordance with Part

IXD of the Environment Protection Act 1970, or An environmental auditor appointed under the Environment Protection Act 1970 must

make a statement in accordance with Part IXD of that Act that the environmental conditions of the land are suitable for the sensitive use.

The applicant has submitted a Limited Environmental Site Assessment (LESA) prepared by Environmental Earth Sciences VIC in response to the applicable Environmental Audit Overlay on the subject site. As noted above, the application was referred to EPA Victoria however, no response was received. Nonetheless, it is considered appropriate that suitable measure be put in place to ensure any contaminants are removed as appropriate and it is considered that the recommendations and conclusions of the LESA should be endorsed to form part of any permit issued. This can be achieved through the inclusion of a suitable condition being placed on any permit issued.

14.6 Other – Cultural Heritage Management Plan

The subject site falls within an Area of Cultural Significance as identified under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Therefore, as part of the application, the applicant submitted a report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates providing a detailed response in relation to the cultural sensitivity of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard. In general terms, following a review of the history of the Mordialloc Timber Yard, a site inspection and review of all available data and documentation, the report has determined that no known Aboriginal or archaeological heritage sites are located on the Mordialloc Timber Yard site. Therefore, it is considered that a Cultural Heritage Management Plan

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

34

(CHMP) is not required to be provided as part of this application. However, the report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates does provide recommendations in the event that an Aboriginal Heritage Site is identified during any construction. It is considered that such recommendations should be included as part of a condition on any permit issued.

15.0 CLAUSE 55 (RESCODE ASSESSMENT) 15.1 The proposal has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode)

of the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to attachment A). It is considered that the development largely satisfies the requirements of ResCode and is a well-designed development. There appear to be the following areas of non-compliance, which are discussed below:

Standard B2 Residential Policy: The proposed developments compliance with the relevant residential policy directions of the Kingston Planning Scheme have been adequately discussed previously in this report. It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework including but not limited to Clause 22.14 – Mordialloc Activity Centre, Clause 21.05 – Residential Land Use and Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The development of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard in three (3) stages consisting of the following:

a townhouse development located at the southern most point of the overall site; a medium density residential apartment development through the middle section of the

overall site; and a commercial / retail development at the northern most section of the overall site; is considered an appropriate design response with respect to the opportunities and constraints of the site. Furthermore, the overall development provides a graduated development across the overall site providing a lower residential development, medium density residential development and commercial / retail opportunities at the overall development moves closer to the main commercial precinct of Mordialloc. Please see the State and Local Planning Policy Framework sections of this report for more details. Standard B6 Street Setback: This Standard require new dwellings be set back a minimum 4 metres from the site’s Park Street property boundary. The applicant seeks to provide a variation to the requirements of this Standard. The proposal is provided with varied building setbacks to Park Street which range between 1.5 metres for dwelling 10 to 7.9 metres for dwelling 1. Having regard to the layout of the proposed dwellings, the alignment of Park Street and the re-development of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard, it is considered that the proposal in its submitted format will respect the neighbourhood character and a variation to the front setback requirements is considered appropriate in this instance.

Standard B9 Permeability: This Standard requires a minimum site permeability of twenty (20%) percent. It is unclear as to wether the proposal satisfies this specific requirement as not figure has been provided by the applicant. However, the total hard surface area proposed (built form and common driveway) appears to be substantial. In order to achieve the

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

35

minimum site permeability requirements of this Standard, it is suggested that a suitable condition be placed on any permit requiring additional landscaping adjacent to dwelling 4 and that all paving within courtyards be nominated as permeable paving. It is considered that this will achieve the minimum twenty (20%) percent site permeability as required by the provisions of this Standard. Standard B13 Landscaping: As noted above, there is opportunity to increase landscaping adjacent to dwelling 4 by a reduction in the width of the common driveway in this area. This can be achieved through the inclusion of a suitable condition being placed on any permit issued. Furthermore, it should be noted that the Landscape plans submitted to Council as part of the application were referred to Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who advised the plans submitted were appropriate having regard to the level of landscaping proposed. It was advised that no changes would be required to these plans as part of any approval. Standard B14 Access: Stage 1 of the proposed Mordialloc Timber Yard re-development does not raise any issues with regard to access of traffic considerations. It is considered that suitable access and car parking provisions have been provided for a development of this size and scale. Please see Planning Application KP852/09 and KP72/10 for further discussion on traffic and car parking considerations for the overall re-development of the site. Standard B18 Walls on Boundaries & Standard B17 Side and Rear Setbacks: The proposal requires a variation to the minimum setback requirements of this Standard, in particular, with regard to dwelling 11. Dwelling 11 is designed with walls located along the site’s south (side) and west (rear) property boundaries. These walls exceed the setback requirements of this Standard with the west facing wall provided at a height of 4.12 metres before it is set back from this property boundary. The south facing wall of this dwelling is not set back and is provided at a height of 11.68 directly on the boundary. It is considered that the height and location of these walls along the site’s south (side) and west (rear) property boundary are appropriate having regard to the adjoining land surrounding properties. To the west of the subject site is the Frankston Railway Line while to the south is land owned by Vic-Track which is currently used for open area / storage. Therefore, having consideration to the abutting land uses and the limited impact on adjoining properties, it is considered that a variation to the requirements of this Standard is appropriate.

Standard B22 Overlooking: The potential for any overlooking from the proposal (including ground floor, first floor, second floor and roof top decks) has been assessed and it is considered that the proposal adequately satisfies the requirements of this Standard. The nearest built form of properties surrounding the subject site are some 25-30 metres from the east boundary of the subject site and further from any balconies or roof top decks of the proposed development. Furthermore, it should be noted that the development has been designed to gain long range views of the Port Phillip Bay and Mordialloc rather than to overlook nearby and surrounding properties. For this reason balconies are generally located along the western side of the dwellings overlooking the railway line while roof top decks are set in from the eastern edge of the built form directly below to prevent any overlooking.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

36

Therefore, it is considered that overlooking has been addressed and the requirements of this Standard have been satisfied.

16.0 RESPONSE AGAINST GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS 16.1 Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass,

neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The proposal adequately satisfies the policy directions and objectives of the Kingston

Planning Scheme including the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework;

The site is located within a Major Activity Centre and on land designated as an “Increased Housing Diversity Area” within the Residential Land Use Framework Plan at Clause 21.05 on the Kingston Planning Scheme;

The proposal does not raise any areas of concern with regard to the existing heritage buildings / features of Mordialloc;

The site has great access to various forms of transportation including public (Mordialloc Railway Station / various bus routes) and private transport modes and networks; and

The height, scale and overall built form is considered appropriate and adequately addresses various elements with regards to the character and built form of the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

Overall the development is consistent with the development provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme and is not considered to be an overdevelopment of the site. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

16.2 Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic

movements etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The development is considered to provide adequate car parking on site for the future

residents with regard to the relevant provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme; Visitor car parking is anticipated to be accommodated both on site and within the

existing on-street car parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the subject site; It is considered that the existing road network will adequately handle any potential

increase in traffic movements to and from the site and in the immediate vicinity of the subject site as a result of the proposed development; and

There are various modes of transportation available in the immediate vicinity of the site including public (Mordialloc Railway Station / various bus routes) and private forms of transportation.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

37

Overall the development is consistent with the car parking and traffic provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

16.3 Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns and

visual impact concerns etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The proposal has been provided with setbacks which are site responsive and which are

consistent with adjoining land uses and the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay of the Kingston Planning Scheme;

Suitable design features (materials / colours etc / light weight construction / glazing) have been provided in the built form so as to provide a response to the streetscape and neighbourhood character of Mordialloc;

The overall height of the proposal is in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay of the Kingston Planning Scheme and has been kept to a maximum four (4) storeys and a maximum height of 14 metres; and

Overlooking and overshadowing by the proposal is considered minimal and should not impact on adjoining sensitive uses.

Overall the development is consistent with the amenity based provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

17.0 CONCLUSION: 17.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported

subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.

17.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:

The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area;

The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and,

The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy, Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy, Mixed Use Zone and the Schedule to the zone, Design and Development Overlay, Environmental Audit Overlay, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).

16.3 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered

reasonable and warrants support.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

38

18.0 RECOMMENDATION: That Council resolve to support the application for the development of this site for eleven (11) dwellings be issued, subject following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible

Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 1st April, 2010, but modified to show:

i. the provision of an improved landscape plan and associated planting schedule for the site in accordance with the final development plans submitted;

ii. a detailed hydrology study to determine the flood level in the vicinity of the development for storm events of 1% Average Exceedence Probability (AEP) standard. Provision must be made for safe and effective passage of stormwater flows. The development should be free from inundation or to a lesser standard of flood protection where agreed by the Council;

iii. a comprehensive drainage strategy for the development of the site incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design Treatments;

iv. the actual location of the existing Council’s stormwater drain within the property and any modifications required to the proposed building so as to not affect the drain. Create a three metre wide easement along the existing Council drain alignment and any modifications to ensure no habitable area is over the easement;

v. a notation on the plans stating that the Council’s stormwater drain located within the property must be protected at all times during construction;

vi. a notation on the plans stating that the footpath must be constructed in front of the development to the satisfaction of Roads & drains Department according to the engineering plans approved by the Council;

vii. no trees with intrusive roots that may effect the Council’s drainage within the property;

viii. the redundant vehicle crossing to be removed and the Council’s assets to be reinstated to the satisfaction of the Council.

ix. the provision of a notation stating that a footpath must be constructed adjacent to the site’s Park Street property boundary (on the nature strip) at the cost of the developer / owner, with the footpath constructed to Council Standards with 2% black oxide by weight and provided with a 200mm offset from the property boundary for the length of the development;

x. the provision of a notation stating that the Council road reserve and property boundaries are to be maintained and where there is no existing footpath, footpath levels are to be obtained from the Roads and Drains Department prior to the commencement of construction;

xi. the provision of a notation stating that all Landscaping and construction is to be kept within the property boundary;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

39

xii. the provision of a notation stating that all new vehicle crossings are to be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

xiii. the provision of a notation stating that all vehicle crossovers which are not to be retained and used for vehicles access must be reinstated as kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

xiv. the section of driveway located to the west of the garage of dwelling 4 reduced to 3 metres in width, with the additional area either side of this section of driveway used for additional landscaping;

xv. the landscaping strip along the site’s west (rear) property boundary opposite the garages of dwelling 5-9 increased in width where appropriate to allow for additional planting along this property boundary;

xvi. the visitor car spaces nominated with dimensions of 2.6 metres in width by 4.9 metres in length with any additional area used for additional landscaping;

xvii. the surface material of all driveways / accessways and car parking spaces nominated in all-weather coloured concrete sealcoat, or similar;

xviii. the door of each garage nominated as a panel lift door, or similar;

xix. the storage areas of each dwelling nominated as being a minimum 6m3 in size;

xx. the conditions required by the Department of Transport, pursuant to Condition 3 of this Permit;

xxi. the conditions required by Department of Sustainability and Environment, pursuant to Condition 4 of this Permit; and

xxii. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule, including samples (illustrated on an A4 or A3 sheet), for all external elevations and driveways of the development.

2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Conditions Required by Department of Transport:

a. The provision of a suitable sign to be erected at the front of the adjoining VicTrack owned car park stating that this car park is for commuter parking only.

b. The building materials along the railway corridor nominated as being non-reflective and avoiding the use of red and green colour schemes that may interfere with driver operations;

c. All windows and built form that front the railway corridor should be constructed with noise attenuation materials including double glazing and appropriate wall attenuation materials to reduce amenity impacts.

d. The permit holder must take all reasonable steps to ensure that disruption to train operation within the railway corridor and bus operation along Albert Street and Park Streets is kept to a minimum during the construction of the development. Foreseen disruption to rail or bus operation during construction and mitigation measures must be communicated to Metro and the Director of Public Transport fourteen (14) days prior.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

40

e. The permit holder must ensure that all track, overhead power and supporting infrastructure is not damaged or that works do not cause unplanned disruption to rail operations. Any damage to public transport infrastructure must be rectified to the satisfaction of the Director of Public transport at the full cost of the permit holder.

f. The building and works must not encroach on the railway corridor to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Transport.

4. Conditions Required by Department of Sustainability and Environment:

a. No storage of materials on Crown land during or after the construction phase;

b. No parking of vehicles on Crown land during or after the construction phase; and

c. There must be no discharge of stormwater or other concentrated flow of water onto the Crown land. All stormwater and surface drainage should be directed to the legal point of discharge away from the Crown land.

5. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

6. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be complied with, unless with the further prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

7. Before commencement of the development, the proposed works within the road reserve as described in Condition 1f) must be in accordance with engineering plans submitted to and approved by the Council at the developer’s cost. A priced schedule of works within the road reserve and the payment of Council’s engineering fees of 3.25% of the cost of works are required to be submitted prior to approval of engineering plans. Proposed new footpath levels must be obtained from Roads and Drains Department.

8. Any modifications to Council’s stormwater pits must be to the Council’s standards.

9. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater runoff quality and which also retains on site any increase in runoff as a result of the approved development. The system must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Council's Development Engineer can advise on satisfactory options to achieve these desired outcomes which may include the use of an infiltration or bioretention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system.

10. Before the development commences, a Stormwater Management Plan showing the stormwater works to the nominated point of discharge must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Stormwater Management Plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed stormwater works including all existing and proposed features that may have impact (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).

11. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties.

12. Stormwater outflow from the development to the Council drainage system should not exceed the predevelopment outflow of the site.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

41

13. Before the use starts, a Waste Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the Planning Permit. Three (3) copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

a) Waste collection in accordance with the loading and collection conditions included on this permit.

b) Provision on the land for the storage and collection of garbage and other solid waste. This area must be graded and drained and screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

c) All waste material not required for further on-site processing must be regularly removed from the site. All vehicles removing waste must have fully secured and contained loads so that no wastes are spilled or dust or odour is created to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

d) In accordance with Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) requirements, arrangements for the storage, segregation and disposal of any infectious waste, potentially infectious waste (as defined by the EPA), and any prescribed waste.

The waste management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction the responsible authority. The waste management plan must not be modified unless with the consent of the responsible authority.

14. Before the commencement of any building or works on the land a Construction Management Plan (CMP) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The CMP must deal with the parking of vehicles during construction, delivery of materials, containment of waste on site and suppression of dust, construction over the public domain etc.

15. Before construction of the development starts, a Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. Three copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

a. the location of all areas to be used for staff / long term parking for the retail premises, offices and gymnasium within the lower and upper basement car parking levels of the building;

b. the provision of a notation stating that a minimum of two-hour free parking be provided for the visitors to the premises;

c. details of any arrangements for fee payment, including details of fees to be charged and the means by which such payment is to be collected;

d. the provision of suitable signs and pavement markings to direct and control the flow of traffic into, within and exiting the site including for the basement and loading bay areas, with this to include suitable warning signs/signals for drivers and pedestrians;

e. the provision of all lighting and security arrangements for the basement;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

42

f. full details of access arrangements to and from the site including full details of any proposed security arrangements for resident and long term parking in the lower basement level (i.e. boom gates restricting access, swipe cards to be used etc);

g. details of any traffic management measure to improve vehicles entry and exit to and from the site (i.e. keep clear line markings on Swanston Street etc).

The Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan must be implemented to the satisfaction the Responsible Authority. The Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan must not be modified unless with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.

16. Prior to the commencement of works, the report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates dated 2nd June, 2010, in response to the Aboriginal Heritage of the site must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the report will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

17. Prior to the commencement of works, the report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics dated 29th October, 2009, in response to the Noise Impacts on the development must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the report will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

18. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the nature strip, kerb and channel, vehicle crossover and footpath must reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

19. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification.

20. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner.

21. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be:

a. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

b. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans.

c. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

d. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

22. All works on or facing the boundaries of adjoining properties must be finished and surface cleaned to a standard that is well presented to neighbouring properties in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

23. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

24. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

43

The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue.

The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue.

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit.

Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit.

Note: Before removing / pruning any vegetation from the site, the applicant or any contractor engaged to remove any vegetation, should consult Council’s Vegetation Management Officer to verify if a Local Laws Permits is required for the removal of such vegetation.

Or

Should Council resolve not to support the application, that a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit be used on the following grounds:

1. The proposal would have an adverse affect on the amenity of the area.

2. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site.

3. The proposal exhibits excessive visual bulk and mass.

4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape.

5. The proposal fails to satisfy all of the requirements of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme (ResCode).

The meeting was addressed by Clinton Tilley on behalf of the applicant. Crs Dundas/Brownlees That Council resolve to support the application for the development of this site for eleven (11) dwellings be issued, subject to 24 conditions and The provision of a minimum 2 metre by 2 metre wide splay either side of the common driveway where it meets the site’s Park Street property boundary.

Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

44

M 148 Planning Application KP852/09 – Mordialloc Timber Yard APPLICANT Gattini & Partners ADDRESS OF LAND No. 76 Albert Street and No. 2 Park Street (Crown Grant –

Crown Allotment 5A on TP75868U), Mordialloc PROPOSAL Residential Apartment Building – Ninety-five (95) Dwellings PLANNING OFFICER Sebastian Lorenzo REFERENCE NO. KP-852/2009 RELEVANT STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 12: Metropolitan Development Clause 14: Settlement Clause 15: Environment Clause 16: Housing Clause 18: Infrastructure Clause 19: Particular Uses & Development

RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy Clause 22.14: Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy Clause 22.16: Heritage Policy

ZONE Clause 32.04: Mixed Use Zone OVERLAYS Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 9

and Schedule 10 Clause 45.03: Environmental Audit Overlay

PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 52.06: Car Parking Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities Clause 52.35: (Urban Context Report and Design Response for Residential Development of Four or More Storeys) Clause 52.36: Integrated Public transport Planning

GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines OTHER Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006: Cultural Heritage Management

Plan (CHMP) RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA

Increased Housing Diversity

DECISION DATE BY STATUTORY DAYS CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES / DATE RECEIVED

1st April, 2010

1.0 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL’S FAILURE TO

DETERMINE: 1.1 The applicant has lodged an application with the Victorian Civil and Administrative

Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine this application for planning permit within the required statutory time frame.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

45

1.2 As such, Council is unable to formally determine the proposal though it must, however, form a view on the proposal which must be presented before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

1.3 The purpose of this report, therefore, is to outline to Council its Officers views with respect to the appropriateness or otherwise of this proposal, and provide a recommendation to Council with regard to the position Council should take at the hearing.

2.0 KEY ISSUES 2.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to:

Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass, neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc);

Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic movements etc);

Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns, and visual impact concerns etc); and

Policy Considerations. 3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS 3.1 The subject site forms part of a larger parcel of land known as the ‘Mordialloc Timber Yard’

with the street addresses of No. 2-4 Bear Street, No 76 Albert Street and No. 2 Park Street, Mordialloc. The Mordialloc Timber Yard comprises two (2) Crown Grant Allotments. The title details of these are provided below:

Crown Grant: Crown Allotment 1A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc

– TP70491U; and Crown Grant: Crown Allotment 5A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc

– TP75868U.

3.2 This application is located on Crown Allotment 5A on TP75868U and is known as No. 76 Albert Street and No. 2 Park Street, Mordialloc. The site is irregular in shape and size with a frontage of 152.27 metres to Park Street, a frontage of 88.64 metres to Albert Street, a maximum depth of approximately 44 metres and an area of approximately 7682m2.

3.3 The subject site contains a number of buildings which are currently used for commercial and

industrial purposes. The subject site is relatively flat with only a marginal fall in a north-south direction. The subject land does not contain any significant vegetation and is provided with vehicle access along both Park Street and Albert Street.

3.4 The subject site is also encumbered by a 2 metre wide sewerage and drainage easement. 4.0 TITLE DETAILS 4.1 There appears to be a restriction listed on the Certificate of Title. However, the restriction

stipulates that mining on the subject site must not be restricted subject to the grating of

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

46

leases and the like. It is considered that the proposed development is not considered to result in any breach of this restriction.

5.0 PROPOSAL 5.1 The Mordialloc Timber Yard is proposed to be re-developed in three (3) different stages.

Details of the each stage are provided below with a more detailed description of the current Stage 2 (KP852/09) provided further below;

Stage 1: KP779/09 – located in the south-east corner of the overall site and consists of

eleven (11) dwellings; Stage 2: KP852/09 – located in the middle section of the overall site and consists of a

four (4) storey plus basement residential apartment building with ninety-five (95) dwellings proposed; and

Stage 3: KP72/10 – located in the north-west most section of the overall site and consists of a three (3) storey with under croft / semi-basement level with retail / showroom at ground floor level and offices above.

5.2 Stage 2: It is proposed develop the middle section of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard

for a four (4) storey residential apartment building plus single level basement comprising ninety-five (95) dwellings and one hundred and nineteen (119) car parking spaces.

5.3 Dwellings are spread across four (4) levels with a mixture of one (1) bedroom dwellings,

two (2) bedroom Dwellings and three (3) bedroom dwellings. It is also noted that there are twelve (12) dwellings which are split level dwellings with bedrooms located on first floor and living rooms located at second floor level. Private open space for each dwelling is provided in the form of ground floor courtyards or upper level balconies / deck areas. Further details of each level are provided below:

Basement Level: One hundred and nineteen (119) car parking spaces are provided,

including one hundred (100) car parking spaces for the proposed dwellings and nineteen (19) visitor car parking spaces. Thirty (30) bicycle parking spaces, three (3) lift / stair access and other site services such as water tanks, plant equipment and waste enclosures are also provided within the basement level of the development. Vehicle access to the basement car park is provided at the northern end of the building with this vehicle accessway co-shared with the commercial development on the adjoining Stage 3 site to the north;

Ground floor: A total of twenty-nine (29) dwellings are proposed at ground floor level with some fronting Albert Street and Park Street and some facing the Frankston Railway Line. Twenty (20) by one (1) bedroom dwellings and nine (9) by two (2) bedroom dwellings are located on this level of the development. There are six (6) pedestrian entry points at ground floor level with the main foyer entry located in the middle of the proposed building;

First Floor: A total of thirty-one (31) dwellings are proposed at first floor level comprising of ten (10) by one (1) bedroom dwellings and twenty-one (21) by two (2) bedroom dwellings;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

47

Second Floor: A total of nineteen (19) dwellings are located at second floor level comprising ten (10) by one (1) bedroom dwellings and nine (9) by two (2) bedroom dwellings; and

Third Floor: A total of sixteen (16) dwellings are located at third floor level comprising twelve (12) by two (2) bedroom dwellings and four (4) by three (3) bedroom dwellings.

5.4 The main built form of the proposed building is set back from the site’s Albert Street and

Park Street property boundary with three (3) protrusions of build form coming closer to the road reserve creating large landscaped areas and breaks in the built form. Setbacks to Albert Street and Park Street vary between 2.3 metres and 23 metres creating a staggered built form as well as opportunities for significant landscaping within the front of the site.

5.5 Stage 2 of the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard consists of a parcel of

land of approximately 4737m2. The total building area is approximately 2487m2 giving a site coverage of approximately fifty-three (53%) percent.

6.0 PLANNING CONTROLS 6.1 The subject site is located within a Mixed Use Zone and is subject to A Design and

Development Overlay Schedule 9 and Schedule 10. The subject site is also affected by an Environmental Audit Overlay.

7.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 7.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.04 – Mixed Use Zone of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a Planning

Permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot. 7.2 Pursuant to Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay Schedule 10 of the Kingston

Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is required to vary the performance criteria of Table 1 of this Schedule.

8.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 8.1 Council records indicate that there is no relevant planning history relating to this site.

However, as noted above, this application is Stage 2 of an overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard containing a total of 3 Stages. Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10) are currently under consideration by Council.

9.0 AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION BEFORE NOTIFICATION 9.1 Amendments to the application were made by the applicant on 1st April, 2010. The

amendments were largely made in response to Council further information letter dated 19th January, 2010.

9.2 The amendments made to the application were considered satisfactory and Council,

therefore, directed that the application proceed to advertising. 10.0 ADVERTISING

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

48

10.1 Stage 2 (KP852/09) of the Mordialloc Timber Yard Re-development was advertised

concurrently with the proposed Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10) by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Sixteen (16) objection(s) and one (1) letter of support for the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows: Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass,

neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc); Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic

movements etc); and Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns, and

visual impact concerns etc). 11.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 11.1 A preliminary conference for Stage 1 (KP779/09), Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3

(KP72/10) was held concurrently on Wednesday 26th May, 2010 with the relevant Planning Officer, Ward Councillor(s), the Permit Applicant and objectors in attendance. Each Stage was discussed individually with the above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

11.2 While positive discussions and suggestions were made, the above concerns were unable to

be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand. 12.0 AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER NOTIFICATION 12.1 No formal amendment to the application was made after notification. However, further

details on the proposed materials and colours of the proposed apartment building were provided by the applicant on 15th July, 2010.

13.0 REFERRALS 13.1 The application was referred to the following external authorities. Where appropriate

amended applications have been re-referred. The referral responses below relate to the current/amended application only:

VicTrack; EPA Victoria; Department of Transport; and Department of Sustainability and Environment.

13.2 It is noted that no response was received from VicTrack or EPA Victoria. However, the Department of Transport and the Department of Sustainability and Environment advised of no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being included on any permit issued.

13.3 The application was referred to the following internal departments within Council (where appropriate amended applications have been re-referred):

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

49

Council’s Development Engineer; Council’s Vegetation Management Officer; Council’s Heritage Advisor; Council’s Roads and Drains Department; Council’s Health Department; Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer; Council’s Urban Designer; Council’s Strategic Planning Department; Council’s Waste Management Officer; and Council’s Traffic Engineer.

The relevant comments from each of the abovementioned departments are detailed below. Development Approvals Engineers: Council’s Development Approvals Engineers advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable drainage conditions being placed on any permit issued. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Vegetation Management Officers: Council’s Vegetation Management Officer advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable vegetation conditions being placed on any permit issued. It is noted that the landscape plans submitted as part of the application were considered to be satisfactory by Council’s Vegetation Management Officers. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Council Heritage Advisor: Council’s Heritage Advisor advised of no objection to the proposed development. It is considered that the proposal does not raise any issues with respect to the nearby heritage listed buildings and places. Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisors advised that while the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard was quite large, there would be no impact on the heritage significance of adjoining and nearby heritage listed places and buildings. No conditions were required in relation to heritage matters. Roads and Drains Department: Council’s Roads and Drains Department advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions requiring the applicant to construct all public paths which abut the subject site in accordance with Council requirements / details and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Health Department: Council’s Health Department advised of concerns with regard to potential noise issues give the site’s proximity to the Frankston Railway Line. However, these could be addressed through the inclusion of suitable conditions on any permit issued. Environmental Sustainability Officer: Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer advised of no objection to the proposed development, however provided a number of suggestions to improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of the proposed development. These include the use of double glazed windows, solar treatments to east and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

50

west facing windows, the use of water and energy efficient fixtures and fittings. This has been considered and a number of these elements have been provided as conditions within Council’s recommendation. Urban Designer: Council’s Urban Designer advised of no objection to the proposed development, however provided a number of suggestions to improve the built form and reduce visual bulk and mass. These elements were incorporated at the early design stage and therefore the current proposal does not raise significant urban design issues. As part of a condition on any permit issued, the applicant is required to submit a full colour and building materials schedule which better reflects the coastal village and history of Mordialloc. Strategic Planning Department: Council’s Strategic Planning Department advised of no objection to the proposed development. Further, it was advised that the separation of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard into three (3) different built forms with typical low density townhouse residential development located in the southern most section of the site, a medium density residential apartment development through the middle section of the site and a commercial / retail development in the northern most section of the site was appropriate from a land use, amenity and policy perspective. No conditions were required in relation to strategic planning matters. Maintenance Contracts and Waste Department: Council’s Maintenance Contracts and Waste Department advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of a suitable condition requiring the applicant to submit a Waste Management Plan being placed on any permit issued. This condition is included as part of Council officers recommendation. Traffic Engineers: Council’s Traffic Engineers initially objected to the proposed development. However, through discussions and the submission of additional information by the applicant and other Council Officers it was advised that subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions being placed on any permit issued, the development should be supported.

14.0 RELEVANT POLICIES 14.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 12 (Metropolitan Development) Clause 14 (Settlement) Clause 16 (Housing) Clause 19 (Particular Uses and Development)

14.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.03 (Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium) Clause 21.04 (Vision) Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy) Clause 22.14 (Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy)

14.3 Zoning

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

51

The site is located in the following Zone:

Clause 32.04 (Mixed Use Zone)

14.4 Overlays

The following Overlay Controls apply to this site:

Clause 43.02 (Design and Development Overlay) DDO9 – 2-4 Bear Street, 2 Park Street and 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc DDO10 – Mordialloc Activity Centre Clause 45.03 – Environmental Audit Overlay

14.5 Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06 (Car Parking) Clause 52.34 (Bicycle Facilities) Clause 52.35 (Urban Context Report and Design Response for Residential Development of Four or More Storeys) Clause 52.36 (Integrated Public Transport Planning)

14.6 General Provisions

Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)

14.7 Other – Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006

Cultural Heritage Management Plan

15.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 15.1 While the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard is proposed in three (3)

individual stages, it is considered that each stage interacts and informs the next. Therefore, while each stage is assessed individually against the relevant provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme, there are various elements of each proposal which require an understanding of the other stages proposed and how the overall re-development is consistent with the various provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. Therefore, it is considered appropriate that this assessment be read in conjunction with the Council reports prepared for Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10).

15.2 State and Local Planning Policy Framework

The State Planning Policy Framework are rather broad policies which are essentially the framework by which local policies are derived from. The following is, therefore, a brief comment of the relevant polices. Clause 12 – Metropolitan Development:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

52

Clause 12.01: A More Compact City: This seeks to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing settlement patterns, and investment in transport and communication, water and sewerage and social facilities, and locate a substantial proportion of new housing in or close to activity centres and other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and transport. Clause 12.05: A Great Place To Be: This seeks to create urban environments that are of better quality, safer and more functional, provide more open space and an easily recognisable sense of place and cultural identity. It promotes issues of good urban design, recognition and protection of cultural identity, neighbourhood character, sense of place heritage, improvement of community safety. Clause 12.06: A Fairer City: This seeks to increase the supply of well located and affordable housing by encouraging a significant proportion of new development, including development activity centres and strategic redevelopment sites, to be affordable for households on low to moderate incomes. Clause 12.07: A Greener City: This seeks to minimise impacts on the environment by reducing the amount of waste generated, reducing energy usage, manage water use and reduce the impact of stormwater on bays and catchments. In general, the proposal is considered to satisfy the above listed objectives. The site is within a major activity centre and would provide for additional housing which can take full advantage of public transport, commercial facilities and recreation facilities, all with minimal reliance on car usage, and therefore, lesser energy consumption. Clause 14 – Settlement: One of the key objectives under Clause 14.01 of the Kingston Planning Scheme aims ‘to ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, institutional and other public use’. The proposal is considered to satisfy this objective by maintaining the commercial component of the site (Stage 3 of the Mordialloc Timber Yard Re-development) while providing a new residential component (Stage 1 and Stage 2) on the site in the form of apartment and townhouse dwellings. Clause 15 – Environment Clause 15.06: Soil Contamination: This clause seeks to ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely. An Environmental Audit Overlay is applicable to the subject site, and through the provision is suitable environment conditions, will ensure that the sensitive use is appropriate. Clause 15.12: Energy Efficiency: The key objective of this Clause is ‘to encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions’. Further, planning and responsible authorities should:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

53

Promote energy efficient building; Promote consolidation of urban development and integration of land use and transport;

and Encourage retention of existing vegetation or revegetation as part of subdivision and

development proposals. It is considered that the nature of the proposed development generally accords with the above strategies for general implementation. An Ecological Sustainable Design (ESD) report has been submitted by the applicant and assessed by Council’s Environmental Planning Department who advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to suitable conditions. Clause 16 – Housing Clause 16.02: Medium Density Housing: This policy aims to encourage the development of well-designed medium density housing which respects the character of the neighbourhood, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency of housing. This virtually repeats those matters previously discussed. Clause 17 – Economic Development Clause 17.01: Activity Centres: The key policy objectives includes an aim ‘to encourage the concentration of major retail, commercial, administrative, entertainment and cultural developments into activity centres (including strip shopping centres) which provide a variety of land uses and are highly accessible to the community’. The proposal would provide a mix of retail and commercial opportunities fronting Bear Street (Stage 3) on the site while encouraging the concentration of various uses within the Mordialloc Activity Centre. Clause 18 – Infrastructure Clause 18.02: Car Parking And Public Transport Access To Development: This policy aims to ensure that new developments are provided with good access and that new developments take advantage of all available modes of transport to minimise impact on existing transport networks and the amenity of the surrounding areas. The proposal is located in close proximity to the Mordialloc Railway Station. There is excellent access to railway services as well as bus services. The site is located within the Mordialloc Activity Centre and therefore takes advantage of pedestrian movements within the Activity Centre. Car parking is also provided in the form of a single basement level. Overall is considered that the site’s location in within the Mordialloc Activity Centre takes advantage of all major forms of public and private transportation services available (including train, bus, private vehicle, walking, bicycle etc). Clause 19.03: Design and Built Form

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

54

It is policy to achieve high quality urban design and architecture that reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of the community. Pursuant to Clause 19.03 the following design principles are relevant to this application: Context: It is policy that: development must take into account the natural, cultural and strategic context of its

location. The site is located within the Mordialloc Activity Centre which has been identified as a Major Activity Centre in the Kingston Planning Scheme. A more intensive type of development is expected within all activity centres, particularly those identified as Principal or Major Activity Centres. It is considered that the proposal adequately satisfies the above provision. The Public Realm: It is policy that: the public realm, which includes main pedestrian spaces, streets, squares, parks and

walkways, should be protected and enhanced. The site is currently occupied by commercial / industrial buildings and used built to the sites boundaries and offers no visual or physical connection to the street. The proposed development is in accordance with the zoning of the land and the removal of the existing buildings will introduce and activate the site’s Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street property frontage with the existing urban area. Further it is considered that the public realm will be enhanced by the proposed development with improved pedestrian spaces and walkways. Safety: It is policy that: new development should create urban environments that enhance personal safety and

property security and where people feel safe to live, work and move in at any time. The proposal does not appear to raise any issues in this respect and overall safety should be improved via improved surveillance from the outdoor living areas of the dwellings to Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street below. Further, given part of the development is orientated to the railway line, this is provide for improved safety and surveillance of this area thereby limiting anti-social behaviour such as vandalism along the railway line. Landmarks, Views and Vistas: It is policy that: landmarks, views and vistas should be protected and enhanced or, where appropriate,

created by new additions to the built environment. It is considered that the proposal does not appear to raise any issues in this respect. Concerns have been raised by objectors with regard to the heritage listing of the Water Tower, Mordialloc Railway Station and Masonic Hall, however, it is considered that that proposal will in no way detrimentally impact on these heritage listed buildings.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

55

Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisors did not object to the proposal and advised that while the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard was quite large, there would be no impact on the heritage significance of adjoining and nearby heritage listed places and buildings. Pedestrian Spaces: It is policy that: the design of the relationship between buildings and footpaths and other pedestrian

spaces, including the arrangement of adjoining activities, entrances, windows, and architectural decoration, should enhance the visual and social experience of the observer.

It is considered that the proposal has adequately addressed the above provision. Various elements have been included into the overall design of the building which enhances the relationship between the building, public spaces and existing character of the Mordialloc Activity Centre. The proposal provides an active street frontage to the Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street that will vastly improve the existing conditions with respect to pedestrian amenity. The vehicular entry points and basement car park / rear parking ensures that the streetscape is not dominated by accessways or car parking facilities. Heritage: It is policy that: new development should respect, but not simply copy, historic precedents and create a

worthy legacy for future generations. As noted above (landmarks, views and vistas) the proposal does not raise any concerns with respect to the any potential impact on the heritage places and buildings located in close proximity to the subject site. Consolidation of Sites and Empty Sites: It is policy that: new development should contribute to the “complexity” and diversity of the built

environment; and site consolidation should not result in street frontages that are out of keeping with the

“complexity” and “rhythm” of existing streetscapes. The proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the “complexity” and “rhythm” of the Mordialloc Activity Centre by seeking to incorporate elements such as the building materials and commercial interfaces at the ground floor. Light and Shade: It is policy that: the enjoyment of the public realm should be enhanced by a desirable balance of sunlight

and shade; and

this balance should not be compromised by undesirable overshadowing or exposure to the sun.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

56

The form and articulation of the development creates variations in the light and shade over public and private areas. Shadows cast by the development generally fall over the subject site or the adjoining railway line to the west of the subject site. Energy and Resource Efficiency: It is policy that: all buildings, subdivisions and engineering works should promote more efficient use of

resources and energy efficiency. It is considered that the proposed development addresses the above policy. Council Officer’s have worked closely with the applicant and architects to achieve a greater level of solar access to the development as a whole. Subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, it is considered that this development and buildings should be energy sufficient. Architectural Quality: It is policy that: new development should aspire to the high standards in architecture and urban design;

and

any rooftop plant, lift over-runs, service entries, communication devices, and other technical attachment should be treated as part of the overall design.

It is considered that the proposal demonstrates a high level of architectural and urban design merit. The provision of three separate building forms (Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3) across the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard with a variety of quality materials and colours achieves good articulation, visual interest and is a contemporary design response for the site. Landscape Architecture: It is policy that: recognition should be given to the setting in which buildings are designed and the

integrating role of landscape architecture. There is no existing vegetation located on the site. The development of this land for creates an opportunity to revegetate the site. Some areas of deep soil planting have been provided within the sites frontage in the form of large landscaping areas between “fingers” of built form at ground floor level. The extensive basement limits the amount of meaningful planting available. Overall it is submitted that the proposed development generally satisfies the aforementioned State strategies and policy direction. Specifically, the subject site is located on a large parcel of land earmarked for Mixed Use purposes, whereby residential development is an ‘as of right’ use under the zoning provisions. The site enjoys convenient and direct access to community facilities, various modes of transportation and everyday essential services.

15.3 Local Planning Policy Framework

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

57

The Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) contains Council’s strategic direction, the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), which is an extension of the direction established by the SPPF, and the local policies that implement the LPPF. Within Clause 21 (MSS) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the following five (5) clauses are submitted as being the most relevant to the consideration of the proposal: Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium; Clause 21.04: Vision; Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use; Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy; Clause 22.14: Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy After reviewing the relevant strategic directions that emerge from the abovementioned Clauses, the following can be summarised: Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium identifies the need for the

Municipality to provide suitable housing stock that meets future housing demands and to sustain an appropriate mix of supporting urban infrastructure. It is further stated that recent pressures for new development, consolidation and medium density housing has resulted in change to the amenity and character of local areas. It is acknowledged that careful management will be required in order to integrate urban consolidation objectives with an understanding of specific character issues applicable to certain neighbourhoods.

Within Clause 21.04-3: Strategic framework plan (Clause 21.04 Vision), provides for the

strategic direction for future land use planning and development within the City of Kingston. This Policy includes a Strategic Land Use Framework Plan, which identifies the location of where specific land use outcomes are anticipated, supported and promoted. Further, it also illustrates potential ‘development opportunity areas’, where significant land use change might be expected, along with defining areas where land use constraints may restrict future development.

With specific regard to this application, the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan identifies Mordialloc as a “Primary Activity Node” as well as an area for the promotion of “Medium Density Housing.” Furthermore, redevelopment opportunities for sites such as the one before Council rarely come about in the municipality and, therefore, it is important that we take advantage of these sites to cater for our housing projections and to reduce pressures on surrounding residential areas. Accordingly, the major strategic direction identified on the Framework Plan, within Clause 21.04-3, which is of relevance to this application, is as follows: Locations for promotion of medium to higher density housing opportunities within areas

designated for increased housing diversity and activity centres; Larger residential opportunity sites where new residential development (including medium

density housing) should be pursued.

The City of Kingston’s MSS at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, seeks to provide guidance to development in residential zoned land, mixed use zoned lands and land within activity centres. The Residential Land Use Framework Plan illustrates the range of housing outcomes sought across the City of Kingston.

Relevant objectives and strategies in Clause 21.05-3: Residential Land Use include:

o Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

58

walking distance of public transport and activity notes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character.

o Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood.

o To provide a range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing housing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. This is to be achieved through encouraging residential development within activity centres via mixed-use development, and on transitional sites at the periphery of activity centres.

o To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. This is to be achieved through promoting new residential development, which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood.

o To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development. To be achieved through promoting medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations.

o To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses.

o To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities. o To recognise and response to special housing needs within the community. o Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and

quality of life for future occupants.

It is considered that the proposed development is generally consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates an adequate standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, as well as for occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area.

Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use), effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.

In summary, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework. Importantly, the proposal delivers on specific objectives relating to the development of larger opportunity sites which seek to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations as well providing diversity in housing choice to assist in meeting the anticipated future population forecasts.

Clause 22.14 Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy: The Mordialloc Activity Centre

Policy is relevant in the assessment of this application. This Clause builds upon the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework of the Kingston Planning Scheme and seeks to provide design guidance and policy direction in the implementation of the Mordialloc Pride of the Bay: A Structure Plan for the Future of Mordialloc, 2004. As relevant to this application, it is policy to:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

59

o Land Use: Where a permit is required for the use of land within the policy area, it is policy to:

Encourage active commercial premises at ground level and inactive uses such as

offices, and residential at upper levels. Provide housing opportunities within the Activity Centre to capitalise on the

area’s transport, open space and retail assets. Promote a diverse range of housing types and sizes within areas identified for

increased residential and mixed development. Encourage the provision of service and commercial accommodation to address

the needs of visitors to Mordialloc and the surrounding region. Encourage the provision of aged care accommodation.

o Built Form: Where a permit is required for the development of land within the

policy area, it is policy to:

Ensure development is designed to reinforce Mordialloc’s coastal village attributes, heritage features and environmental qualities.

Ensure development preserves important views, vistas and landmarks currently enjoyed of existing heritage built forms and natural attributes.

Encourage buildings to interact with the street by providing entrances, windows and other details that maximise movement and surveillance.

Require balconies and roof decks to integrate with the building and provide minimal visual impact when viewed from the street and surrounding area.

Balconies and roof decks should not overlook into surrounding private open space areas, habitable room windows or cause overshadowing. Encourage all development to:

o Be of a high architectural and urban design standard that presents integrated building forms, that have a sense of address and clearly articulated facades, and sensitively designed building form.

o Apply design techniques and detail that will integrate a building with its surrounding streetscape, natural landscape and heritage without replicating or mimicking historical detailing.

o Highlight key corners, entries or landmarks through design projection, detailing and massing that presents to both street frontages and the site’s surroundings.

o Ensure that service infrastructure is appropriately sited into the design and obscured from the public domain.

o development and design including solar orientation, use of storm water management systems and natural ventilation.

Ensure building heights, setbacks and massing achieves solar access to pathways,

public open spaces and forecourt areas.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

60

Require developments, where relevant, to respond to the principles, siting and design guidelines set out in the Siting and Design Guidelines for Structures on the Victorian Coast, 1998.

o Access: Where a permit is required for the use and development of land within the

policy area, it is policy to:

Encourage the development of an interchange between modes of transport including buses and the station area, commuter drop off points, park and ride, and bike locker facilities.

Rationalise private vehicle and traffic access through, to and within the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

Consolidate and simplify vehicular points of access to and off-street car parking facilities.

Reinforce east-west pedestrian connection between the foreshore area, Main Street and established area east of Albert Street.

Provide a series of safe and highly amenable pedestrian routes. The subject site also falls within Precinct 3 of the Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy. In addition to the general policies, in the Timber Yard Redevelopment Precinct it is policy to: o Precinct 3: Timber Yard Redevelopment:

Draw the commercial core east across Main Street and the railway line through the provision of a new approximately 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor.

Encourage linked retail and commuter trips through the co-location of commuter and retail parking with an upper level deck above the new retail attractor with ramp access from Albert Street.

Promote the development of a mixed use commercial development on the south west corner of the intersection of Bear Street and Albert Street that creates an identifiable gateway.

Ensure the provision of an 8-12 metre reservation east of the railway line to

accommodate a future 3rd

railway line. Encourage the provision of aged care housing. Encourage surveillance of Park Street through the provision of balconies, bays,

porches or colonnades from the residences and the provision of individual entrances to the pathway.

Discourage the number of vehicular access points to Park Street. Encourage the extension of the pedestrian footpath on the west side of Park

Street to provide access to the adjoining open space areas. As previously discussed, this application should be read in conjunction with the reports and recommendations of Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 3 (KP72/10) currently before Council. A number of the policy directions and objectives addressed or satisfied in the remaining stages of the Mordialloc Timber Yard re-development. However, specifically, the following can be said with regards to the current Stage 2 (KP852/09) in response to the abovementioned policy directions of the Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

61

Stage 2 of the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard seeks to

provide higher density living within a portion of the overall site which is capable of accommodating increased heights and densities. This is due to the increase in width of the site through the this section of the Mordialloc Timber Yard;

The proposal provides a diverse range of dwelling types, sizes and layouts which can accommodate families, couples and singles with one (1) bedroom, two (2) bedroom and three (3) bedroom dwellings proposed as part of this application;

The proposal provides additional residential opportunities within the Mordialloc Activity Centre in close proximity to various modes of transportation as well as the necessary day to day community services used by residents;

The proposal preserves existing views and vistas to heritage listed places / buildings while retaining the coastal village attributes through building colours and materials;

The development provides for the passive surveillance and interaction with Albert Street and Park Street by providing suitable courtyards / raised terraces and entries direct from Albert Street and Park Street;

Low balustrades for balconies and deck areas have been provided to reduce the visual bulk and mass of the proposed building. It is noted that overlooking from balconies and deck areas has been assessed and it considered that there should not be any significant overlooking from balcony or deck areas of the proposed development;

Overshadowing and overlooking to adjoining and surrounding properties have been adequately address to prevent adverse amenity impacts on the surrounding area;

Setbacks from the street and railway reserve are considered appropriate having regard to the alignments of Albert Street and Park Street, the location of dwellings on surrounding properties and the potential future development of a 3rd railway line; and

Traffic, car parking and vehicle access to the site is adequately provided for and should not cause adverse amenity or safety implications to the surround road networks or adjoining properties. Furthermore, the proposed development will be accessed via a double width crossover and common accessway which is also to be used for vehicle access for the proposed Stage 3 commercial development located to the north of Stage 2.

Overall, it is considered that the proposed development of the middle section of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard for a four (4) storey plus basement car park residential building comprising ninety-five (95) dwellings is appropriate and adequately addresses and satisfies the policy directions and objectives of Clause 22.14 – Mordialloc Activity Centre of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

15.4 Zoning Provisions Clause 32.04: Mixed Use Zone: The purpose of the Mixed Use Zone is to provide for a range of residential, commercial, industrial and other uses which complement the mixed use function of the locality. In this instance, the provision of residential townhouse development on the southern most part of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard is appropriate given the residential nature of properties opposite the site to the east. A planning permit is required for the development of 2 or more dwellings.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

62

Schedule The proposal meets the additional requirements listed in the Schedule to the Mixed Use Zone.

15.5 Overlay Provisions

Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay

Schedule 9: 2-4 Bear Street, 2 Park Street and 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc: The purpose of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay is as follows:

To encourage the redevelopment of the land for a mix of residential use and commercial

and local services, with the latter preferably located along Bear Street. To ensure that the combination of uses, their densities, and the scale and character of any

redevelopment are compatible with the amenity of the surrounding area. To ensure that the development of the land does not have an adverse impact on local

traffic conditions. To achieve a high quality urban design outcome that is reflective of the site’s gateway

location to the Mordialloc Activity Centre. To ensure an appropriate transition between the core commercial centre of Main Street

and the surrounding residential environment of the Park Street and Albert Street area. To ensure that the land is developed in an orderly manner. Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay requires that an Urban Context Report be prepared and endorsed by the Responsible Authority which identifies the development opportunities and constraints of the site. The report must provide an adequate response against the following: The State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework, and zone

and overlay objectives; Existing and preferred built form and character of adjacent and nearby buildings; Land use mix and subdivision pattern; Energy efficiency, waste management and water sensitive urban design initiatives; Ground floor street frontages, including visual impacts and pedestrian safety; Traffic impacts and car parking requirements; Vistas; Noise attenuation associated with the railway interface; Stages of construction; Landscaping opportunities; and Drainage infrastructure. The responsible authority must have regard to the Urban Context Report before approving any application for permit. An Urban Context Report was prepared by Craig Czarny of Hansen Partnerships Pty Ltd and submitted to Council as part of the application documentation. In general, it is

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

63

considered that the Urban Context Report submitted adequately satisfies the requirements of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay. The Urban Context Report identifies the opportunities and constraints of the site and provides an urban design response against the proposed built form and policy context for each individual stage. Therefore, it is considered that the requirements of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay have been adequately satisfied and the Urban Context Report prepared by Hansen Partnerships Pty Ltd should be endorsed to form part of any permit issued. This can be included as a condition on any permit issued. Schedule 10: Mordialloc Activity Centre: The subject site falls within Precinct 3 of the framework plans under this Clause. Table 1 to Schedule 10 of the Design and development Overlay provides policy direction with regard to maximum building height as well as performance criteria which should be met as part of any development. Precinct A3 requires that new development on the subject site should be a maximum of four (4) storeys (14 metres) in height. Furthermore, the performance criteria states that any fourth (4th) storey must be recessed and not be visible from Park Street. The proposal is generally in accordance with Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay. The proposal will not exceed four (4) storeys or a maximum height of 14 metres at any point. However, as noted previously at point 6.2 of this report, a Planning Permit is required to vary the performance criteria of Table 1 of this Schedule. This is discussed in more detail below: The performance criteria of Table 1 in Schedule 10 states that any fourth (4th) storey

must be recessed and not be visible from Park Street. It is considered that the fourth storey of the proposed development is clearly visible from Park Street. However, the building envelope of the proposed building is a direct design response to the opportunities and constraints of the site.

A recessed fourth (4th) storey which is not visible from Park Street could only be accommodated should the majority of the built form of the proposed building be located along the site’s Albert Street and Park Street property boundary. This would allow for a three (3) storey podium along the site’s Albert Street and Park Street property boundaries with the fourth floor set back further into the subject site and not be visible from Park Street. However, while this may achieve the performance criteria, a development such as this would be a poor design outcome from a built form / urban design perspective as well as for an amenity, traffic and overall planning perspective.

The proposed building avoids built form along the site Albert Street and Park Street property boundary and in so doing has no building bulk issues along the street edge. This allows clear sightlines for north and south bound traffic using Albert Street and Park Street, as well as, reducing the visual bulk and mass exhibited by the proposed development. The fourth storey is generally setback a significant distance from both Albert Street and Park Street, however this varies given the irregular shape of the site and the alignment of Albert Street and Park Street.

The fourth (4th) storey at the southern most section of the building is closest to the Park Street at approximately 7.3 metres, while the northern most section of the building is provided with a setback from Albert Street of approximately 7.6 metres. The main built form of the fourth (4th) storey is set back between 7.6 metres and 21 metres from the

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

64

site’s Albert Street and Park Street property boundaries. There is suitable separation between the fourth level and Park Street.

It is also noted that the proposed development is provided with large landscaped areas in between “fingers” of built form which allows for a break in the overall building. This provides an area for communal open space as well as a location for substantial landscaping to be provided which will reduce the visual bulk and mass of the development particularly when viewed from Albert Street and Park Street.

Therefore, having consideration to the overall design response for the site, it is considered that a variation to the performance standard of Table 1 of the Design and Development Overlay Schedule 10 is considered appropriate.

Clause 45.03: Environmental Audit Overlay: This overlay requires that before a sensitive use commences or before the construction or carrying out of buildings and works in association with a sensitive use commences one of the following must occur:

A certificate of environmental audit must be issued for the land in accordance with Part

IXD of the Environment Protection Act 1970, or An environmental auditor appointed under the Environment Protection Act 1970 must

make a statement in accordance with Part IXD of that Act that the environmental conditions of the land are suitable for the sensitive use.

The applicant has submitted a Limited Environmental Site Assessment (LESA) prepared by Environmental Earth Sciences VIC in response to the applicable Environmental Audit Overlay on the subject site. As noted above, the application was referred to EPA Victoria however, no response was received. Nonetheless, it is considered appropriate that suitable measure be put in place to ensure any contaminants are removed as appropriate and it is considered that the recommendations and conclusions of the LESA should be endorsed to form part of any permit issued. This can be achieved through the inclusion of a suitable condition being placed on any permit issued.

15.6 Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06: Car Parking: Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, two (2) car parking spaces are required to be provided on site for each dwelling. It is considered that the ResCode requirement at Clause 55.05 (which is not strictly applicable to this proposed development) provides a better representation of the likely car parking demand for this component of the development. In this instance the following car parking requirements are generated for this development: a minimum of one (1) car space should be provided for each one (1) and two (2)

bedroom dwelling which generates a need for ninety-one (91) car parking spaces; a minimum of two (2) car parking spaces provided for each three (3) bedroom dwelling

which generates a need for eight (8) car parking spaces; and a minimum of one (1) visitor car parking space for every five (5) proposed dwellings

which generates a need for nineteen (19) car parking spaces. Therefore, based on the abovementioned figures, the proposal generates a car parking requirement of one hundred and eighteen (118) car parking spaces. A total of one hundred

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

65

and nineteen (119) spaces have been provided within the basement of the proposed building. It is considered that this is an appropriate number of spaces for the proposed development having regard to the size of the proposed dwelling (one and two bedroom apartments), the availability of excellent public transport in close proximity to the subject site and the ResCode requirement for car parking for dwellings. Therefore, Council considers it appropriate to reduce car parking requirements of dwellings under Clause 52.06-5. Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities: The statutory requirements for bicycle parking for the proposed development pursuant to Clause 52.34 of the Planning Scheme is as follows:- Proposed Use Requirement Dwellings: 1 resident space to each 5 dwellings and 1 visitor space to

each 10 dwellings A total of twenty-eight (28) bicycle spaces are required for the development (nineteen (19) dwelling bicycle parking spaces and nine (9) visitor bicycle spaces). The development is provided with thirty (30) bicycle parking spaces within the basement car park level and therefore complies with the requirements of this clause. Clause 52.35: Urban Design Context Report And Design Response For Residential Development Of Four Or More Storeys: As the development proposed is greater than four storeys in height, the applicant was required to provide an Urban Design Context Report against the “Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development” and a Design Response. The development has been assessed against the key elements and objectives of the Department of Sustainability and Environment’s “Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Developments”. The guidelines essentially duplicate the objectives and policy direction of Clause 19.03 – Design and Built Form as discussed previously in this report. Council Officers, including Council’s Urban Designer and Strategic Planning Department, have reviewed the Urban Design Context Report and Design Response, and consider the submitted information satisfactory. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development adequately satisfies the requirements of Clause 52.35 and the Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Developments.

Clause 52.36: Integrated Public Transport Planning: Relevant to this application, the intention of this Clause, amongst other things, is to ensure development supports public transport usage and to ensure that development incorporates safe, attractive and convenient pedestrian access to public transport stops.

Pursuant to this Clause, an application of sixty (60) or more dwellings must be referred to the Director of Public Transport, who advised of no objection to the proposal subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions on any permit issued.

15.7 Other – Cultural Heritage Management Plan

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

66

The subject site falls within an Area of Cultural Significance as identified under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Therefore, as part of the application, the applicant submitted a report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates providing a detailed response in relation to the cultural sensitivity of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard. In general terms, following a review of the history of the Mordialloc Timber Yard, a site inspection and review of all available data and documentation, the report has determined that no known Aboriginal or archaeological heritage sites are located on the Mordialloc Timber Yard site. Therefore, it is considered that a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is not required to be provided as part of this application. However, the report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates does provide recommendations in the event that an Aboriginal Heritage Site is identified during any construction. It is considered that such recommendations should be included as part of a condition on any permit issued.

16.0 RESPONSE AGAINST GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS 16.1 Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass,

neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The proposal adequately satisfies the policy directions and objectives of the Kingston

Planning Scheme including the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework;

The site is located within a Major Activity Centre and on land designated as an “Increased Housing Diversity Area” within the Residential Land Use Framework Plan at Clause 21.05 on the Kingston Planning Scheme;

The proposal does not raise any areas of concern with regard to the existing heritage buildings / features of Mordialloc;

The site has great access to various forms of transportation including public (Mordialloc Railway Station / various bus routes) and private transport modes and networks; and

The height, scale and overall built form is considered appropriate and adequately addresses various elements with regards to the character and built form of the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

Overall the development is consistent with the development provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme and is not considered to be an overdevelopment of the site. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

16.2 Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic

movements etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

67

The development is considered to provide adequate car parking on site for the future residents with regard to the relevant provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme;

Visitor car parking is anticipated to be accommodated both on site and within the existing on-street car parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the subject site;

It is considered that the existing road network will adequately handle any potential increase in traffic movements to and from the site and in the immediate vicinity of the subject site as a result of the proposed development; and

There are various modes of transportation available in the immediate vicinity of the site including public (Mordialloc Railway Station / various bus routes) and private forms of transportation.

Overall the development is consistent with the car parking and traffic provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

16.3 Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns and

visual impact concerns etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The proposal has been provided with setbacks which are site responsive and which are

consistent with adjoining land uses and the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay of the Kingston Planning Scheme;

Suitable design features (materials / colours etc / light weight construction / glazing) have been provided in the built form so as to provide a response to the streetscape and neighbourhood character of Mordialloc;

The overall height of the proposal is in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay of the Kingston Planning Scheme and has been kept to a maximum four (4) storeys and a maximum height of 14 metres; and

Overlooking and overshadowing by the proposal is considered minimal and should not impact on adjoining sensitive uses.

Overall the development is consistent with the amenity based provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

17.0 CONCLUSION: 17.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported

subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.

17.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:

The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

68

The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and,

The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy, Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy, Mixed Use Zone and the Schedule to the zone, Design and Development Overlay, Environmental Audit Overlay, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).

17.3 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered

reasonable and warrants support. 18.0 RECOMMENDATION: That Council resolve to support the application for the development of this site for a four (4) storey plus basement residential building and to vary the performance criteria of Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay Schedule 10 with reduced car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 – Car Parking of the Kingston Planning Scheme be issued, subject following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible

Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 1st April, 2010, but modified to show:

a. the provision of an improved landscape plan and associated planting schedule for the site in accordance with the final development plans submitted;

b.a detailed hydrology study to determine the flood level in the vicinity of the development for storm events of 1% Average Exceedence Probability (AEP) standard. Provision must be made for safe and effective passage of stormwater flows. The development should be free from inundation or to a lesser standard of flood protection where agreed by the Council;

c. a comprehensive drainage strategy for the development of the site incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design Treatments;

d. the basement is protected from the floodwater up to the apex level entering via all the basement entrances (stair accesses, entry/exit driveway etc);

e. a notation on the plans stating that the footpath must be constructed in front of the development to the satisfaction of Roads & drains Department according to the engineering plans approved by the Council;

f. the redundant vehicle crossing to be removed and the Council’s assets to be reinstated to the satisfaction of the Council;

g. the access road and basement ramp longitudinal sections with grades and apex;

h.the provision of a notation stating that a footpath must be constructed adjacent to the site’s Albert Street and Park Street property boundary (on the nature strip) at the cost of the developer / owner, with the footpath constructed to Council Standards with 2% black

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

69

oxide by weight and provided with a 200mm offset from the property boundary for the length of the development;

i. the provision of a notation stating that the Council road reserve and property boundaries are to be maintained and where there is no existing footpath, footpath levels are to be obtained from the Roads and Drains Department prior to the commencement of construction;

j. the provision of a notation stating that all landscaping and construction is to be kept within the property boundary;

k. the provision of a notation stating that all new vehicle crossings are to be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

l. the provision of a notation stating that all vehicle crossovers which are not to be retained and used for vehicles access must be reinstated as kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

m. the structural columns within the car parking areas should be located at least 400mm and no more than 1.4 metres from the entry end of their respective car space;

n. the privacy screens separating the private open space / deck / courtyard areas of each dwelling nominated at a minimum height of 1.8 metres from their respective finished floor level;

o. suitable skylights / clerestory windows provided to the third floor level hallway to allow natural light and ventilation to these areas;

p. suitable openable windows provided to the ground floor, first floor, and second floor level hallways of the proposed development to allow for natural light and ventilation to these areas;

q. the provision of nineteen (19) visitor car parking spaces clearly nominated withinh the basement car park;

r. the provision of suitable wheel stops provided for car spaces 9-11, 15-20, 48-50 and 72-74 within the basement car park;

s. the surface material of all driveways / accessways and car parking spaces nominated in all-weather coloured concrete sealcoat, or similar;

t. each dwelling provided with a minimum storage area of 6m3;

u. the conditions required by the Department of Transport, pursuant to Condition 3 of this Permit;

v. the conditions required by Department of Sustainability and Environment, pursuant to Condition 4 of this Permit; and

w. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule, including samples (illustrated on an A4 or A3 sheet), for all external elevations and driveways of the development.

2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Conditions Required by Department of Transport:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

70

a. The provision of a suitable sign to be erected at the front of the adjoining VicTrack owned car park stating that this car park is for commuter parking only.

b. The building materials along the railway corridor nominated as being non-reflective and avoiding the use of red and green colour schemes that may interfere with driver operations;

c. All windows and built form that front the railway corridor should be constructed with noise attenuation materials including double glazing and appropriate wall attenuation materials to reduce amenity impacts.

d. The permit holder must take all reasonable steps to ensure that disruption to train operation within the railway corridor and bus operation along Albert Street and Park Streets is kept to a minimum during the construction of the development. Foreseen disruption to rail or bus operation during construction and mitigation measures must be communicated to Metro and the Director of Public Transport fourteen (14) days prior.

e. The permit holder must ensure that all track, overhead power and supporting infrastructure is not damaged or that works do not cause unplanned disruption to rail operations. Any damage to public transport infrastructure must be rectified to the satisfaction of the Director of Public transport at the full cost of the permit holder.

f. The building and works must not encroach on the railway corridor to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Transport.

4. Conditions Required by Department of Sustainability and Environment:

a. No storage of materials on Crown land during or after the construction phase;

b. No parking of vehicles on Crown land during or after the construction phase; and

c. There must be no discharge of stormwater or other concentrated flow of water onto the Crown land. All stormwater and surface drainage should be directed to the legal point of discharge away from the Crown land.

5. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

6. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be complied with, unless with the further prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

7. Before commencement of the development, the proposed works within the road reserve as described in Condition 1b) must be in accordance with engineering plans submitted to and approved by the Council at the developer’s cost. A priced schedule of works within the road reserve and the payment of Council’s engineering fees of 3.25% of the cost of works are required to be submitted prior to approval of engineering plans. Proposed new footpath levels must be obtained from Roads and Drains Department.

8. Any modifications to Council’s stormwater pits must be to the Council’s standards.

9. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater runoff quality and which also retains on site any increase in runoff as a result of the approved development. The system must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

71

Authority. Council's Development Engineer can advise on satisfactory options to achieve these desired outcomes which may include the use of an infiltration or bioretention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system.

10. Before the development commences, a Stormwater Management Plan showing the stormwater works to the nominated point of discharge must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Stormwater Management Plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed stormwater works including all existing and proposed features that may have impact (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).

11. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties.

12. Stormwater outflow from the development to the Council drainage system should not exceed the predevelopment outflow of the site.

13. The entry/exit driveway to the basement car park must incorporate an apex no less than 150mm above the top of kerb level (abutting the vehicle crossing) or implement an alternative engineering solution for major flooding, approved by the Council.

14. Before the use starts, a Waste Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the Planning Permit. Three (3) copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

e) Waste collection in accordance with the loading and collection conditions included on this permit.

f) Provision on the land for the storage and collection of garbage and other solid waste. This area must be graded and drained and screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

g) All waste material not required for further on-site processing must be regularly removed from the site. All vehicles removing waste must have fully secured and contained loads so that no wastes are spilled or dust or odour is created to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

h) In accordance with Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) requirements, arrangements for the storage, segregation and disposal of any infectious waste, potentially infectious waste (as defined by the EPA), and any prescribed waste.

The waste management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction the responsible authority. The waste management plan must not be modified unless with the consent of the responsible authority.

15. Before the commencement of any building or works on the land a Construction Management Plan (CMP) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The CMP must deal with the parking of vehicles during construction, delivery of materials, containment of waste on site and suppression of dust, construction over the public domain etc.

16. Before construction of the development starts, a Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

72

Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. Three copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

a. the location of all areas to be used for staff / long term parking for the retail premises, offices and gymnasium within the lower and upper basement car parking levels of the building;

b. the provision of a notation stating that a minimum of two-hour free parking be provided for the visitors to the premises;

c. details of any arrangements for fee payment, including details of fees to be charged and the means by which such payment is to be collected;

d. the provision of suitable signs and pavement markings to direct and control the flow of traffic into, within and exiting the site including for the basement and loading bay areas, with this to include suitable warning signs/signals for drivers and pedestrians;

e. the provision of all lighting and security arrangements for the basement;

f. full details of access arrangements to and from the site including full details of any proposed security arrangements for resident and long term parking in the lower basement level (i.e. boom gates restricting access, swipe cards to be used etc);

g. details of any traffic management measure to improve vehicles entry and exit to and from the site (i.e. keep clear line markings on Swanston Street etc).

The Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan must be implemented to the satisfaction the Responsible Authority. The Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan must not be modified unless with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.

17. Prior to the commencement of works, the report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates dated 2nd June, 2010, in response to the Aboriginal Heritage of the site must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the report will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

18. Prior to the commencement of works, the report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics dated 29th October, 2009, in response to the Noise Impacts on the development must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the report will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

19. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the nature strip, kerb and channel, vehicle crossover and footpath must reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

20. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification.

21. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner.

22. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

73

e. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

f. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans.

g. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

h. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

23. All works on or facing the boundaries of adjoining properties must be finished and surface cleaned to a standard that is well presented to neighbouring properties in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

24. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

25. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue.

The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue.

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit.

Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit.

Note: Before removing / pruning any vegetation from the site, the applicant or any contractor engaged to remove any vegetation, should consult Council’s Vegetation Management Officer to verify if a Local Laws Permits is required for the removal of such vegetation.

Or

Should Council resolve not to support the application, that a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit be used on the following grounds:

1. The proposal would have an adverse affect on the amenity of the area.

2. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site.

3. The proposal exhibits excessive visual bulk and mass.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

74

4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape.

5. The proposal fails to comply with the requirements of Clause 52.06 – Car Parking of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

The meeting was addressed by Sharon Reiter on behalf of the objectors and by Clinton Tilley on behalf of the applicant. Crs Dundas/Brownlees That Council resolve to support the application for the development of this site for a four (4) storey plus basement residential building and to vary the performance criteria of Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay Schedule 10 with reduced car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 – Car Parking of the Kingston Planning Scheme be issued, subject to 25 conditions and The following condition be inserted into Condition 1 of the recommendation: The provision of a minimum 2 metre by 2 metre wide splay to the south-east corner of the common accessway from Albert Street (adjacent to the courtyard of dwelling 1) where it meets the site’s Albert Street property boundary

Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

75

M 149 Planning Application KP72/10 – Mordialloc Timber Yard APPLICANT Gattini & Partners ADDRESS OF LAND No. 2-4 Bear Street and 76 Albert Street (Crown Grant –

Crown Allotment 1A on TP70491U and Part 5A on TP75868U), Mordialloc

PROPOSAL Commercial Building – Retail / Showroom / Office PLANNING OFFICER Sebastian Lorenzo REFERENCE NO. KP-72/2010 RELEVANT STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 12: Metropolitan Development Clause 14: Settlement Clause 15: Environment Clause 16: Housing Clause 18: Infrastructure Clause 19: Particular Uses & Development

RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.06: Retail and Commercial Land Use Clause 22.14: Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy Clause 22.16: Heritage Policy

ZONE Clause 32.04: Mixed Use Zone OVERLAYS Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 9

and Schedule 10 Clause 45.03: Environmental Audit Overlay

PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 52.06: Car Parking Clause 52.07: Loading and Unloading of Vehicles Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities

GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines OTHER Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006: Cultural Heritage Management

Plan (CHMP) RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA

Increased Housing Diversity

DECISION DATE BY STATUTORY DAYS CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES / DATE RECEIVED

1st April, 2010

1.0 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL’S FAILURE TO

DETERMINE: 1.1 The applicant has lodged an application with the Victorian Civil and Administrative

Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine this application for planning permit within the required statutory time frame.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

76

1.2 As such, Council is unable to formally determine the proposal though it must, however, form a view on the proposal which must be presented before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

1.3 The purpose of this report, therefore, is to outline to Council its Officers views with respect to the appropriateness or otherwise of this proposal, and provide a recommendation to Council with regard to the position Council should take at the hearing.

2.0 KEY ISSUES 2.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to:

Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass, neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc);

Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic movements etc);

Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns, and visual impact concerns etc); and

Policy Considerations. 3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS 3.1 The subject site forms part of a larger parcel of land known as the ‘Mordialloc Timber Yard’

with the street addresses of No. 2-4 Bear Street, No 76 Albert Street and No. 2 Park Street, Mordialloc. The Mordialloc Timber Yard comprises two (2) Crown Grant Allotments. The title details of these are provided below:

Crown Grant: Crown Allotment 1A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc

– TP70491U; and Crown Grant: Crown Allotment 5A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc

– TP75868U.

3.2 This application is located on Crown Allotment 1A Section 11 City of Mordialloc Parish of Mordialloc – TP70491U and part Crown Allotment 5A on TP75868U. This land is known as No. 2 – 4 Bear Street and No. 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc. The land encompassing Stage 3 is irregular in shape and size with a frontage of 18.51 metres to Bear Street, a frontage of 69.34 metres to Albert Street and an area of approximately 1558m2.

3.3 The subject site contains a number of buildings which are currently used for commercial and

industrial purposes. The subject site is relatively flat with only a marginal fall in a north-south direction. The subject land does not contain any significant vegetation and is provided with vehicle access along Albert Street.

3.4 Crown Allotment 5A on TP75868U is also encumbered by a 2 metre wide sewerage and

drainage easement. However, this easement is located in the southern portion of this title and doe not impact on the land proposed to encompass Stage 3 of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard re-development.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

77

4.0 TITLE DETAILS 4.1 There appears to be a restriction listed on the Certificate of Title. However, the restriction

stipulates that mining on the subject site must not be restricted subject to the grating of leases and the like. It is considered that the proposed development is not considered to result in any breach of this restriction.

5.0 PROPOSAL 5.1 The Mordialloc Timber Yard is proposed to be re-developed in three (3) different stages.

Details of the each stage are provided below with a more detailed description of the current Stage 3 (KP72/10) provided further below;

Stage 1: KP779/09 – located in the south-east corner of the overall site and consists of

eleven (11) dwellings; Stage 2: KP852/09 – located in the middle section of the overall site and consists of a

four (4) storey plus basement residential apartment building with ninety-five (95) dwellings proposed; and

Stage 3: KP72/10 – located in the north-west most section of the overall site and consists of a three (3) storey with under croft / semi-basement level with retail / showroom at ground floor level and offices above.

5.2 Stage 3: It is proposed develop the northern most section of the overall Mordialloc Timber

Yard for a three (3) storey commercial building with a split level under croft car park. The building will comprise of retail / showroom premises at ground floor level and offices above. Further details of each level are provided below:

Ground floor: Three (3) retail / showrooms are proposed at ground floor level ranging

in size from 68m2 to 200m2. The ground floor level will also be provided with a foyer for the offices located at first and second floor level.

First Floor: Twelve (12) offices are located at first floor level ranging in size between 50m2 and 114m2;

Second Floor: Ten (10) offices are located at first floor level ranging in size between 56m2 and 137m2; and

Car Parking: A total of fifty-five (55) car parking spaces are located over two (2) levels of car parking. The lower level car park is located partially under ground. Twelve (12) bicycle parking spaces and other site services such as plant equipment and waste enclosures are also provided within the lower level car park of the development.

Vehicle access to the car park is provided at the southern end of the building with this vehicle accessway co-shared with the residential apartment building on the adjoining Stage 2 site to the south;

5.3 While two (2) levels of car parking are proposed (one of which is partially under ground),

the built form as it presents to Bear Street and Albert Street is of a three (3) storey building with the two (2) levels of car parking being contained within building height of the ground floor level. It is also noted that the proposed building at ground floor level has been set back between 3.47 metres and 4.7 metres from the site’s north (Bear Street) property frontage

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

78

while the along the site’s Albert Street property frontage the proposed building is set back between 0 metres and 2.39 metres at ground floor level.

5.4 Stage 3 of the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard consists of a parcel of

land of approximately 1558m2. The total building area is approximately 1120m2 giving a site coverage of approximately seventy-two (72%) percent.

6.0 PLANNING CONTROLS 6.1 The subject site is located within a Mixed Use Zone and is subject to A Design and

Development Overlay Schedule 9 and Schedule 10. The subject site is also affected by an Environmental Audit Overlay.

7.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 7.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.04 – Mixed Use Zone of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a Planning

Permit is required to construct a building or construct and carry out works. A Planning Permit is also required to use the site for a retail premises / office.

7.2 Pursuant to Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay Schedule 10 of the Kingston

Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is required to vary the performance criteria of Table 1 of this Schedule.

7.3 Pursuant to Clause 52.06 – Car Parking, a Planning Permit is required to waive / reduce the

car parking requirements in the table at Clause 52.06-5. 7.4 Pursuant to Clause 52.07 – Loading and Unloading of Vehicles, a Planning Permit is

required to waive / reduce the loading and unloading requirements of this cloase. 8.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 8.1 Council records indicate that there is no relevant planning history relating to this site.

However, as noted above, this application is Stage 3 of an overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard containing a total of 3 Stages. Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 2 (KP852/10) are currently under consideration by Council.

9.0 AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION BEFORE NOTIFICATION 9.1 Amendments to the application were made by the applicant on 1st April, 2010. The

amendments were largely made in response to Council further information letter dated 2nd March, 2010.

9.2 The amendments made to the application were considered satisfactory and Council,

therefore, directed that the application proceed to advertising. 10.0 ADVERTISING

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

79

10.1 Stage 3 (KP72/09) of the Mordialloc Timber Yard Re-development was advertised concurrently with the proposed Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 2 (KP852/10) by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Fourteen (14) objection(s) and one (1) letter of support for the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows: Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass,

neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc); Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic

movements etc); and Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns, and

visual impact concerns etc). 19.0 AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION AFTER NOTIFICATION 19.1 No formal amendment to the application was made after notification. However, further

details on the proposed materials and colours of the proposed commercial building were provided by the applicant on 15th July, 2010.

11.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 11.1 A preliminary conference for Stage 1 (KP779/09), Stage 2 (KP852/09) and Stage 3

(KP72/10) was held concurrently on Wednesday 26th May, 2010 with the relevant Planning Officer, Ward Councillor(s), the Permit Applicant and objectors in attendance. Each Stage was discussed individually with the above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

11.2 While positive discussions and suggestions were made, the above concerns were unable to

be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand. 12.0 REFERRALS 12.1 The application was referred to the following external authorities. Where appropriate

amended applications have been re-referred. The referral responses below relate to the current/amended application only:

VicTrack; EPA Victoria; Department of Transport; and Department of Sustainability and Environment.

12.2 It is noted that no response was received from VicTrack or EPA Victoria. However, the Department of Transport and the Department of Sustainability and Environment advised of no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being included on any permit issued.

12.3 The application was referred to the following internal departments within Council (where appropriate amended applications have been re-referred): Council’s Development Engineer;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

80

Council’s Vegetation Management Officer; Council’s Heritage Advisor; Council’s Roads and Drains Department; Council’s Health Department; Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer; Council’s Urban Designer; Council’s Strategic Planning Department; Council’s Waste Management Officer; and Council’s Traffic Engineer.

The relevant comments from each of the abovementioned departments are detailed below. Development Approvals Engineers: Council’s Development Approvals Engineers advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable drainage conditions being placed on any permit issued. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Vegetation Management Officers: Council’s Vegetation Management Officer advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable vegetation conditions being placed on any permit issued. It is noted that the landscape plans submitted as part of the application were considered to be satisfactory by Council’s Vegetation Management Officers. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Council Heritage Advisor: Council’s Heritage Advisor advised of no objection to the proposed development. It is considered that the proposal does not raise any issues with respect to the nearby heritage listed buildings and places. Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisors advised that while the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard was quite large, there would be no impact on the heritage significance of adjoining and nearby heritage listed places and buildings. No conditions were required in relation to heritage matters. Roads and Drains Department: Council’s Roads and Drains Department advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions requiring the applicant to construct all public paths which abut the subject site in accordance with Council requirements / details and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. These conditions are included as part of Council officers recommendation. Health Department: Council’s Health Department advised of concerns with regard to potential noise issues give the site’s proximity to the Frankston Railway Line. However, these could be addressed through the inclusion of suitable conditions on any permit issued. Environmental Sustainability Officer: Council’s Environmental Sustainability Officer advised of no objection to the proposed development, however provided a number of suggestions to improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of the proposed development. These include the use of double glazed windows, solar treatments to east and west facing windows, the use of water and energy efficient fixtures and fittings. This has

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

81

been considered and a number of these elements have been provided as conditions within Council’s recommendation. Urban Designer: Council’s Urban Designer advised of no objection to the proposed development, however provided a number of suggestions to improve the built form and reduce visual bulk and mass. These elements were incorporated at the early design stage and therefore the current proposal does not raise significant urban design issues. As part of a condition on any permit issued, the applicant is required to submit a full colour and building materials schedule which better reflects the coastal village and history of Mordialloc. Strategic Planning Department: Council’s Strategic Planning Department advised of no objection to the proposed development. Further, it was advised that the separation of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard into three (3) different built forms with typical low density townhouse residential development located in the southern most section of the site, a medium density residential apartment development through the middle section of the site and a commercial / retail development in the northern most section of the site was appropriate from a land use, amenity and policy perspective. No conditions were required in relation to strategic planning matters. Maintenance Contracts and Waste Department: Council’s Maintenance Contracts and Waste Department advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to the inclusion of a suitable condition requiring the applicant to submit a Waste Management Plan being placed on any permit issued. This condition is included as part of Council officers recommendation. Traffic Engineers: Council’s Traffic Engineers initially objected to the proposed development. However, through discussions and the submission of additional information by the applicant and other Council Officers it was advised that subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions being placed on any permit issued, the development should be supported.

13.0 RELEVANT POLICIES 13.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 12 (Metropolitan Development) Clause 14 (Settlement) Clause 16 (Housing) Clause 19 (Particular Uses and Development)

13.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.03 (Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium) Clause 21.04 (Vision) Clause 21.06 (Retail and Commercial Land Use) Clause 22.14 (Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy)

13.3 Zoning The site is located in the following Zone:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

82

Clause 32.04 (Mixed Use Zone)

13.4 Overlays

The following Overlay Controls apply to this site:

Clause 43.02 (Design and Development Overlay) DDO9 – 2-4 Bear Street, 2 Park Street and 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc DDO10 – Mordialloc Activity Centre Clause 45.03 – Environmental Audit Overlay

13.5 Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06 (Car Parking) Clause 52.07 (Loading and Unloading of Vehicles) Clause 52.34 (Bicycle Facilities)

13.6 General Provisions

Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)

13.7 Other – Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006

Cultural Heritage Management Plan

14.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 14.1 While the overall re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard is proposed in three (3)

individual stages, it is considered that each stage interacts and informs the next. Therefore, while each stage is assessed individually against the relevant provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme, there are various elements of each proposal which require an understanding of the other stages proposed and how the overall re-development is consistent with the various provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. Therefore, it is considered appropriate that this assessment be read in conjunction with the Council reports prepared for Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 2 (KP852/09).

14.2 State and Local Planning Policy Framework

The State Planning Policy Framework are rather broad policies which are essentially the framework by which local policies are derived from. The following is, therefore, a brief comment of the relevant polices. Clause 12 – Metropolitan Development: Clause 12.01: A More Compact City: This seeks to facilitate sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing settlement patterns, and investment in transport and communication, water and sewerage and social facilities, and locate a substantial proportion

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

83

of new housing in or close to activity centres and other strategic redevelopment sites that offer good access to services and transport. Clause 12.05: A Great Place To Be: This seeks to create urban environments that are of better quality, safer and more functional, provide more open space and an easily recognisable sense of place and cultural identity. It promotes issues of good urban design, recognition and protection of cultural identity, neighbourhood character, sense of place heritage, improvement of community safety. Clause 12.06: A Fairer City: This seeks to increase the supply of well located and affordable housing by encouraging a significant proportion of new development, including development activity centres and strategic redevelopment sites, to be affordable for households on low to moderate incomes. Clause 12.07: A Greener City: This seeks to minimise impacts on the environment by reducing the amount of waste generated, reducing energy usage, manage water use and reduce the impact of stormwater on bays and catchments. In general, the proposal is considered to satisfy the above listed objectives. The site is within a major activity centre and would provide for additional housing which can take full advantage of public transport, commercial facilities and recreation facilities, all with minimal reliance on car usage, and therefore, lesser energy consumption. Clause 14 – Settlement: One of the key objectives under Clause 14.01 of the Kingston Planning Scheme aims ‘to ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, institutional and other public use’. The proposal is considered to satisfy this objective by maintaining the commercial component of the site (Stage 3 of the Mordialloc Timber Yard Re-development) while providing a new residential component (Stage 1 and Stage 2) on the site in the form of apartment and townhouse dwellings. Clause 15 – Environment Clause 15.06: Soil Contamination: This clause seeks to ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely. An Environmental Audit Overlay is applicable to the subject site, and through the provision is suitable environment conditions, will ensure that the sensitive use is appropriate. Clause 15.12: Energy Efficiency: The key objective of this Clause is ‘to encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions’. Further, planning and responsible authorities should: Promote energy efficient building; Promote consolidation of urban development and integration of land use and transport;

and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

84

Encourage retention of existing vegetation or revegetation as part of subdivision and development proposals.

It is considered that the nature of the proposed development generally accords with the above strategies for general implementation. An Ecological Sustainable Design (ESD) report has been submitted by the applicant and assessed by Council’s Environmental Planning Department who advised of no objection to the proposed development subject to suitable conditions. Clause 16 – Housing Clause 16.02: Medium Density Housing: This policy aims to encourage the development of well-designed medium density housing which respects the character of the neighbourhood, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency of housing. This virtually repeats those matters previously discussed. Clause 17 – Economic Development Clause 17.01: Activity Centres: The key policy objectives includes an aim ‘to encourage the concentration of major retail, commercial, administrative, entertainment and cultural developments into activity centres (including strip shopping centres) which provide a variety of land uses and are highly accessible to the community’. The proposal would provide a mix of retail and commercial opportunities fronting Bear Street (Stage 3) on the site while encouraging the concentration of various uses within the Mordialloc Activity Centre. Clause 18 – Infrastructure Clause 18.02: Car Parking And Public Transport Access To Development: This policy aims to ensure that new developments are provided with good access and that new developments take advantage of all available modes of transport to minimise impact on existing transport networks and the amenity of the surrounding areas. The proposal is located in close proximity to the Mordialloc Railway Station. There is excellent access to railway services as well as bus services. The site is located within the Mordialloc Activity Centre and therefore takes advantage of pedestrian movements within the Activity Centre. Car parking is also provided in the form of a single basement level. Overall is considered that the site’s location in within the Mordialloc Activity Centre takes advantage of all major forms of public and private transportation services available (including train, bus, private vehicle, walking, bicycle etc). Clause 19.03: Design and Built Form It is policy to achieve high quality urban design and architecture that reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of the community. Pursuant to Clause 19.03 the following design principles are relevant to this application:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

85

Context: It is policy that: development must take into account the natural, cultural and strategic context of its

location. The site is located within the Mordialloc Activity Centre which has been identified as a Major Activity Centre in the Kingston Planning Scheme. A more intensive type of development is expected within all activity centres, particularly those identified as Principal or Major Activity Centres. It is considered that the proposal adequately satisfies the above provision. The Public Realm: It is policy that: the public realm, which includes main pedestrian spaces, streets, squares, parks and

walkways, should be protected and enhanced. The site is currently occupied by commercial / industrial buildings and used built to the sites boundaries and offers no visual or physical connection to the street. The proposed development is in accordance with the zoning of the land and the removal of the existing buildings will introduce and activate the site’s Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street property frontage with the existing urban area. Further it is considered that the public realm will be enhanced by the proposed development with improved pedestrian spaces and walkways. Safety: It is policy that: new development should create urban environments that enhance personal safety and

property security and where people feel safe to live, work and move in at any time. The proposal does not appear to raise any issues in this respect and overall safety should be improved via improved surveillance from the outdoor living areas of the dwellings to Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street below. Further, given part of the development is orientated to the railway line, this is provide for improved safety and surveillance of this area thereby limiting anti-social behaviour such as vandalism along the railway line. Landmarks, Views and Vistas: It is policy that: landmarks, views and vistas should be protected and enhanced or, where appropriate,

created by new additions to the built environment. It is considered that the proposal does not appear to raise any issues in this respect. Concerns have been raised by objectors with regard to the heritage listing of the Water Tower, Mordialloc Railway Station and Masonic Hall, however, it is considered that that proposal will in no way detrimentally impact on these heritage listed buildings. Furthermore, Council’s Heritage Advisors did not object to the proposal and advised that while the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard was quite large, there

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

86

would be no impact on the heritage significance of adjoining and nearby heritage listed places and buildings. Pedestrian Spaces: It is policy that: the design of the relationship between buildings and footpaths and other pedestrian

spaces, including the arrangement of adjoining activities, entrances, windows, and architectural decoration, should enhance the visual and social experience of the observer.

It is considered that the proposal has adequately addressed the above provision. Various elements have been included into the overall design of the building which enhances the relationship between the building, public spaces and existing character of the Mordialloc Activity Centre. The proposal provides an active street frontage to the Bear Street, Albert Street and Park Street that will vastly improve the existing conditions with respect to pedestrian amenity. The vehicular entry points and basement car park / rear parking ensures that the streetscape is not dominated by accessways or car parking facilities. Heritage: It is policy that: new development should respect, but not simply copy, historic precedents and create a

worthy legacy for future generations. As noted above (landmarks, views and vistas) the proposal does not raise any concerns with respect to the any potential impact on the heritage places and buildings located in close proximity to the subject site. Consolidation of Sites and Empty Sites: It is policy that: new development should contribute to the “complexity” and diversity of the built

environment; and site consolidation should not result in street frontages that are out of keeping with the

“complexity” and “rhythm” of existing streetscapes. The proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the “complexity” and “rhythm” of the Mordialloc Activity Centre by seeking to incorporate elements such as the building materials and commercial interfaces at the ground floor. Light and Shade: It is policy that: the enjoyment of the public realm should be enhanced by a desirable balance of sunlight

and shade; and

this balance should not be compromised by undesirable overshadowing or exposure to the sun.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

87

The form and articulation of the development creates variations in the light and shade over public and private areas. Shadows cast by the development generally fall over the subject site or the adjoining railway line to the west of the subject site. Energy and Resource Efficiency: It is policy that: all buildings, subdivisions and engineering works should promote more efficient use of

resources and energy efficiency. It is considered that the proposed development addresses the above policy. Council Officer’s have worked closely with the applicant and architects to achieve a greater level of solar access to the development as a whole. Subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, it is considered that this development and buildings should be energy sufficient. Architectural Quality: It is policy that: new development should aspire to the high standards in architecture and urban design;

and

any rooftop plant, lift over-runs, service entries, communication devices, and other technical attachment should be treated as part of the overall design.

It is considered that the proposal demonstrates a high level of architectural and urban design merit. The provision of three separate building forms (Stage 1, Stage 2 and Stage 3) across the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard with a variety of quality materials and colours achieves good articulation, visual interest and is a contemporary design response for the site. Landscape Architecture: It is policy that: recognition should be given to the setting in which buildings are designed and the

integrating role of landscape architecture. There is no existing vegetation located on the site. The development of this land for creates an opportunity to revegetate the site. Some areas of deep soil planting have been provided within the sites frontage in the form of large landscaping areas between “fingers” of built form at ground floor level. The extensive basement limits the amount of meaningful planting available. Overall it is submitted that the proposed development generally satisfies the aforementioned State strategies and policy direction. Specifically, the subject site is located on a large parcel of land earmarked for Mixed Use purposes, whereby residential development is an ‘as of right’ use under the zoning provisions. The site enjoys convenient and direct access to community facilities, various modes of transportation and everyday essential services.

14.3 Local Planning Policy Framework

The Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) contains Council’s strategic direction, the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), which is an extension of the direction established by the SPPF, and the local policies that implement the LPPF.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

88

Within Clause 21 (MSS) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the following five (5) clauses are submitted as being the most relevant to the consideration of the proposal: Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium; Clause 21.04: Vision; Clause 21.06: Retail and Commercial Land Use; Clause 22.14: Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy After reviewing the relevant strategic directions that emerge from the abovementioned Clauses, the following can be summarised: Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium identifies the need for the

Municipality to provide suitable housing stock that meets future housing demands and to sustain an appropriate mix of supporting urban infrastructure. It is further stated that recent pressures for new development, consolidation and medium density housing has resulted in change to the amenity and character of local areas. It is acknowledged that careful management will be required in order to integrate urban consolidation objectives with an understanding of specific character issues applicable to certain neighbourhoods.

Within Clause 21.04-3: Strategic framework plan (Clause 21.04 Vision), provides for the

strategic direction for future land use planning and development within the City of Kingston. This Policy includes a Strategic Land Use Framework Plan, which identifies the location of where specific land use outcomes are anticipated, supported and promoted. Further, it also illustrates potential ‘development opportunity areas’, where significant land use change might be expected, along with defining areas where land use constraints may restrict future development.

With specific regard to this application, the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan identifies Mordialloc as a “Primary Activity Node” as well as an area for the promotion of “Medium Density Housing.” Furthermore, redevelopment opportunities for sites such as the one before Council rarely come about in the municipality and, therefore, it is important that we take advantage of these sites to cater for our housing projections and to reduce pressures on surrounding residential areas. Accordingly, the major strategic direction identified on the Framework Plan, within Clause 21.04-3, which is of relevance to this application, is as follows: Locations for promotion of medium to higher density housing opportunities within areas

designated for increased housing diversity and activity centres; Larger residential opportunity sites where new residential development (including medium

density housing) should be pursued.

Clause 21.06 Retail and Commercial Land Use: Mordialloc is identified as being a Major Activity Centre on Council’s Retail and Commercial Land Use Framework Plan. It is policy to promote mixed use precincts around key activity centres which encourage a broader range of cultural, social, commercial and higher density housing opportunities to complement retail functions of activity centres and enhance their economic vitality. Furthermore, strategic direction for Mordialloc as a Major Activity Centre is to reinforce the coastal character of Mordialloc by enhancing linkages with the foreshore and the area’s tourism potential through the built form and land use.

It is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the abovementioned policy directions. The proposal provides a variety of commercial opportunities within an

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

89

existing Activity Centre including retail, showroom and office uses. It is also noted that the zoning of the site allows permits to be granted for various other uses which will contribute to the range of services and commercial opportunities within Mordialloc.

Clause 22.14 Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy: The Mordialloc Activity Centre

Policy is relevant in the assessment of this application. This Clause builds upon the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework of the Kingston Planning Scheme and seeks to provide design guidance and policy direction in the implementation of the Mordialloc Pride of the Bay: A Structure Plan for the Future of Mordialloc, 2004. As relevant to this application, it is policy to: o Land Use: Where a permit is required for the use of land within the policy area, it is

policy to:

Encourage active commercial premises at ground level and inactive uses such as offices, and residential at upper levels.

Provide housing opportunities within the Activity Centre to capitalise on the area’s transport, open space and retail assets.

Promote a diverse range of housing types and sizes within areas identified for increased residential and mixed development.

Encourage the provision of service and commercial accommodation to address the needs of visitors to Mordialloc and the surrounding region.

Encourage the provision of aged care accommodation.

o Built Form: Where a permit is required for the development of land within the policy area, it is policy to:

Ensure development is designed to reinforce Mordialloc’s coastal village

attributes, heritage features and environmental qualities. Ensure development preserves important views, vistas and landmarks currently

enjoyed of existing heritage built forms and natural attributes. Encourage buildings to interact with the street by providing entrances, windows

and other details that maximise movement and surveillance. Require balconies and roof decks to integrate with the building and provide

minimal visual impact when viewed from the street and surrounding area. Balconies and roof decks should not overlook into surrounding private open space areas, habitable room windows or cause overshadowing. Encourage all development to:

o Be of a high architectural and urban design standard that presents integrated building forms, that have a sense of address and clearly articulated facades, and sensitively designed building form.

o Apply design techniques and detail that will integrate a building with its surrounding streetscape, natural landscape and heritage without replicating or mimicking historical detailing.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

90

o Highlight key corners, entries or landmarks through design projection, detailing and massing that presents to both street frontages and the site’s surroundings.

o Ensure that service infrastructure is appropriately sited into the design and obscured from the public domain.

o development and design including solar orientation, use of storm water management systems and natural ventilation.

Ensure building heights, setbacks and massing achieves solar access to pathways,

public open spaces and forecourt areas. Require developments, where relevant, to respond to the principles, siting and

design guidelines set out in the Siting and Design Guidelines for Structures on the Victorian Coast, 1998.

o Access: Where a permit is required for the use and development of land within the

policy area, it is policy to:

Encourage the development of an interchange between modes of transport including buses and the station area, commuter drop off points, park and ride, and bike locker facilities.

Rationalise private vehicle and traffic access through, to and within the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

Consolidate and simplify vehicular points of access to and off-street car parking facilities.

Reinforce east-west pedestrian connection between the foreshore area, Main Street and established area east of Albert Street.

Provide a series of safe and highly amenable pedestrian routes. The subject site also falls within Precinct 3 of the Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy. In addition to the general policies, in the Timber Yard Redevelopment Precinct it is policy to: o Precinct 3: Timber Yard Redevelopment:

Draw the commercial core east across Main Street and the railway line through the provision of a new approximately 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor.

Encourage linked retail and commuter trips through the co-location of commuter and retail parking with an upper level deck above the new retail attractor with ramp access from Albert Street.

Promote the development of a mixed use commercial development on the south west corner of the intersection of Bear Street and Albert Street that creates an identifiable gateway.

Ensure the provision of an 8-12 metre reservation east of the railway line to

accommodate a future 3rd

railway line. Encourage the provision of aged care housing. Encourage surveillance of Park Street through the provision of balconies, bays,

porches or colonnades from the residences and the provision of individual entrances to the pathway.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

91

Discourage the number of vehicular access points to Park Street. Encourage the extension of the pedestrian footpath on the west side of Park

Street to provide access to the adjoining open space areas. As previously discussed, this application should be read in conjunction with the reports and recommendations of Stage 1 (KP779/09) and Stage 2 (KP852/09) currently before Council. A number of the policy directions and objectives addressed or satisfied in the remaining stages of the Mordialloc Timber Yard re-development. However, specifically, the following can be said with regards to the current Stage 3 (KP72/10) in response to the abovementioned policy directions of the Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy: As noted above, Clause 21.14 seeks to drawn the commercial core of the Mordialloc

Activity Centre east, across Main Street and the railway line by providing a new approximately 2000-300 square metre retail attractor such as a supermarket. The proposed development is clearly contrary to this policy direction, however, the applicant went to considerable lengths in order to try to satisfy this policy direction of Clause 21.14. The following comment is made with respect to this area of non-compliance:

o The size, irregular shape and location of the subject site is a considerable

constraint to the development of a 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor on the site;

o The ability to locate a 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor on the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard would require the use of VicTrack land located to the west of the subject site for access, car parking and building purposes. VicTrack has provided documentation to the applicant stating that VicTrack land and / or air space must be retained for future transport services;

o The applicant approached Woolworths Supermarkets, Coles Supermarkets and IGA Supermarkets in response to the potential to locate a supermarket on the subject site. A representative from each organisation advised that the ability to locate a supermarket on the subject site was problematic due to the size and location of the site and the future functionality of any supermarket on the site. Further, the applicant has provided a copy of this correspondence as part of the documentation submitted with the application;

o Vehicle access to the site would be problematic particularly with regard to truck (semi-trailers / 19 metre trucks) access as well as vehicle turning movements on the subject site itself;

o Overall, it is considered that the site, without the adjoining VicTrack owned land to the west can not accommodate a 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor without significantly compromising on traffic, safety and built form considerations.

While a 2000-3000 square metre retail attractor has not been provided, the proposal continues to provide for a mix of retail and office opportunities on the site and creates an identifiable commercial gateway to the Mordialloc Activity Centre;

The proposal preserves existing views and vistas to heritage listed places / buildings while retaining the coastal village attributes through building colours and materials;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

92

The development provides for the passive surveillance and interaction with Bear Street and Albert Street by providing retail / showrooms fronting either street as well as windows at first and second floor level which overlook the road reserve;

Overshadowing and overlooking to adjoining and surrounding properties have been adequately address to prevent adverse amenity impacts on the surrounding area;

Setbacks from the street and railway reserve are considered appropriate having regard to the alignments of Albert Street and Park Street, the location of dwellings on surrounding properties and the potential future development of a 3rd railway line; and

Traffic, car parking and vehicle access to the site is adequately provided for and should not cause adverse amenity or safety implications to the surround road networks or adjoining properties. Furthermore, the proposed development will be accessed via a double width crossover and common accessway which is also to be used for vehicle access for the proposed Stage 2 residential apartment building located to the south of Stage 3.

Overall, it is considered that the proposed development of the northern most section of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard for a three (3) storey commercial building comprising retail / showroom / office components is appropriate having regard to the constraints of the subject site and it is considered that the proposal adequately addresses and satisfies the remaining policy directions and objectives of Clause 22.14 – Mordialloc Activity Centre of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

14.4 Zoning Provisions Clause 32.04: Mixed Use Zone: The purpose of the Mixed Use Zone is to provide for a range of residential, commercial, industrial and other uses which complement the mixed use function of the locality. In this instance, the provision of a commercial development on the northern most part of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard is appropriate given the policy directions of the Mordialloc Activity Centre and the requirement to provide a gateway to the commercial core of the Mordialloc Activity Centre. A planning permit is required for buildings and works and to use the site for retail premises / offices.

Schedule The proposal meets the additional requirements listed in the Schedule to the Mixed Use Zone.

14.5 Overlay Provisions

Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay Schedule 9: 2-4 Bear Street, 2 Park Street and 76 Albert Street, Mordialloc: The purpose of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay is as follows:

To encourage the redevelopment of the land for a mix of residential use and commercial

and local services, with the latter preferably located along Bear Street. To ensure that the combination of uses, their densities, and the scale and character of any

redevelopment are compatible with the amenity of the surrounding area.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

93

To ensure that the development of the land does not have an adverse impact on local traffic conditions.

To achieve a high quality urban design outcome that is reflective of the site’s gateway location to the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

To ensure an appropriate transition between the core commercial centre of Main Street and the surrounding residential environment of the Park Street and Albert Street area.

To ensure that the land is developed in an orderly manner. Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay requires that an Urban Context Report be prepared and endorsed by the Responsible Authority which identifies the development opportunities and constraints of the site. The report must provide an adequate response against the following: The State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework, and zone

and overlay objectives; Existing and preferred built form and character of adjacent and nearby buildings; Land use mix and subdivision pattern; Energy efficiency, waste management and water sensitive urban design initiatives; Ground floor street frontages, including visual impacts and pedestrian safety; Traffic impacts and car parking requirements; Vistas; Noise attenuation associated with the railway interface; Stages of construction; Landscaping opportunities; and Drainage infrastructure. The responsible authority must have regard to the Urban Context Report before approving any application for permit. An Urban Context Report was prepared by Craig Czarny of Hansen Partnerships Pty Ltd and submitted to Council as part of the application documentation. In general, it is considered that the Urban Context Report submitted adequately satisfies the requirements of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay. The Urban Context Report identifies the opportunities and constraints of the site and provides an urban design response against the proposed built form and policy context for each individual stage. Therefore, it is considered that the requirements of the Schedule 9 to the Design and Development Overlay have been adequately satisfied and the Urban Context Report prepared by Hansen Partnerships Pty Ltd should be endorsed to form part of any permit issued. This can be included as a condition on any permit issued. Schedule 10: Mordialloc Activity Centre: The subject site falls within Precinct 3 of the framework plans under this Clause. Table 1 to Schedule 10 of the Design and development Overlay provides policy direction with regard to maximum building height as well as performance criteria which should be met as part of any development. Precinct A3 requires that new development on the subject site should be a maximum of four (4) storeys (14 metres) in height. Furthermore, the performance criteria states that any fourth (4th) storey must be recessed and not be visible from Park Street.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

94

The proposal is generally in accordance with Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay. The proposal will not exceed four (4) storeys or a maximum height of 14 metres at any point. Stage 3 of the proposed re-development of the Mordialloc Timber Yard is a maximum of three (3) storeys with no part of this development to exceed a height of 13.15 metres from natural ground level. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed development is in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 10 to the Design and Development Overlay.

Clause 45.03: Environmental Audit Overlay: This overlay requires that before a sensitive use commences or before the construction or carrying out of buildings and works in association with a sensitive use commences one of the following must occur:

A certificate of environmental audit must be issued for the land in accordance with Part

IXD of the Environment Protection Act 1970, or An environmental auditor appointed under the Environment Protection Act 1970 must

make a statement in accordance with Part IXD of that Act that the environmental conditions of the land are suitable for the sensitive use.

The applicant has submitted a Limited Environmental Site Assessment (LESA) prepared by Environmental Earth Sciences VIC in response to the applicable Environmental Audit Overlay on the subject site. As noted above, the application was referred to EPA Victoria however, no response was received. Nonetheless, it is considered appropriate that suitable measure be put in place to ensure any contaminants are removed as appropriate and it is considered that the recommendations and conclusions of the LESA should be endorsed to form part of any permit issued. This can be achieved through the inclusion of a suitable condition being placed on any permit issued.

14.6 Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06: Car Parking: Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme sets out the number of car parking spaces required for various uses. A permit may be granted to reduce or waive the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. Where a use is not specified, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

The decision guidelines of Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme state that before a requirement for car spaces is reduced or waived, the applicant must satisfy the Responsible Authority that the reduced provision is justified due to:

Any relevant parking precinct plan;

The availability of car parking in the locality;

The availability of public transport in the locality;

Any reduction in car parking demand due to the sharing of car spaces by multiple uses, either because of variation of car parking demand over time or because of efficiencies gained from the consolidation of shared car parking spaces;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

95

Any car parking deficiency or surplus associated with the existing use of the land;

Any credit which should be allowed for a car parking demand deemed to have been provided in association with a use which existed before the change of parking requirement;

Local traffic management;

Local amenity including pedestrian amenity;

An empirical assessment of car parking demand; and

Any other relevant consideration. As discussed previously, the application was referred to Council’s Traffic Engineers for their comment and advice. An assessment of the car parking and traffic implications of the proposal is detailed below. Retail Premises: The applicant considers that the car parking rate of eight (8) spaces

per 100m2 for a retail premises (shop) as set out at Clause 52.06-5 of the Kingston Planning Scheme is excessive in almost all cases. The applicant proposes that a peak car parking rate of 3.5 spaces per 100m2 for the proposed retail premises is appropriate in this case. Therefore, the three (3) retail premises would attract a car parking provision of twelve (12) car spaces. It is proposed that this component of the development would provide four (4) on-site staff car parking spaces while eight (8) spaces would be accommodated on-street for customers.

Office: The statutory planning requirement of three (3) spaces per 100m2 of net floor

area is considered appropriate for the office component of the proposed development, particularly having regard to the good access to public transport. Therefore, a requirement of fifty-one (51) car spaces is to be provided on site. It is proposed that this component of the development would provide all fifty-one (51) car parking spaces on site.

It is considered that the abovementioned car parking rates are appropriate and should be applied top the proposed development. Furthermore, it is considered that the proposal adequately satisfies the objectives of Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme and that the proposal provides an adequate number of car parking spaces on site to accommodate the anticipated demand for car parking as generated by the proposed development. It is considered that subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal provides sufficient car parking for staff while visitors to and from the site can be accommodated by the available on-street car parking.

It is noted that should parking restrictions be applied to the immediate streets surrounding the subject site (Bear Street / Albert Street / Park Street etc) through any future parking precinct plan that may be introduced, all future residents and employees of the proposed development would not be eligible for any such parking permits. A note to such effect should be included as part of any permit issued for the proposed development.

Clause 52.07: Loading & Unloading of Vehicles: The purpose of Clause 52.07 is to set aside land for loading and unloading of commercial vehicles to prevent loss of amenity and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

96

adverse effect on traffic flow and road safety. The following table outlines the provisions which are required to be met with regards to loading and unloading of vehicles. Floor Area of Building Minimum Loading Bay Dimensions

Area 27.4m² Length 7.6 metres Width 3.6 metres

2,600m² or less in single occupation

Height Clearance 4.0 metres For every additional 1,800m² or part Additional 18m²

A permit may be granted to reduce or waive these requirements if either: The land area is insufficient; and Adequate provision is made for loading and unloading vehicles to the satisfaction of the

responsible authority.

The proposal is not provided with a designated loading bay. However, through discussions between Council Planning Officers, Council’s Traffic Engineers and the applicant, it was suggested that a suitable onsite loading bay facility can be provided in the current location of car spaces 28-30. These car spaces would be increased in width (so as to provide 2 loading bay spaces), line marked and provided with adequate signage for the purposes of loading and unloading. It is considered that these two (2) loading bay spaces will be sufficient to accommodate the anticipated loading and unloading demands for the proposed retail premises and offices of the development. Furthermore, discussions with Council’s Traffic Engineers confirm that should the need arise to provide a larger loading bay facility for the proposed development, an on street loading bay facility can be provided. The optimal location for any on street loading bay would be along the site’s Albert Street property boundary. Further, it was advised that should such a loading bay be required, this would be provided as a result of further consultation with Council’s Traffic Engineers and should not form part of this application.

Overall, taking into consideration Council’s Traffic Engineers comments and suggestions, it is considered that a waiving of the loading bay requirements is appropriate in this instance. Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities: The statutory requirements for bicycle parking for the proposed development pursuant to Clause 52.34 of the Planning Scheme is as follows:- Proposed Use Requirement Offices: 1 staff space to each 300m2 and 1 customer space to each

500m2 if the floor area exceeds 1000m2 Retail Premises: 1 staff space to each 300m2 and 1 customer space to each

500m2 if the floor area exceeds 1000m2 A total of nine (10) bicycle spaces are required for the development (seven (7) staff bicycle parking spaces and three (3) visitor bicycle parking spaces). The development is provided

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

97

with twelve (12) bicycle parking spaces within the lower car park level and therefore complies with the requirements of this clause.

14.7 Other – Cultural Heritage Management Plan The subject site falls within an Area of Cultural Significance as identified under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. Therefore, as part of the application, the applicant submitted a report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates providing a detailed response in relation to the cultural sensitivity of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard. In general terms, following a review of the history of the Mordialloc Timber Yard, a site inspection and review of all available data and documentation, the report has determined that no known Aboriginal or archaeological heritage sites are located on the Mordialloc Timber Yard site. Therefore, it is considered that a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is not required to be provided as part of this application. However, the report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates does provide recommendations in the event that an Aboriginal Heritage Site is identified during any construction. It is considered that such recommendations should be included as part of a condition on any permit issued.

15.0 RESPONSE AGAINST GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS 15.1 Overdevelopment of the site (including height, scale, visual bulk and mass,

neighbourhood character, heritage concerns, drainage concerns etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The proposal adequately satisfies the policy directions and objectives of the Kingston

Planning Scheme including the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework;

The site is located within a Major Activity Centre and on land designated as an “Increased Housing Diversity Area” within the Residential Land Use Framework Plan at Clause 21.05 on the Kingston Planning Scheme;

The proposal does not raise any areas of concern with regard to the existing heritage buildings / features of Mordialloc;

The site has great access to various forms of transportation including public (Mordialloc Railway Station / various bus routes) and private transport modes and networks; and

The height, scale and overall built form is considered appropriate and adequately addresses various elements with regards to the character and built form of the Mordialloc Activity Centre.

Overall the development is consistent with the development provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme and is not considered to be an overdevelopment of the site. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

15.2 Car parking and Traffic Concerns (including lack of car parking, increase in traffic

movements etc):

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

98

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The development is considered to provide adequate car parking on site for the future

residents with regard to the relevant provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme; Visitor car parking is anticipated to be accommodated both on site and within the

existing on-street car parking spaces in the immediate vicinity of the subject site; It is considered that the existing road network will adequately handle any potential

increase in traffic movements to and from the site and in the immediate vicinity of the subject site as a result of the proposed development; and

There are various modes of transportation available in the immediate vicinity of the site including public (Mordialloc Railway Station / various bus routes) and private forms of transportation.

Overall the development is consistent with the car parking and traffic provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

15.3 Amenity based concerns (including overshadowing, overlooking, safety concerns and

visual impact concerns etc):

The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site for the following reasons:

The proposal has been provided with setbacks which are site responsive and which are

consistent with adjoining land uses and the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay of the Kingston Planning Scheme;

Suitable design features (materials / colours etc / light weight construction / glazing) have been provided in the built form so as to provide a response to the streetscape and neighbourhood character of Mordialloc;

The overall height of the proposal is in accordance with the requirements of Schedule 10 of the Design and Development Overlay of the Kingston Planning Scheme and has been kept to a maximum four (4) storeys and a maximum height of 14 metres; and

Overlooking and overshadowing by the proposal is considered minimal and should not impact on adjoining sensitive uses.

Overall the development is consistent with the amenity based provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal, subject to the inclusion of suitable planning conditions should be supported.

16.0 CONCLUSION: 16.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported

subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.

16.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

99

The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the

surrounding area; The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to

appropriate conditions); and, The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme,

including the MSS, Residential Development Policy, Mordialloc Activity Centre Policy, Mixed Use Zone and the Schedule to the zone, Design and Development Overlay, Environmental Audit Overlay, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).

16.3 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered

reasonable and warrants support. 17.0 RECOMMENDATION: That Council resolve to support the application for the development of this site for a three (3) storey commercial building, with a reduced car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 – Car Parking and reduced loading bay requirements pursuant to Clause 52.07 – Loading and Unloading of Vehicles of the Kingston Planning Scheme be issued, subject following conditions: 26. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible

Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 1st April, 2010, but modified to show:

a. the provision of an improved landscape plan and associated planting schedule for the site in accordance with the final development plans submitted;

b. a comprehensive drainage strategy for the development of the site incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design Treatments;

c. a notation on the plans stating that all proposed works in the road reserve must be constructed to the satisfaction of Roads & drains Department according to the engineering plans approved by the Council;

d. the redundant vehicle crossing to be removed and the Council’s assets to be reinstated to the satisfaction of the Council;

e. the access road longitudinal sections with grades and apex.

f. the provision of a notation stating that the footpath adjacent to the proposed development must be constructed to Council Standards of the Mordialloc Shopping Precinct at the time;

g. the provision of a notation stating that the Council road reserve and property boundaries are to be maintained and where there is no existing footpath, footpath levels are to be obtained from the Roads and Drains Department prior to the commencement of construction;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

100

h. the provision of a notation stating that all landscaping and construction is to be kept within the property boundary;

i. the provision of a notation stating that all new vehicle crossings are to be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

j. the provision of a notation stating that all vehicle crossovers which are not to be retained and used for vehicles access must be reinstated as kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

k. the common accessway for Stage 2 and Stage 3 of the overall Mordialloc Timber Yard re-development provided with a minimum width of 6 metres for its entirety;

l. car parking spaces 28-30 deleted and two (2) loading bay car parking spaces with minimum dimensions of 3.2 metres in width by 4.9 metres in length, with these spaces nominated for the purposes of 15 minute loading / unloading with appropriate signage and line marking provided for each space;

m. the provision of suitable “no stopping signage to be provided either side of the common accessway for Stage 2 and Stage 3 of the development;

n. the structural columns within the car parking areas should be located at least 400mm and no more than 1.4 metres from the entry end of their respective car space;

o. the surface material of all driveways / accessways and car parking spaces nominated in all-weather coloured concrete sealcoat, or similar;

p. the conditions required by the Department of Transport, pursuant to Condition 3 of this Permit;

q. the conditions required by Department of Sustainability and Environment, pursuant to Condition 4 of this Permit; and

r. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule, including samples (illustrated on an A4 or A3 sheet), for all external elevations and driveways of the development.

27. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

28. Conditions Required by Department of Transport:

a. The provision of a suitable sign to be erected at the front of the adjoining VicTrack owned car park stating that this car park is for commuter parking only.

b. The building materials along the railway corridor nominated as being non-reflective and avoiding the use of red and green colour schemes that may interfere with driver operations; and

c. All windows and built form that front the railway corridor should be constructed with noise attenuation materials including double glazing and appropriate wall attenuation materials to reduce amenity impacts.

d. The permit holder must take all reasonable steps to ensure that disruption to train operation within the railway corridor and bus operation along Albert Street and Park Streets is kept to a minimum during the construction of the development. Foreseen disruption to rail or bus operation during construction and mitigation measures must be communicated to Metro and the Director of Public Transport fourteen (14) days prior.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

101

e. The permit holder must ensure that all track, overhead power and supporting infrastructure is not damaged or that works do not cause unplanned disruption to rail operations. Any damage to public transport infrastructure must be rectified to the satisfaction of the Director of Public transport at the full cost of the permit holder.

f. The building and works must not encroach on the railway corridor to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Transport.

29. Conditions Required by Department of Sustainability and Environment:

a. No storage of materials on Crown land during or after the construction phase;

b. No parking of vehicles on Crown land during or after the construction phase; and

c. There must be no discharge of stormwater or other concentrated flow of water onto the Crown land. All stormwater and surface drainage should be directed to the legal point of discharge away from the Crown land.

30. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

31. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be complied with, unless with the further prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

32. Before commencement of the development, the proposed works within the road reserve as described in Condition 1b) must be in accordance with engineering plans submitted to and approved by the Council at the developer’s cost. A priced schedule of works within the road reserve and the payment of Council’s engineering fees of 3.25% of the cost of works are required to be submitted prior to approval of engineering plans. Proposed footpath levels must be obtained from Roads and Drains Department.

33. Any modifications to Council’s stormwater pits must be to the Council’s standards.

34. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater runoff quality and which also retains on site any increase in runoff as a result of the approved development. The system must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Council's Development Engineer can advise on satisfactory options to achieve these desired outcomes which may include the use of an infiltration or bioretention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system.

35. Before the development commences, a Stormwater Management Plan showing the stormwater works to the nominated point of discharge must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Stormwater Management Plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed stormwater works including all existing and proposed features that may have impact (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).

36. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties.

37. The entry/exit driveway to the basement car park must incorporate an apex no less than 150mm above the top of kerb level (abutting the vehicle crossing) or implement an alternative engineering solution for major flooding, approved by the Council.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

102

38. Prior to the commencement of the use or development authorised by this permit, the applicant must submit a Soil Management Plan to the Responsible Authority. The SMP must be generally in accordance with the plan prepared by Environmental Earth Sciences titled Limited Environmental Site Assessment (LESA). When approved, the SMP will form part of the permit under this permit and the actions required by the SMP must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

39. Before the use starts, a Waste Management Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the Planning Permit. Three (3) copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

i) Waste collection in accordance with the loading and collection conditions included on this permit.

j) Provision on the land for the storage and collection of garbage and other solid waste. This area must be graded and drained and screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

k) All waste material not required for further on-site processing must be regularly removed from the site. All vehicles removing waste must have fully secured and contained loads so that no wastes are spilled or dust or odour is created to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

l) In accordance with Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) requirements, arrangements for the storage, segregation and disposal of any infectious waste, potentially infectious waste (as defined by the EPA), and any prescribed waste.

The waste management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction the responsible authority. The waste management plan must not be modified unless with the consent of the responsible authority.

40. Before the commencement of any building or works on the land a Construction Management Plan (CMP) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The CMP must deal with the parking of vehicles during construction, delivery of materials, containment of waste on site and suppression of dust, construction over the public domain etc.

41. Before construction of the development starts, a Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. Three copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

a. the location of all areas to be used for staff / long term parking for the retail premises, offices and gymnasium within the lower and upper basement car parking levels of the building;

b. the provision of a notation stating that a minimum of two-hour free parking be provided for the visitors to the premises;

c. details of any arrangements for fee payment, including details of fees to be charged and the means by which such payment is to be collected;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

103

d. the provision of suitable signs and pavement markings to direct and control the flow of traffic into, within and exiting the site including for the basement and loading bay areas, with this to include suitable warning signs/signals for drivers and pedestrians;

e. the provision of all lighting and security arrangements for the basement;

f. full details of access arrangements to and from the site including full details of any proposed security arrangements for resident and long term parking in the lower basement level (i.e. boom gates restricting access, swipe cards to be used etc);

g. details of any traffic management measure to improve vehicles entry and exit to and from the site (i.e. keep clear line markings on Swanston Street etc).

The Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan must be implemented to the satisfaction the Responsible Authority. The Traffic and Car Parking Management Plan must not be modified unless with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.

42. Prior to the commencement of works, the report prepared by Andrew Long and Associates dated 2nd June, 2010, in response to the Aboriginal Heritage of the site must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the report will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

43. Prior to the commencement of works, the report prepared by Marshall Day Acoustics dated 29th October, 2009, in response to the Noise Impacts on the development must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the report will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

44. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the nature strip, kerb and channel, vehicle crossover and footpath must reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

45. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification.

46. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner.

47. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be:

a. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

b. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans.

c. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

d. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

48. All works on or facing the boundaries of adjoining properties must be finished and surface cleaned to a standard that is well presented to neighbouring properties in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

104

49. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

50. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue.

The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue.

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit.

Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit.

Note: Before removing / pruning any vegetation from the site, the applicant or any contractor engaged to remove any vegetation, should consult Council’s Vegetation Management Officer to verify if a Local Laws Permits is required for the removal of such vegetation.

Or

Should Council resolve not to support the application, that a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit be used on the following grounds:

1. The proposal would have an adverse affect on the amenity of the area.

2. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site.

3. The proposal exhibits excessive visual bulk and mass.

4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape.

5. The proposal fails to comply with the requirements of Clause 52.06 – Car Parking of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

105

The meeting was addressed by Clinton Tilley on behalf of the applicant.

Crs Dundas/Brownlees Council resolve to support the application for the development of this site for a three (3) storey commercial building, with a reduced car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 – Car Parking and reduced loading bay requirements pursuant to Clause 52.07 – Loading and Unloading of Vehicles of the Kingston Planning Scheme be issued, subject to 25 conditions and The following condition be inserted into Condition 1 of the recommendation: 1. The forecourt nominated as being finished at the same level to Australian Height Datum (AHD) as the footpath located along Bear Street and Albert Street 2. The provision of a minimum 800mm by 800mm splay to the north-east and north-west corner of the development at first and second floor level with façade of these splay to be constructed of glazing or similar to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 3. The first and second floor level of the Bear Street façade of the development is to be finished in the following materials: a) 600-800mm wide horizontal parallel panels of textured concrete. b) Glazing above each section of textured concrete panels. c) The top fascia board is to be either colourbond, a textured concrete finish or a painted finish to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

106

M 150 Planning Application KP137/09 – 238 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village

APPLICANT Acorn Planning ADDRESS OF LAND 238 Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley Village (Lot 10 on PS

004498) PROPOSAL Construction of two dwellings and construction and use of

the site as a child care centre PLANNING OFFICER Tess Johnson REFERENCE NO. KP137/10 RELEVANT STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 12: Metropolitan Development Clause 14: Settlement Clause 15: Environment Clause 16: Housing Clause 17: Economic Development Clause 19: Particular Uses & Development

RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy

ZONE Clause 32.06 – Residential 3 Zone OVERLAYS NIL PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 52.06: Car Parking Requirements Clause 52.29: Land Adjacent to a Road Zone Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities Clause 55: ResCode Two or more Dwellings on a Lot

GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 64: General Provisions for Use and Development of Land Clause 65: Decision Guidelines

RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA

Incremental Change Area

DECISION DATE BY 23rd May, 2010 STATUTORY DAYS 114 days as of 16th July, 2010 CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES / DATE RECEIVED

Plans considered are those lodged with the application and date stamped 16/3/2010. Plan ref 09-0710 Issue C, pages 1-5

1.0 KEY ISSUES 1.1 The main issues arising from this proposal relate to:

- Car Parking and Traffic considerations; - Amenity Considerations; and - Neighbourhood Character.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

107

2.0 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL’S FAILURE TO DETERMINE:

2.1 The permit applicant has lodged an application with the Victorian Civil and Administrative

Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine this application for planning permit within the required statutory time frame.

As such, Council is unable to formally determine the proposal though must, however, form a view as to the proposal which will be presented before the VCAT on a date yet to be scheduled. The purpose of this report, therefore, is to outline to Council its Officers views with respect to the appropriateness of this proposal.

3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS 3.1 The subject site is located on the south west side of Centre Dandenong Road, Dingley

Village, at the intersection with Tootal Road, and Old Dandenong Road. It is irregular in shape with a frontage width of 38.16 metres to Centre Dandenong Road, a maximum depth of 49.72 metres, and an overall area of approximately 1818m².

3.2 The site is encumbered by a 3.0 metre wide easement that traverses the front of the site

along the northern property boundary. This easement benefits Melbourne Water. 3.3 Existing vehicle access to the site is via a single width crossover (4.0 metres) located on the

north-east side of the property, with access from the service road off Centre Dandenong Road.

3.4 The site is currently occupied by an existing single storey dwelling with a garage, the site is

relatively flat. 3.5 Vegetation on the site is typical of that to be found on larger residential blocks with a variety

of shrubs and larger trees. 3.6 Surrounding land to the south, east and west of the subject site is used and developed for

residential purposes. Dwellings in the area are generally detached. 3.7 Land to the north, across Centre Dandenong Road contains commercial buildings including

a small neighbourhood shopping centre and a convenience store (Seven / Eleven) on the corner of the roundabout intersection with Tootal Road.

4.0 TITLE DETAILS 4.1 There appears to be no restrictions listed on the Certificate of Title. 5.0 PROPOSAL 5.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing dwelling and outbuildings and to develop and use this

site for a child care centre and two (2) double storey dwellings on this site.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

108

5.2 The key features of the proposed development are as follows:

Childcare Centre Ground Floor - Total floor area of 366.2 square metres. - Entrance, four playrooms to accommodate 60 children and amenities. - Play areas located to the rear and front of the building. - A total of 13 car spaces including two drop off bays, and one disabled car space. - Front setback of approximately 17.5 metres from Centre Dandenong Road. - The car park is setback 1.5 metres from the frontage of the site. - Access to the site is via the existing crossover via the service road off Centre Dandenong

Road. First Floor - Total floor area of 142.6 square metres. - Various offices, staff room, storage areas, meeting room, library and amenities.

General - Overall height of 7.4 metres. - Materials colours and finishes are face brick work, rendered cladding and colourbond

roofing. - The childcare centre is to accommodate sixty (60) children and twelve (12) full and part time staff. - A total of thirteen (13) car spaces are provided on site, including two (2) dedicated drop off

bays and one (1) disabled car space. - The proposed days / hours of operation are Monday to Friday; 7am – 7pm - It is proposed to remove several trees to the front of the site to make way for car parking;

many of the trees to the rear are to be retained. - No works are proposed to be constructed over the easement. - Vehicle access to the site for the childcare centre and dwellings is shared via the existing

crossover with access from the Service Road. Two (2) double storey side-by-side dwellings Ground Floor - Total floor area 97.1 square metres (including the garage). - Single garage and room for a tandem car space. - Kitchen meals and family area. - Access to private open space area to the rear of the site. First Floor - Each dwelling has a total area of 57.3 square metres. - Each dwelling has two bedrooms (master bedroom with ensuite) and a bathroom. General - Overall height of 7.0 metres.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

109

- Materials colours and finishes are a combination of face brick work, render and colourbond roofing.

- Vehicle access to the site for the childcare centre and dwellings is shared via the existing crossover with access from the Service Road.

5.3 Development summary for the residential dwellings: Dwelling Floor Area

(excluding garage / verandah)

Secluded Private Open Space

No. of Bedrooms proposed

No. of Car Parking Spaces provided

1 Ground 67.0m² First 57.3 m²

40.1m² (all secluded private open space)

2 1

2 Ground 67.0m² First 57.3m²

40.1m² (all secluded private open space)

2 1

5.4 The proposal has an overall (inclusive of the childcare centre and dwellings) site coverage of

35%. The site coverage of Dwelling 1 is 53.8% and Dwelling 2 is 53.7%. 5.5 The proposal has an overall site permeability of 39%. 5.6 Development Assessment Table: Criteria ResCode Requirement Proposed Development Provision Private Open Space

An area of 40m2, with one part of the privateopen space to consist of secluded private openspace at the side or rear of the dwelling with aminimum area of 25m2, a minimumdimension of 3 metres and convenient accessfrom a living room, OR

Both dwellings have private open space

A balcony of 8 square metres with a minimum width of 1.6 metres and convenientaccess from a living room, OR A roof-top area of 10 square metres with a minimum width of 2 metres and convenient access from a living room.

provided at ground level. The provision meets the standard (40.1m2 to each dwelling) with a minimum dimension of 5 metres and convenient access from a living room.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

110

Car Parking

One (1) car parking space for one (1) or two(2) bedroom dwelling

The dwellings comply with one (1) space provided to each two bedroom dwelling. OR

Two (2) car parking spaces for each three (3)or more bedroom dwelling, with one (1)space under cover

The table at Clause 52.06-5 sets out the number of car spaces required for uses not covered by a parking precinct plan or another clause. Where a use is not specified in the table at Clause 52.06-5, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. It is noted that child care centre is not specified in the table at Clause 52.06-5, and as such, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The adequacy of the number car spaces provided is assessed outside the planning permit process and is approved or declined under consent. This is further discussed later within this report.

Visitor Car Parking

One (1) visitor space for every 5 dwellings N/A

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

111

Front Setback

Front Street: the same distance as the setback

of the front wall of the existing building onthe abutting allotment facing the front street(i.e. 8m). Side Street: Front walls of new development fronting the side street of a corner site should be setback at least the same distance as the setback of the front wall of any existing building on the abutting allotment facing the side street (13.3m) or 3 metres, whichever is the lesser (i.e. 3m) Side walls of new development on a corner site should be setback the same distance as the setback of the front wall of any existing building on the abutting allotment facing the side street (13.3m) or 2 metres, whichever is the lesser (i.e. 2m).

The dwellings are setback more than 9 metres from Centre Dandenong Road and comply with the standard.

Site Coverage

Maximum 60% - as per ResCode Overall site coverage is 53.8% and meets the ResCode standard

6.0 PLANNING CONTROLS 6.1 The subject site is located within a Residential 3 Zone. 6.2 Centre Dandenong Road is identified in a Road Zone Category 1. 7.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 7.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.06 – Residential 3 Zone, a Planning Permit is required to use the site

for a Child Care Centre. 7.2 Pursuant to Clause 32.06-4 – Residential 3 Zone, a Planning Permit is required to construct

two or more dwellings on a lot. 7.3 Pursuant to Clause 32.06-7 – Residential 3 Zone, a Planning Permit is required to construct

buildings and works in association with a Section 2 Use (child care centre). 7.4 Pursuant to Clause 52.06 a permit may be granted to reduce or to waive the number of car

spaces required by the table at 52.06-5. Where a use is not specified in the table at Clause 52.06-5, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. It is noted that child care centre is not specified in the table at Clause 52.06-5, and as such, no planning permit is required to reduce or to waive the number of car spaces required to be provided. Therefore, pursuant to Clause 52.06-1 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

112

the Responsible Authority. The adequacy of the number car spaces provided is assessed outside the planning permit process and is approved or declined under consent.

7.5 Pursuant to Clause 52.29 – Land Adjacent to a Road in a Road Zone Category 1, a Planning

Permit is required to construct or alter an access to a Road in a Road Zone Category 1. It is noted that no direct access to Centre Dandenong Road is sought and as such, no permit is required under this provision.

8.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 8.1 Council records indicate the following Planning Permit has been issued for the site which

includes:

- Planning Permit No. KP962/08 was issued on for the construction of five (double storey) dwellings on the site. The permit is still valid, albeit without plans satisfying Condition 1 of the permit.

9.0 AMENDMENT TO THE APPLICATION BEFORE NOTIFICATION 9.1 No amendments made. 10.0 ADVERTISING 10.1 The proposal was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners

and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Nine (9) objections to the proposal were received. The grounds of objection are summarised as follows: - Inconsistent with neighbourhood character

- Increase in noise

- Tree removal

- Traffic concerns, including;

o Insufficient car parking provided for childcare centre

o Increase in traffic volumes within the area

o Lack of information provided within the Traffic Report submitted by the applicant

o Neighbouring roundabout is already congested and dangerous

o Safety concerns

11.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 11.1 A preliminary conference was held on 27th May, 2010 with the relevant Planning Officer,

the Permit Applicant and fifteen residents (15) in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

113

11.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand.

12.0 REFERRALS 12.1 The application was referred to externally to VicRoads pursuant to Section 55 of the Act,

who advised of no objection to the proposal. However, they did raise the following note for Council to further consider;

‘Vic Roads would like to advise Council that according to comments provided by our Traffic Operation Team, vehicles leaving the proposed site may need to travel on the south-western side of the service road to improve their existing movement onto Centre Dandenong Road. This may be in conflict with vehicles entering from Centre Dandenong Road, such that vehicles may have to wait until exiting vehicles have turned left.’

12.2 These comments were forwarded to Councils Traffic Department who responded accordingly (also refer to Section 14.6 of this report for a comprehensive response from Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer). I refer to VicRoads' letter of 1 July 2010 containing their comments in relation to this application, and offer the following comments in response:

- I have prepared a 'swept path' diagram (see below) that demonstrates that the vehicle

movements VicRoads refer to in the 3rd paragraph (namely are actually achievable without any need to 'travel on the south-western side of the service road' or 'be in conflict'.

- The swept path diagram shows that this is not the case (i.e. yellow path). In fact, it is from the dedicated right-hand-turn lane (refer the orange path of vehicle no. [1] on diagram), a similar movement to that described (i.e. u-turn), that will be more difficult to execute.

- The diagrams I've presented here are not intended to represent conflict that may occur. They simply represent how the individual turning movements 'in question' are positioned relative to one another (i.e. in a spatial sense), and how they can be executed safely without conflict occurring.

- The only movement (among all those represented) that can be considered as being 'difficult' is the u-turn from the dedicated right-hand-turn lane. I need to highlight that this is an existing scenario and has no direct bearing on the current planning application.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

114

Figure above: Council’s Senior Traffic Engineers representation of ‘swept path’. 12.3 The application was referred to the following internal departments within Council:

- Development Engineer; - Traffic Engineer; - Roads and Drains Department; and - Vegetation Management Officer. The departments advised of no objection, subject to the inclusion of a number of conditions on any permit issued;

13.0 RELEVANT POLICIES 13.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

- Clause 12 (Metropolitan Development)

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

115

- Clause 14 (Settlement)

- Clause 16 (Housing)

- Clause 17 (Economic Development)

- Clause 19 (Particular Uses and Development)

13.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)

- Clause 21.06 (Retail and Commercial Land Use)

- Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use)

- Clause 21.10 (Non Urban Areas)

- Clause 21.12 (Transport, Movement and Access)

- Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy)

13.3 Zoning

- Clause 32.06 (Residential 3 Zone)

13.4 Overlays

- There are no overlay controls that apply to this site.

13.5 Particular Provisions

The following Clauses are applicable to this application:

- Clause 52.06 (Car Parking)

- Clause 52.29 (Land Adjacent to a Road Zone)

- Clause 55 (Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings)

13.6 General Provisions

- Clause 64 (Land used for more than one use)

- Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)

13.7 Other

13.8 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document under Clause 21.05 –

Residential Land Use of the LPPF)

The land is located within Area 49 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines. The proposal is generally in accordance with the applicable character profile.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

116

13.9 Design Contextual Housing Guidelines (April 2003 – reference document within Clause

22.11 – Residential Development Policy) The Design Contextual Housing Guidelines offer a range of design techniques and

suggestions to assist with residential design, which is responsive to local character. It is considered that the proposed development does not raise any issues of non-compliance

with these guidelines. 14.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 14.1 State Planning Policy Framework

The application has been assessed against the State Planning Policy Framework and it is considered that the proposed development is consistent with relevant policies contained within this section of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The proposal allows for the use of the land for a commercial use in an area designated for residential and community use. It supports Clause 12 Metropolitan Development and Clause 17 Economic Development, which are closely aligned with the objectives of Melbourne 2030, through the co-location of uses serving community needs within residential areas. The proposal will provide an improved quality of buildings on the site and provide activation of the site.

14.2 Clause 21.05 - Residential Land use

The subject land is identified within an Incremental Housing Change area. The type of housing change anticipated in these areas will take the form of extensions to existing houses, new single dwellings or the equivalent of new two dwelling developments on average sized lots. The existing single dwelling character of these areas is to be retained. The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include: Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to

increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change.

Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality.

Objective 3: To preserve and enhance well landscaped/vegetated environments and protect identified significant vegetation.

Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

117

Objective 5: To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses.

Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.

Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:

- Promote lower density housing in established suburban areas that do not have direct

access to activity/transport nodes and "encourage" only incremental change in housing density (incremental housing change areas). Such areas will retain their predominantly single dwelling character and incremental change will occur in the form of single dwellings or the equivalent of dual occupancy developments on average sized lots.

- Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood.

- Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants.

- Encourage the retention of existing vegetation wherever possible.

- Improve landscape character by accommodating appropriate landscaping within new residential developments.

- Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, wast and recycling, and stormwater management.

- Promote medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations.

- Ensure the siting and design of new residential development sensitively responds to interfaces with environmentally sensitive areas, including the foreshore.

- Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts.

- Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required, where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure.

- Require the provision of car parking to satisfy the anticipated demand having regard to average car ownership levels in the area, the environmental capacity of the local street network and the proximity of public transport and nearby on and off street car parking.

- Ensure that all new medium density housing provides adequate private open space that is appropriately landscaped.

It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates a good

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

118

standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, and does not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts to occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area. It is considered that the development will respect the existing streetscape character, and the broader local neighbourhood character.

14.3 Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy

As outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable Local Planning Policy Framework, which essentially aims to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations. Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to: - Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to

neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered.

- In areas where building placement makes a major contribution to neighbourhood character, design new development to reinforce the established rhythm of buildings in the street and retain the existing single dwelling character of the streetscape.

- Design duplex and side-by-side development to have a visual interconnection with the street rather than presenting merely as garages and front doors only. Staggered front building lines and variation in designs and materials should be used to avoid poor urban design impacts upon streetscapes.

Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:

- Encourage the two storey component of new medium density housing to be located towards the front of a site.

- Ensure that two storey dwellings are designed to respond to the character of the local neighbourhood. Where the local neighbourhood is characterised by single storey development and this characteristic makes a major or critical contribution to neighbourhood character, new two storey development should incorporate rooms within the roof form of attic style dwellings, and should set the second storey building envelope back from the ground level envelope.

- Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours.

- Encourage well articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk.

- Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows.

- Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties.

- Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

119

Whilst the proposed development is for two, double storey dwellings, it is not considered necessary to require the dwellings to be attic-style in this instance. The site is located on a relatively prominent corner, within the Incremental Housing Change area. The dwellings, while distinct from surrounding developments, have been sensitively designed with provision for landscaping to soften the built form. At the street elevations, the second storey building envelope has been set back from the ground floor envelope to reduce its ‘box-like’ effect. It is therefore submitted that the proposal would sit comfortably within the established neighbourhood. Further it should be noted that an existing planning permit KP962/08 (still valid) allowed for the development of this site for five (5) double storey dwellings. Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to: - Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents

and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape. Performance measures

- Locating garages or carports at the rear of dwellings fronting a street wherever possible.

- Ensuring that where garages are located in the street elevation, they are set back a greater distance than the front wall of the building.

- Ensuring that garages and carports are sited so that a tandem car parking space can be provided in front of the garage or carport.

- Incorporating garages and carports within the main roof line of the dwelling.

Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:

- Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems.

Performance measures

On-site infiltration should be maximised by:

- Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving.

- Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system.

- Designing to limit the impervious area.

- Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.

Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy essentially extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) along with the State Planning Policy Framework provisions found at Clause 14.02-2 – Settlement and Clause 16.02 – Medium Density Housing, effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

120

In summary, the proposal is considered to be consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it provides for an intensification of a lot within walking distance of a local shopping centre and has good access to public transport via three bus routes.

Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy of the Kingston Planning Scheme encourages single dwellings or dual occupancy style developments on ‘average sized lots’ within areas designated for Incremental Housing Change. Council’s Strategic Planning Department undertook a study across the municipality in 2003 to identify any emerging patterns with regard to average lot sizes. As such, six (6) areas were identified within the municipality, each having their own ‘average lot size’ calculation. The subject site is identified within Area 3 of this study. The average lot size within this area has been calculated to be 595m2, which results in a suggested development density of 1 dwelling per 297.5m2. It is therefore considered that this proposal would meet this strategy as the subject site has an area of 1818m2.

14.4 Zoning Provisions

Clause 32.06: Residential 3 Zone: The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone specifies variations to three standards of Clause 55 (ResCode), namely:

- Standard B8 – Site Coverage: The local variation is nominated as a maximum of 50%.

The proposed overall site coverage for the development is 35% and is consistent with the Schedule requirements.

- Standard B28 – Private Open Space: The local variation requires an area of 40m2, with

one part of the private open space to consist of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with a minimum area of 40m2, a minimum dimension of 5 metres and convenient access from a living room. If a dwelling has more than 2 bedrooms an additional ground level private open space area of 20m2 with a minimum width of 3 metres is required to be provided for each additional bedroom, with a maximum of 80m2 of private open space required for the dwelling.

The area and dimensions of private open space to each dwelling are in accordance with the requirements of the Schedule. Each dwelling has two bedrooms and provides 40.1 m2 of private open space with a minimum dimension of 5 metres, accessible from the living room.

- Standard B32 – Front Fences: The local variation requires a front fence within 3 metres

of a street must not exceed 2 metres in height for streets in a Road Zone – Category 1 or 1.2 metres in height for any other street.

The proposed front fence to the dwellings is 1.2 metres high (within the site) and accords with the Schedule requirements.

14.5 Particular Provisions

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

121

The application has been assessed against the relevant particular provisions and it is considered that the proposed use and development meets the requirements contained within this section of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

14.6 Clause 52.06 – Car Parking

Pursuant to Clause 74 of the Kingston Planning Scheme the proposed use would fall under the category of kindergarten which is located within the wider category of child care centre. A child care centre is defined as land used to care for five or more children who are not permanently resident on the land. Neither of these uses, child care centre or kindergarten, are listed within the table of Clause 52.06-5 ‘Car Parking’. Where a use is not specified in the table at Clause 52.06-5, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The adequacy of the number car spaces provided is assessed outside the planning permit process and is approved or declined under consent. Whilst the proposed use as a kindergarten (childcare centre) does not specifically require planning approval for the reduction or waiving of car parking requirements, it is noted that there is the potential for amenity impacts that arise as a result of car parking and traffic pressures. This has been reinforced by comments received from both objectors and from Councils Traffic Department, detailing concerns with pedestrian access and the suitability of Shannon Court as a feeder road. The Kingston Planning Scheme does not have a specific rate for childcare centres. An empirical rate of 0.7 car spaces per child minder/staff member, and 0.1 car spaces per child has been used as the basis of recent applications in the past two (2) years. This rate has been used by a number of Traffic Consultants and has been applied consistently as being and appropriate rate, taking into consideration access to public transport in the area. This rate has also been applied by the Permit Applicant within the Traffic Report submitted by O’Brien Traffic Consultants. Empirical Requirement - 12 staff at a rate of 0.7 car parking spaces requires 8.4 car spaces

- 60 children at a rate of 0.1 car parking spaces requires 6 car spaces

- Total car parking requirement for the proposed child care centre is therefore 14.4 car parking spaces

- Total spaces provided for the proposed child care centre is 13 car parking spaces

- This results in a shortfall of 1.4 car parking spaces

These empirical rates are reinforced up by recent studies referred to by the applicant’s traffic engineers including:

“Figures from a child care centre in Bond Street, Ringwood (90 children, 14 staff). For parent parking, the peak rate ranged between 0.09 spaces / child (AM peak) to 0.12 spaces

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

122

/child (PM peak). For the staff parking, the peak rate ranged between 0.06 spaces / child (AM peak) to 0.11 spaces / child (PM peak). We have adopted the higher rates (0.12 spaces / child for parent parking, 0.11 spaces / child for staff parking).” The proposal requires 14.4 spaces to be provided pursuant to empirical rates and will have a shortfall of 1.4 car parking spaces, as only 13 spaces are proposed. Further to this, it is noted that increases in general traffic are likely to occur during drop off and pick up times, which are typically from 8.00am till 9.00am and 5.00pm till 6.30pm respectively. Due to the shortfall in parking spaces and the increase in traffic movements, comments were sought from Councils Traffic Department who noted the following: - Shannon Court is a no-through road, and therefore does not have ANY through (or 'by-

pass') traffic. All traffic belongs to the local residents and their visitors. Essentially, the twenty-four (24) properties located within this self-enclosed area comprising Shannon Court and Rivoli Court, generates negligible traffic volumes.

- Whilst Council hasn't undertaken any traffic speed/volume surveys in Shannon Court; this would also suggest that historically issues of a speeding or 'excessive volumes' nature have never arisen to warrant a survey to be undertaken.

- An investigation of Council's TRIM (the electronic file/document management system) has not identified the existence of ANY correspondence that is of a 'traffic engineering' nature. I have also checked with the Team Leader of the Traffic Department; to the best of her knowledge she is unaware of any 'traffic engineering' issues relating to Shannon Court.

- It is considered that the development has satisfactorily met its parking requirements under the Planning Scheme and is therefore considered to have sufficient capacity to accommodate parents during the Centre's arrival and departure times. I wouldn't preclude a particular parent (or two) having the predisposition to park in Shannon Court, but it is considered highly unlikely that they will resort to this.

- I recall circa 2005, that VicRoads undertook a major intersection redesign of the roundabout at Centre-Dandenong Rd/Old Dandenong Road/Kingston Road (extending to include the dedicated right-hand turn lane at Shannon Court). These changes can be evidenced from the aerial photos of 2004 and 2005 - the biggest modification being to the re-alignment of Tootal Road which once intersected with Centre Dandenong at Shannon Court and was relocated to the Kingston Drive roundabout as part of the re-design.

- An investigation into the VicRoads 'CrashStats' website reveals no accident history at the Shannon Court intersection in the previous five years.

For reasons outlined above, it is considered that the car parking rate is appropriate and should adequately service the needs of the site.

14.7 Other recommendations provided by Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer are as follows;

- Due to the narrowness of the service road (approx. 6 metres), kerbside parking will needs to be banned, to permit two-way flow. This will be followed up separately to this planning permit application and appropriate signalisation installed within the kerb.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

123

- There is no mention of the change in alignment at the interface between the service road and the development sites vehicle crossover. It is considered that the existing crossover should be widened to a minimum of 6.0 metres to allow vehicles to enter / exit freely. This matter can be addressed via condition(s) of any permit issued.

- It is critical that the vehicle entrance be redesigned such that vehicles and pedestrians can enter and exit simultaneously without conflicting with each other. An access point should be provided exclusively for pedestrians with access directly from the existing public footpath. This would avoid conflict with the entering/exiting vehicles mentioned above. This matter can be addressed via condition(s) of any permit issued.

- The disabled parking space '11' shall be switched with visitor space '10'; to be better placed nearer the porch entry. This matter can be addressed via condition(s) of any permit issued.

- Car spaces '12' and '13' are ambiguously labelled as both 'drop off' and 'disabled'. The applicants have advised the following: “based on the Building Code (1 space for every 50 carparking spaces or part thereof), 1 disabled space is appropriate for the development. Spaces 12 and 13 do not need to be disabled.” This matter can be addressed via the inclusion of a condition to require the removal of the reference to disabled spaces on the plans for spaces 12 and 13.

- The provision of bicycle facilities should be provided for the childcare centre. This matter can be addressed via condition(s) of any permit issued.

For the reasons outlined above, Council’s Traffic Department advised of no objection to the application. Subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal should not adversely impact on the surrounding street network.

14.8 Clause 52.29 – Land Adjacent to a Road Zone Category 1:

The site is adjacent to Centre Dandenong Road, which is within a Road Zone Category 1. It is proposed to widen the existing crossover as a part of the application, this was referred to Vic Roads for comment, who advised of no objection.

14.9 ResCode - Clause 55

The residential component of the proposal has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Kingston Planning Scheme. It is considered that the development largely satisfies the requirements of ResCode and is a well-designed development. There appear to be minor non-compliance (with the standards), which are discussed below:

Standard B5-Integration with the street As the proposed dwellings are located within the site, they do not have direct access to the site’s frontage; rather the dwellings and childcare centre share the vehicle access to the service road.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

124

It is considered that the access arrangement is not conducive to safe access for pedestrians. Council’s Traffic Department has recommended that conditions be included on any permit issued to provide separate and safe access for pedestrians. Standard B12 Safety As previously discussed within this report, in accordance with advice received from Council’s Traffic Department, the pedestrian access and the vehicular access should be separated in order to provide for safe access to both the dwellings and the child care centre. Standard B14 Access Subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions as noted above the accessway can be designed to allow convenient, safe and efficient vehicle movements and connections within the development and to the street network. Standard B22 Overlooking The plans indicate that the first floor bathroom window of Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2 is obscure, however its does not indicate whether these windows are fixed or not. A condition should be placed on any permit issued to ensure that these windows are fixed to a minimum height of 1.7 metres above the first floor finished floor level to prevent any undue overlooking into the neighboring property and childcare centre. The south facing first floor master bedroom windows of each dwelling are setback 8.34 metres from the sites rear property boundary and remain unscreened. In accordance with Standard B22, a window within 9 metres of adjoining private open space area should be designed to avoid direct views into this neighboring property. The adjoining property to the south-eastern corner of the site is No. 2 Shannon Court, which has a wooden shed and brick garage located along the property boundary, including a covered carport and two pergola’s located further within the rear yard. It is not considered that the first floor master bedrooms would result in any undue detriment via overlooking and therefore reasonable for these windows to remain unscreened. Standard B23 Internal Views In response this standard, there is opportunity for internal views from the first floor south facing master bedroom windows into the private open space of the proposed dwellings. A condition should be placed on any permit issued to address this matter via the erection of an external screen or similar, to limit views into these areas. Standard B31 Design Detail A condition of permit will be included that requires the submission of a schedule of materials and finishes. These should reflect a controlled mix of colours and materials with complementary natural tones.

14.10 General Provisions

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

125

14.11 Clause 64.01 of the Kingston Planning Scheme requires that if land is used for more than one use and one use is not ancillary to the other, each use must comply with this scheme. It is submitted that the dwelling use and the child care centre use are not linked together in any manner and are therefore not ancillary to each other. As such, each use must comply with the Kingston Planning Scheme.

Subject to the permit containing conditional requirements, the only area of possible non-compliance with the scheme is site coverage for the residential dwelling component only. The Residential 3 Zone has within its Schedule a more onerous requirement with regards to Standard B8 of ResCode (Site Coverage). The standard requires a maximum of 50% site coverage. As noted in section 4.4 of this report, the proposal has an overall site coverage of 35% with site coverage to dwelling 1 of 53.8% and dwelling 2 of 53.7%. On the most conservative reading of the scheme, the calculation of the lot size would be limited to the area to be used for dwellings. As such, the site coverage would 53.8% and 53.7% for each dwelling and would not be in accordance with the standard. Whilst the standard is amended at the schedule to the Residential 3 Zone, the development is not required to meet this standard; rather, the objective must be met. Clause 55 states that: A development:

- Must meet all of the objectives of this clause.

- Should meet all of the standards of this clause. If the schedule to a zone specifies a requirement of a standard different from a requirement set out in this clause, the requirement in the schedule to the zone applies. The site coverage is found to comply with the objective which is: To ensure that the site coverage respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site. It is considered that, notwithstanding the non-compliance with the standard, the proposal complies with the scheme as it complies with the objective of Clause 55.03-3.

15.0 RESPONSE AGAINST GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS

The following includes response to concerns raised by objectors that have not been address above.

15.1 Inconsistent with neighbourhood character

A number of the objectors considered that the proposed childcare centre would be inconsistent with the neighbourhood character of the area and present as an overdevelopment on the site. While it is acknowledged that many objectors consider that

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

126

two dwellings and a child care centre on a lot of this size (1818m2) amounts to an overdevelopment of the site, it is important to note that the proposal’s performance against the relevant criteria of the Planning Scheme indicates that the development proposed is not unreasonable. The proposal does not exhibit the usual indicators of overdevelopment, such as excessive site coverage, inadequate setbacks, excessive building bulk, overshadowing, insufficient on-site car parking, poor internal amenity, etc., and is therefore deemed an acceptable development for the site that should compliment the existing character of the area.

15.2 Increase in noise 15.3 It is considered that the increases in noise that will arise from the proposal will be

negligible. The dwelling use is entirely in accordance with the zoning of the land as Residential 3 Zone. It is considered that the increase in dwelling density from one to two will not impact on the quiet enjoyment of private open spaces of surrounding properties. The zone has as its purpose to: To provide for residential development at a range of densities with a variety of dwellings to meet the housing needs of all households.

The proposal is in accordance with this purpose and should not unduly impact on the amenity of the surrounding properties though increased residential noise.

It is appropriate to locate a child care centre use within the Residential 3 Zone as is evidenced by the purpose of the zone which seeks inter alia: In appropriate locations, to allow educational, recreational, religious, community and a limited range of other non-residential uses to serve local community needs. It is anticipated that the inclusion of a child care centre would result in an element of an increase in noise levels experienced within the area during weekdays, between the hours of 7am till 7pm Monday to Friday. However, the use is not proposed to operate on weekends when most people can expect to be able to quietly enjoy their private open spaces. Given the context of the site, being located on a very busy intersection at the convergence of five roads, it is considered that the residential properties in the vicinity do not currently experience pristine silence that would be jarred through the sound of young children at play during weekdays. It is considered reasonable to allow a use that might increase background noise during the week in such a location. Having said this, it is considered appropriate to require a condition of permit to protect inappropriate noise in accordance with EPA guidelines and Australian Standards.

15.4 Tree removal

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

127

A condition would be placed on any permit issued requiring the submission of a Landscape Plan detailing the location, species and size at maturity of new trees and shrubs to be planted on site. In conjunction with the retention of the majority of trees to the rear, and some vegetation to the front of the site, it is considered that these provisions can adequately ameliorate concerns regarding the removal of trees. The site can remain relatively verdant. Importantly, Council’s Senior Vegetation Management Officer offered no objection to the proposed development.

15.5 Traffic concerns, including;

- Insufficient car parking provided for childcare centre

As discussed at length in Section 14.6 of this report, a car parking ‘rate’ is not specified for a child care centre within the Clause 52.06 Car Parking of the Kingston Planning Scheme. As such, an adequate number of car spaces must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. An empirical rate of 0.7 car spaces per child minder/staff member, and 0.1 car spaces per child has been used as the basis of recent applications in the past two (2) years for other childcare centers within the City of Kingston, within other municipalities and at the Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). This rate has been used by a number of Traffic Consultants and has been applied consistently as being and appropriate rate, taking into consideration access to public transport in the area. Using these rates as applicable to this application a total of 14.4 car spaces are required (12 staff @ 0.7 = 8.4 car spaces and 60 children @ 0.1 = 6 car spaces). The proposed child care centre provides 13 car spaces, resulting in a shortfall of 1.4 spaces. It is considered that there is sufficient car parking to service the needs of the child care centre. It is considered that subject to the inclusion of the above conditions, the car parking provision will not adversely impact on the surrounding street network. - Increase in traffic volumes within the area As discussed in Section 14.6 of this report, whilst the acknowledged that the proposed use would generate an addition of traffic to and from the proposed child care centre, Council’s Traffic Engineers do not believe that this would be unreasonable. An investigation into the VicRoads 'CrashStats' website reveals no accident history at the Shannon Court intersection in the previous five years.

Concerns relating to traffic volumes appear to be related to the existing conditions of the large roundabout at Centre Dandenong Road.

Council’s Traffic Engineers have acknowledged that due to the narrowness of the service road (approx. 6 metres), kerbside parking will need to be banned, to permit two-way flow. This can be accommodated as a condition on any permit issued (see Condition 1 h).

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

128

- Lack of information provided within the Traffic Report submitted by the applicant Council’s Traffic Engineering Department were satisfied with the information provided within the submitted Traffic Report. Whilst some empirical evidence was not provided, Council Officers are satisfied with the information submitted and have undertaken an independent assessment to substantiate the details submitted. These empirical rates are backed up by recent studies referred to by the applicants traffic engineers including:

“Figures from a child care centre in Bond Street, Ringwood (90 children, 14 staff). For parent parking, the peak rate ranged between 0.09 spaces / child (AM peak) to 0.12 spaces /child (PM peak). For the staff parking, the peak rate ranged between 0.06 spaces / child (AM peak) to 0.11 spaces / child (PM peak). We have adopted the higher rates (0.12 spaces / child for parent parking, 0.11 spaces / child for staff parking).” The development will require 14.4 spaces to be provided pursuant to empirical rates and will have a shortfall of 1.4 car parking spaces, as only 13 spaces are proposed. Further to this, it is noted that increases in general traffic are likely to occur during drop off and pick up times, which are typically from 8.00am till 9.00am and 5.00pm till 6.30pm respectively. - Neighbouring roundabout is already congested and dangerous There has been no concern raised from Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer in relation to the traffic volume / congestion or safety concerns in relation to the existing roundabout. The point of entrance / exit to the site is an existing condition, and subject to the inclusion of suitable permit conditions should adequately service the site. - Safety concerns

Concern was raised with regards to the safety of pedestrians and also on neighbouring traffic volumes. It is considered that with the inclusion of a number of conditions concerns relating to safety within the site can be adequately addressed and would be unlikely to cause safety or manoeuvrability problems for users / residents of the site.

15.6 Importantly and as previously discussed within this report, Council’s Senior Traffic Engineer offered no objection to the proposed development, particularly with regards to the large number of objections received with regards to traffic / car parking related concerns. It is considered that the objector’s concerns have been addressed, where appropriate, and, subject to the inclusion of appropriate conditions (including those discussed is this report) the proposed use of the land for a child care centre is appropriate to the site and its location in the Residential 3 Zone.

It is, therefore, recommended that the application be supported. 16.0 CONCLUSION: 16.1 It is submitted that the proposal be supported subject to the adoption of the recommended

conditions.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

129

The proposed use and development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:

- The design and siting of the proposed development which is compatible with the

surrounding area;

- The proposal does not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and,

- The proposal satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the SPPF, MSS, Zoning controls and Particular Provisions.

On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered reasonable and warrants support.

17.0 RECOMMENDATION:

That Council resolve to support the development and use of this site for a childcare centre, and two dwellings, based on the following conditions:

1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 16th March, 2020, but modified to show: a. the provision of a landscape plan in accordance with the submitted development plan

and the City of Kingston Landscape Plan Checklist, with such plans to be prepared by a suitably qualified landscape professional and incorporating:

i. an associated planting schedule showing the proposed location, species type, mature height and width, pot sizes and number of species to be planted on the site. The schedule must be shown on the plan;

ii. the delineation of all garden beds, paving, grassed areas, retaining walls, fences and other landscape works including areas of cut and fill throughout the development;

iii. all existing trees on the site and within three (3) metres to the boundary of the site on adjoining properties, accurately illustrated to represent actual canopy width and labelled with botanical name, height and whether the tree is proposed to be retained or removed;

iv. a range of plant types from ground covers to large shrubs and trees; v. adequate planting densities (e.g.: plants with a mature width of 1 metre, planted at 1

metre intervals); vi. the provision of one (1) suitable medium to large size (at maturity) canopy tree

within the front setback of the property, with species chosen to be approved by the Responsible Authority.

vii. sustainable lawn areas and plant species taking current water restrictions into consideration;

viii. all trees provided at a minimum of two (2) metres in height at time of planting;

ix. medium to large shrubs to be provided at a minimum pot size of 200mm; and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

130

x. the provision of notes on the landscape plan regarding site preparation, including the removal of all weeds, proposed mulch, soil types and thickness, subsoil preparation and any specific maintenance requirements.

b. the surface material of all driveways / accessways and car parking spaces nominated in

all-weather coloured concrete sealcoat, or similar;

c. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule (including samples) for all external elevations and driveways of the development;

d. the provision of rainwater tanks clearly nominated for dwellings and child care centre with water re-use for toilet flushing;

e. the existing vehicle crossing and driveway access widened to a minimum of 6 metres to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, to allow vehicles to enter and exit at the same time;

f. the details provided regarding the levels of the vehicle crossing;

g. the details provided regarding the maneuverability (vehicle turning and turn around point) for garbage collection;

h. a notation on the plans stating that the vehicle crossing will be constructed to industrial strength due to the volume of traffic;

i. the site entry / access point redesigned to ensure that vehicles and pedestrians can enter and exit simultaneously without conflicting with each other;

j. the provision of a separate access point provided for exclusive access for pedestrians to the dwellings and childcare centre and the subsequent reconfiguration of the site. This path should be constructed of a contrast material to the car park and provide connectivity between the existing public footpath within the service road and the subject site. This path and modifications to the existing site layout must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

k. the 1.2m high merbau front fence of Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2 setback a greater distance to allow for the provision of a separate pedestrian path, in accordance with condition 1k) of this permit, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

l. the provision of a gate (or similar) to the boundary fence along the eastern property boundary to allow for the public footpath to connect with the subject site, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

m. the height of all internal fencing clearly nominated;

n. the disabled car parking space '11', shall be switched with visitor space '10'; to be better placed nearer the porch entry of the child care centre;

o. the removal of the reference to disabled spaces on the plans for spaces ‘12’ and ‘13’;

p. the location of bicycle rail to be shown on the plans and elevations, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority;

q. the first floor bathroom window of Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2 fixed to a height of 1.7 metres above the first floor finished floor level; and

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

131

r. the provision of an external screening device or similar to prevent internal overlooking from the first floor south facing master bedroom of each dwelling.

2. The development and/or use as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater runoff quality and which also retains on site any increase in runoff as a result of the approved development. The system must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Council's Development Engineer can advise on satisfactory options to achieve these desired outcomes which may include the use of an infiltration or bioretention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system.

4. Before the development commences, a Stormwater Management Plan showing the stormwater works to the nominated point of discharge must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Stormwater Management Plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed stormwater works including all existing and proposed features that may have impact (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).

5. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties.

6. The amenity of the area must not be detrimentally affected by the development and/or use, through the:

i) Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land. ii) Appearance of any building, works or materials. iii) Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash,

dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil. iv) Presence of vermin.

v) Any other way. 7. Before occupation of the development hereby permitted, landscaping works as shown on the

endorsed plans must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Before occupation of the development hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles,

access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be:

ii) Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. iii) Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans. iv) Surfaced with an all-weather sealcoat to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. v) Drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. vi) Line-marked to indicate each car space, all access lanes and, if necessary, the direction in

which vehicles are to travel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. vii) In accordance with any Council adopted guidelines for the construction of car parks.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

132

Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. In areas set aside for car parking, measures must be taken to the satisfaction of the Responsible

Authority to prevent damage to fences or landscaped areas. 10. The child care centre use must operate only between the hours of:

Monday to Friday: 7.00am to 7.00pm

Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority in writing. 11. No more than 12 staff members shall be employed on the site at any one time. 12. The development and use of the site shall not cause nuisance or be detrimental to the

amenity of the neighbourhood by the emission of noise. In this regard any nuisance shall be assessed in accordance with the Australian Standards AS1055 and AS2107 relating to the measurement of Environmental Noise and recommended sound levels.

13. Concrete kerbs or other barriers must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

to prevent direct vehicle access to an adjoining road other than by a vehicle crossing. 14. All external surfaces of the building elevations must be finished in accordance with the schedule

on the endorsed plans and maintained in good condition to the Responsible Authority’s satisfaction.

15. Construction on the site must be restricted to the following times:

Monday to Friday: 7:00am to 7:00pm;

Saturday: 9:00am to 6:00pm; and

Sunday and Public Holidays: No construction permitted.

Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority in writing.

16. No signs or other advertising or identification may be erected or displayed on the site without

written Council consent. 17. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the

Responsible Authority. 18. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire

if one of the following circumstances applies:

The development and/or use are not started before two (2) years from date of this permit.

The development is not completed before one (1) year from the commencement of works.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

133

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Note: Prior to the commencement of the development or use you are required to obtain the necessary

Building Permit. OR In the event that Council choose not to support the officer’s recommendation, it can use the following grounds; 1. The proposal constitutes an overdevelopment of the site. 2. The proposal would have an adverse amenity impact on the established residential area. 3. Inadequate provision has been made for off-street car parking to cope with the demands of the

proposal. 4. The increased vehicular movements which would be generated by the proposal will cause traffic

congestions in the streets nearby. 5. The traffic generated by the proposal will aggravate an existing traffic problem in the locality. The meeting was addressed by Brian Pullen on behalf of the objectors and Naomi Salisbury on behalf of the applicant. Crs Peulich/Brownlees Council resolve not to support the application, that a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit be used on the following grounds: 1. The proposal constitutes an overdevelopment of the site. 2. The proposal would have an adverse amenity impact on the established residential area. 3. Inadequate provision has been made for off-street car parking to cope with the demands of the proposal. 4. The increased vehicular movements which would be generated by the proposal will cause traffic congestions in the streets nearby. 5. The traffic generated by the proposal will aggravate an existing traffic problem in the locality. Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

134

M 151 Planning Application KP09/865 – 31 Como Parade East, Mentone

APPLICANT Keen Planning Services Pty Ltd ADDRESS OF LAND 31-35 Como Parade East, PARKDALE VIC 3195 (Lot

2 on PS009354, Lot 1 on TP234189H and Lot 1 on TP572398K respectively)

PROPOSAL Construction of twenty seven (27) Dwellings PLANNING OFFICER Alison Slattery for Tess Johnson REFERENCE NO. KP-865/2009 RELEVANT STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 12: Metropolitan Development Clause 14: Settlement Clause 16: Housing Clause 19: Particular Uses & Development

RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use

Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy ZONE R1Z OVERLAYS N/A PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 55: Two or More Dwellings on a Lot &

Residential Buildings GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA

Increased Housing Diversity

DECISION DATE BY 26/6/2010 STATUTORY DAYS 118 days at 23.08.10 CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED

SK01-SK20 Rev A, Drawn by Moull Murray Architects and received by Council 29/6/10

1.0 KEY ISSUES 1.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to:

Traffic considerations Neighbourhood character Amenity impact (internal and external) Any areas of non-compliance with ResCode

2.0 APPLICATION FOR REVIEW AGAINST COUNCIL’S FAILURE TO DETERMINE:

2.1 The permit applicant has lodged an application with the Victorian Civil and Administrative

Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine this application for planning permit within the required statutory time frame.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

135

As such, Council is unable to formally determine the proposal though must, however, form a view as to the proposal which will be presented before the VCAT on a date yet to be scheduled. The purpose of this report, therefore, is to outline to Council its Officers views with respect to the appropriateness of this proposal.

3.0 PROPOSAL 3.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing three dwellings and outbuildings on the three sites

and construct twenty seven (27) dwellings, within a three storey, apartment style building on this site.

3.2 Development summary: Dwelling Floor Area

(excluding garage / verandah)

Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms proposed

No. of Car Parking Spaces provided

1 66m² 77m² 2 1 2 66m² 106m2 2 1 3 73m² 165m² 2 1 4 73m² 94m² 2 1 5 66m² 52m² 2 1 6 66m² 99m² 2 1 7 73m² 44m² 2 1 8 73m² 41m² 2 1 9 66m² 37m² 2 1 10 66m² 49m² 2 1 11 66m² 9m² 2 1 12 66m² 9m² 2 1 13 73m² 11m² 2 1 14 73m² 11m² 2 1 15 66m² 9m² 2 1 16 66m² 9m² 2 1 17 66m² 9m² 2 1 18 73m² 11m² 2 1 19 73m² 11m² 2 1 20 66m² 9m² 2 1 21 66m² 9m² 2 1 22 58m² 40m² 2 1 23 58m² 40m² 2 1 24 70m² 52m² 2 1 25 72m² 40m² 2 1 26 58m² 40m² 2 1 27 70m² 52m² 2 1

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

136

3.3 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 46 percent and a permeability percentage of 30

percent. 3.4 Development Assessment Table:

Criteria ResCode Requirement Proposed Development Provision Private Open Space

An area of 40m2, with one part of the private open space to consist of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling with a minimum area of 25m2, a minimum dimension of 3 metres and convenient access from a living room.

Complies All dwellings provide at least 40 square metres of open space, or a balcony of 8 square metres, accessible from a living area. The seclusion of the open spaces to dwellings 7-10 is discussed in Section 13 of this report.

Car Parking One (1) car parking space for one (1) or two (2) bedroom dwelling OR Two (2) car parking spaces for each three (3) or more bedroom dwelling, with one (1) space under cover

Complies Twenty seven, two bedroom dwellings are proposed with twenty seven car spaces provided, one for each dwelling.

Visitor Car Parking

One (1) visitor space for every 5 dwellings Does not meet standard. Four visitor spaces are provided, whereas five spaces are required. (refer to the ResCode discussion at section 13 of this report)

Front Setback Front Street: the same distance as the setback of the front wall of the existing building on the abutting allotment facing the front street (i.e. 8m). Side Street: Front walls of new development fronting the side street of a corner site should be setback at least the same distance as the setback of the front wall of any existing building on the abutting allotment facing the side street (13.3m) or 3 metres, whichever is the lesser (i.e. 3m) Side walls of new development on a corner site should be setback the same distance as the setback of the front wall of any existing building on the abutting allotment facing the side street (13.3m) or 2 metres, whichever is the lesser (i.e. 2m).

Does not comply-variation sought The front setback of the dwelling does not comply with Standard B6 of ResCode which requires a setback of at least 8.75 metres. The proposal includes a front setback varying from 6.0 metres to 9.0 metres. This will be discussed further in Section 13 (ResCode) to follow.

Site Coverage Maximum 60% - as per ResCode Site coverage is 46% and therefore complies

3.5 The proposed building materials, colours and finishes are noted below: 3.6 Colours include: charcoal, light grey, white, lime green, black, yellow, orange, purple,

green, pink, metallic silver and stainless steel.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

137

3.7 Finishes include: paint, render, flush plasterboard - painted finish, fibre cement sheet cladding – paint finish, rendered styrene, external stone tile, concrete precast panel paint finish, lift shaft over run conc. panel rendered finish, stone entry wall to foyer, grey tinted glass balustrade, anodised al framed grey tinted windows frame colour: charcoal, anodised al framed grey tinted sliding doors frame colour: charcoal, grey tinted glass balustrade fix to conc upstand, horizontal sun shades - 90x35 hardwood slats on galv. frame fixed to wall to engineers detail, vertical screen - 90x35 hardwood slats on galv. frame fixed to wall, exterior plywood lining to eaves, horizontal timber siding cladding, lysaght trimdek roof sheeting to falls on sisalation & safety mesh on purlins to engineers detail colour: colourbond 'shale grey', steel balustrade, rendered blockwork planter, security roller shutter door to basement carpark entry, projecting steel frame surrounding window, stainless steel gate, steel slat fence, timber slat fence, brick wall - dark grey, boral terracotta shingle roof tiles colour – savanna, horizontal sun shades – natural andosied aluminium slats on galv frame. fixed to wall, blockwork - rendered finish, timber feature door natural sealed finish timber panel continues above, building signage. 3d lettering to timber base, blockwork - fairface - stack bond, opaque glass glazed balustrade with steel handrail.

4.0 SITE & SURROUNDS 4.1 The subject site comprises three sites at 31, 33, and 35 Como Parade East. These are located

on the north east side of Como Parade East between Warrigal Road and Barry Street. 4.2 Combined, the area of the site is 2,199 square metres. The frontage of the site to Como

Parade East is 51.81 metres with a frontage to Barry Street of 29.55 metres. 4.3 Each site currently contains a single storey, detached dwelling, with 33 and 35 Como Parade

East also containing garages. 4.4 The site contains significant established vegetation both to the front, in the form of two

Liquidambar Trees and to the rear with several large Peppercorn Trees. The trees are not listed on Council’s Significant Tree Register.

4.5 There are no restrictions or easements listed on the three Certificates of Title. 4.6 Many street trees exist within the site’s Como Parade East frontage. 4.7 The surrounding area to the north is typically comprised of single storey dwellings with

pitched tiled roofs, however there are a number of multi-dwelling developments further along Como Parade East. There are a number of double storey developments within the wider locality.

4.8 The immediate context includes a two storey dwelling to 37 Como Parade East, single storey dwellings to the rear at 43 and 45 Warrigal Road, and a single storey dwelling to the north west at 29 Como Parade East. Opposite the site is the rail line serving the Frankston to City rail service. Beyond this, in Como Parade West are many three storey buildings being used in association with Mentone Grammar School. On the corner of Como Parade East and Warrigal Road, two sites beyond the subject site, is a two storey medical facility.

5.0 TITLE DETAILS 5.1 The Permit Applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there is no

restrictive covenant on the title. 6.0 PLANNING CONTROLS

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

138

6.1 The subject site is located within a Residential 1 Zone. 7.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 7.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.01, a planning permit is required to construct two (2) or more

dwellings on a lot. 8.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 8.1 A review of Council’s records indicates no previous planning permit application on any of

the three sites.

9.0 ADVERTISING 9.1 Prior to advertising the application, the Permit Applicant submitted revised plans on 26th

March, 2010, that essentially addressed the initial concerns outlined within the Planning Officer’s further information letter. It is these revised plans that formed part of the advertising documentation. (The plans for consideration by Council differ from the advertised plans insofar as they include further alterations as mooted during the preliminary conference and meetings between the permit applicant and Council officers.)

9.2 As discussed, the proposal was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite

property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Fourteen (14) objections, from eleven (11) addresses, to the proposal, were received. The valid grounds of objection raised can be summarised as follows:

Inaccurate plans Inappropriate location of bins Visual bulk Load on services Parking and traffic concerns Neighbourhood/streetscape character Overdevelopment Increase in height to fence to 37 Como Parade East to 1.8 metres plus 300mm

screening Removal of trees Impact of development on root structure of trees Overlooking/screening insufficient Overshadowing Noise impacts Loss of view Light glare Excessive site coverage In sufficient side and rear setbacks Peppercorn Tree at 33 Como Parade East needs to be protected Architectural design is poor and of an inappropriately modern vernacular

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

139

10.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 10.1 A preliminary conference was held on 18th May, 2010, with the relevant Planning Officer,

Ward Councillor(s), the Permit Applicant and owner, and seventeen (17) objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

10.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the

objections still stand. 11.0 REFERRALS 11.1 The following internal and/or external referral departments were notified:

Council’s Development Engineer Council’s Vegetation Management Officer Council’s Roads and Drains Officer Council’s Traffic Department Council’s Street Tree Officer Council’s Urban Designer

11.2 The above-mentioned referral authorities had no objection to the proposal, subject to

conditions being included on any permit issued. 12.0 RELEVANT POLICIES 12.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 12 (Metropolitan Development) Clause 14 (Settlement) Clause 16 (Housing) Clause 19 (Particular Uses and Development)

12.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy)

12.3 Particular Provisions

Clause 55 (Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings)

12.4 General Provisions Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)

12.5 Other

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

140

12.6 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document under Clause 21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF)

The land is located within Area 20 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines, which identifies five (5) character elements which are considered to make a ‘major’ contribution to the character of the area, these being lot pattern, building placement, building footprint, type and height of development, front boundary and garden, and other building features. Detached, single storey development is said to make a major contribution to the character of the area. While the buildings are three storey, it is considered that the proposal strikes a reasonable balance between the competing objectives of Council policy which seek to both encourage developments to respond to the character elements contained in the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines, while also allowing for design innovation to contribute to the evolving character of the Increased Housing Diversity area. The 3.0 metre wide break provided at the upper most level ensures that the buildings would appear as two large separate built forms on the land, which is more consistent with the character of the broader area. It is considered that the proposal has had due regard to the major character elements identified in the applicable character profile.

11.7 Design Contextual Housing Guidelines (April 2003 – reference document within Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy)

The Design Contextual Housing Guidelines offer a range of design techniques and

suggestions to assist with residential design, which is responsive to local character. It is considered that the proposed development does not raise any issues of non-compliance

with these guidelines. 13.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 13.1 State and Local Planning Policy Framework

It is considered that the proposed development generally complies and satisfies the State and Local Planning Policy Framework guidelines which aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations.

13.2 Clause 21.05 - Residential Land use

The subject land is identified within an Increased Housing Diversity area. The intention in these areas is for new medium density housing to comprise of a variety of housing types and layouts that respond to the established, yet evolving, urban character. As these residential areas are already established, the design of any new medium density housing proposal should display sensitivity to the existing residential context and respond to the amenity standards in these areas. The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

141

Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to

increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change.

Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality.

Objective 3: To preserve and enhance well landscaped/vegetated environments and protect identified significant vegetation.

Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development.

Objective 5: To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses.

Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.

Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:

Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity notes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character.

Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood.

Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants.

Encourage the retention of existing vegetation wherever possible.

Improve landscape character by accommodating appropriate landscaping within new residential developments.

Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, wast and recycling, and stormwater management.

Promote medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations.

Ensure the siting and design of new residential development sensitively responds to interfaces with environmentally sensitive areas, including the foreshore.

Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

142

Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required, where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure.

Require the provision of car parking to satisfy the anticipated demand having regard to average car ownership levels in the area, the environmental capacity of the local street network and the proximity of public transport and nearby on and off street car parking.

Ensure that all new medium density housing provides adequate private open space that is appropriately landscaped.

It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates a good standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, and does not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts to occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area. It is considered that the development will respect the existing streetscape character, and the broader local neighbourhood character. Further discussion regarding these items will be outlined later within this report.

13.3 Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy

As outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable Local Planning Policy Framework, which essentially aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations. Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to:

Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered.

In areas where building placement makes a major contribution to neighbourhood character, design new development to reinforce the established rhythm of buildings in the street and retain the existing single dwelling character of the streetscape.

Design duplex and side-by-side development to have a visual interconnection with the street rather than presenting merely as garages and front doors only. Staggered front building lines and variation in designs and materials should be used to avoid poor urban design impacts upon streetscapes.

Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:

Encourage the two storey component of new medium density housing to be located towards the front of a site.

Ensure that two storey dwellings are designed to respond to the character of the local neighbourhood. Where the local neighbourhood is characterised by single storey development and this characteristic makes a major or critical contribution to neighbourhood character, new two storey development should incorporate rooms within

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

143

the roof form of attic style dwellings, and should set the second storey building envelope back from the ground level envelope.

While the proposed development is a three storey development, it is not considered necessary to require the dwellings to be attic-style in this instance. The site is located opposite the rail line and within the Increased Housing Diversity area, with direct views available from the rear, and sides, rather than from the streetscape. The dwellings, while distinct from surrounding developments, have been sensitively designed with substantial separation at the upper level and provision for landscaping to soften the built form. At the street elevations, the third storey building envelope has been set back from the first floor envelope to reduce its ‘box-like’ effect. It is, therefore, submitted that the proposal should sit comfortably within the established neighbourhood.

Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours.

Encourage well articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk.

Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows.

Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties.

Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.

Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to:

Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape.

Performance measures

Locating garages or carports at the rear of dwellings fronting a street wherever possible.

Ensuring that where garages are located in the street elevation, they are set back a greater distance than the front wall of the building.

Ensuring that garages and carports are sited so that a tandem car parking space can be provided in front of the garage or carport.

Incorporating garages and carports within the main roof line of the dwelling.

Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:

Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems.

Performance measures

On-site infiltration should be maximised by:

Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

144

Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system.

Designing to limit the impervious area.

Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.

Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy essentially extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) along with the State Planning Policy Framework provisions found at Clause 14.02-2 – Settlement and Clause 16.02 – Medium Density Housing, effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.

In summary, the proposal is considered to be consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it provides for an intensification of a lot within walking distance of Mentone train station and shopping precinct.

13.4 Zoning Provisions

It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the purpose of the zone.

The Schedule to the Residential 1 Zone specifies a variation to a standard of Clause 55 (ResCode), namely:

Standard B32 – Front Fences: The local variation requires a front fence within 3 metres of a street must not exceed 2 metres in height for streets in a Road Zone – Category 1 or 1.2 metres in height for any other street. The proposed front fence is 1.5m high and does not accord with the Schedule requirements. A discussion of the non-compliance with the requirements of the schedule to the zone will be discussed in Section 13, ResCode Assessment to follow.

14.0 CLAUSE 55 (RESCODE ASSESSMENT) 14.1 The proposal has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode)

of the Kingston Planning Scheme. It is considered that the development largely satisfies the requirements of ResCode and is a well-designed development. There appear to be the following areas of minor non-compliance, which are discussed below:

Clause 55.03 - Site Layout and Building Massing

Standard B6 – Street Setback

The adjoining property at No. 29 Como Parade East has a setback of 7.7 metres and the property at No. 37 Como Parade East has a setback of 9.8 metres. The front setback of the development does not comply with Standard B6 of ResCode which requires a setback of at least 8.75 metres.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

145

The proposal includes a front setback varying from 6.0 metres to 9.0 metres. In support of the variation to the standard it is noted that the streetscape includes a variety of different front setbacks, ranging from 5.4 metres to just under 10 metres, with the majority of dwellings (Barry Street) set back around 5-6 metres from the front facade. The adjoining property to the south east at No. 37 Como Parade East is considered anomalous in that regard as it has a front setback of 9.8 metres. The building has been thoughtfully designed insofar as it includes greater front setbacks where it interfaces with adjoining dwellings to either side. These being, 9 metres to the north-west and 7.7 metres to the south-east. It is further noted that the building appears to have been designed specifically so that the depth can be minimised to ensure limited impacts on the amenity of neighbours to the rear and for the retention of large established trees. It is recommended that the requirements of the standard be varied in this instance, noting that the objective of this clause seeks to ensure that the setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site.

Standard B7 – Building Height

Height, in and of itself is only a problem if it manifests itself in such a way that it causes detriment to amenity or visual impacts that detract from the character of the neighbourhood. As such, and in support of a variation to Standard B7 (Building Height) the following comments are made: The variation to the standard is a maximum of 200mm. The area of variation is confined to the lift overrun with the rest of the building

constructed to a height of 9.0 metres. The visual impact of the building when viewed from the street and from adjoining

properties is minimised as the third level is highly recessed. Standard B10 – Energy Efficiency

The proposed development includes northern orientation and makes some use of solar access. The design does not unreasonably impact upon the energy efficiency of adjoining dwellings. It is considered that environmental features can be incorporated within the buildings including, but not limited to: - Energy efficient hot water service units; - Water efficient shower heads and wash basin outlets; - Energy efficient low voltage and fluorescent light fittings and motion detectors for public area lighting to car parks, fire stairs, outdoor areas etc.; - Energy efficient electrical appliances; - Waste recycling collection facilities.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

146

A condition of permit can be included requiring the submission of plans detailing the ESD measures to be introduced.

Standard B13 – Landscaping None of the trees on site are listed on Council’s Significant Tree Register. There are large trees on site, both to the front and the rear of the site. Two Liquidambars are located to the front of the site, one of which is intended to be retained. The rear the site contains several large peppercorn trees. These are proposed to be retained. Council’s Vegetation Management Officer has inspected the plans and the site and notes that the retention of the trees is supported. However, he further notes that the proposed works to the rear, the retaining wall and the paving, will have a serious impact on the root zones of the large peppercorn trees. In order to protect these zones, it is considered appropriate to require the submission of amended plans showing the deletion of reference to retaining walls and the hard paving to the rear. It is considered an appropriate alternative surface could be Lilydale Toppings, crushed rock or granitic sand. It is also considered that some form of fencing, such as timber batten fencing with minimal footing requirements, could be allowed to delineate boundaries at the rear. The details of these fences would need to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority Standard B15 – Parking Location

The car parking facilities are secure, reasonably close and convenient to the dwellings and are generally located at least 1.5 metres from any habitable room windows. A condition of permit can be included requiring the submission of amended plans showing the details of the ventilation to the basement car park area.

Standard B16 – Parking Provision A total of 31 spaces are provided, one for each dwelling (27 spaces), as required by this standard. Four visitor spaces are provided. The standard requires the provision of five visitor spaces and so the provision of visitor spaces does not comply with the standard. It is considered acceptable to vary the standard in this instance for the following reasons: The on-street car parking network can reasonably cater to demand. The reinstatement of two of the redundant crossovers ostensibly reinstates two on street

car parking spaces which allows for public use of car parking, rather than privatisation of carparking

It is noted that the proposal provides for any bicycle parking spaces in the basement. This will come some way to alleviating the pressure on carparking as a result of the dispensation. Clause 55.04 – Amenity Impacts

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

147

Standard B23 – Internal Views

Internal views are minimised and are generally not available from the upper floors to the lower areas of secluded private open space. However, there are some bedrooms that include full length windows that do not appear to incorporate screening elements. It is considered unreasonable to allow these windows to remain unscreened as they offer direct views to the open spaces of the units below. The windows in question are to bedroom 1 of dwellings 11-16 and 18-21, inclusive. A condition of permit will be included requiring the submission of amended plans showing these windows to be constructed from opaque glazing to a height of 1.7 metres in accordance with Standard B23 so as to allow diffuse light whilst limiting views to open spaces of other units.

Standard B24 – Noise Impacts It is considered that the proposed development should not result in unreasonable noise impacts on adjoining properties given the typical residential setting. However, it is noted that dwellings to the ground floor contain bedroom windows very close to the main internal thoroughfare. It is considered that the bedroom windows at ground floor to the north west internal elevation should be screened in a similar fashion to the at the internal south west elevation. A condition of permit should be included that requires the submission of amended plans showing the windows to the internal north-east elevation at ground level screened similarly to the windows to the internal south-west elevation. Clause 55.05 – On-site Amenity & Facilities

Standard B28 – Private Open Space All dwellings are considered to comply with ResCode as they each provide either balconies of at least 8 square metres with a minimum width of 1.6 metres and convenient access from a living room or have private open space provided at ground level. The provision of open space at ground level meets the standard as each space is greater than 40 square metres. The site is located within the Residential 1 Zone which has seen recent higher density, apartment style developments that include open spaces in the form of balconies, or smaller courtyards. This style of open space provision reflects this emerging character. In apartment style accommodation there is an expectation that the open spaces, whilst not large, are highly usable. The open space areas to the units facing Como Parade East are not entirely secluded, as the front fence is proposed to a height of 1.5 metres with planting behind. It is considered that the inclusion of a lower front fence allowing some views is acceptable given the following:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

148

The open space provided to each ground floor unit is highly capable of sustaining a garden

The open space is secluded and over 40 square metres in size The open spaces are highly usable as they have excellent access to direct sunlight. The spaces are conveniently located from living areas. The area is emerging as one where the residents are becoming high end users of the

generous public open spaces within the vicinity. Standard B32 – Front Fence A front fence of 1.5 metres is proposed. The schedule to the Residential 1 Zone calls for a maximum height of 1.2 metres to any new front fence. It is considered reasonable to vary the standard in this instance for the following reasons: The fence will be setback 1.0 metres from the front boundary and will be softened by

landscaping. The height is required to provide a level of seclusion for units 7-10.

15.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS

The following is a response to the grounds of objection not already addressed above: Inaccurate plans

The plans have been amended to show the correct representation of surrounding properties. Also, site visits have been undertaken to ensure the accuracy of this assessment.

Inappropriate location of bins The location of the bins has been altered in response to Council’s initial concerns. The bins will now be located within the basement garage. The collection of bins will be made by a private contractor.

Load on services The development would not overload existing capacity of the surrounding area. Council’s internal departments have not raised any concerns regarding the capacity of local infrastructure to accommodate the proposed extra dwellings.

Removal of trees/Impact of development on root structure of trees. The proposal was referred to Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who had some concerns with the impact of the development to the rear upon the health of the roots to the Peppercorn trees. He has suggested that any reference to cut and fill be deleted from the plans and the paving to the rear be constructed from lightweight materials such as Lilydale toppings or granitic sand, rather than pavers. This would minimise compaction of the soil and would minimise possible disturbance to the root systems. A condition of permit will require such reference deletion. It is also considered reasonable that the

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

149

dividing fences to each of units 1-6 be of a lightweight nature, with minimal footings. Such fences might include paling fences to a maximum height of 1.8 metres. A condition requiring this design feature of the fences can be included on any permit to issue. The removal of the Liquidambar to the front, whilst lamentable, is considered reasonable in the context of the future planting to the site and the retention of the larger, healthier Peppercorn trees to the rear and the more robust Liquidambar to the south west.

Overlooking/screening insufficient Notwithstanding the conditions required as a result of the assessment against Standard B23, an assessment of the screening devices included reveals a high level of compliance with Standard B22. Windows and/or balconies are screened appropriately to the front and rear elevations to avoid views into the open spaces of surrounding properties. The side elevation to Barry Street includes some windows, but these look out onto the open street and provide no views to sensitive open spaces. To the south-east elevation, windows are generally screened or built with a sill height of 1.7 meters above the floor level directly below. The exception to this are three of the four windows proposed for the second storey. These windows are shown with sill heights varying from 1.45 to 1.5 metres in height. It is noted however, that the stepping out of the first floor to this elevation effectively blocks views from these windows to the private open space or ground level windows. The plans indicate that the adjoining property to the south east at No. 37 Como Parade East contains one habitable room at this sensitive interface. The elevation drawings show the proposed window within 55 degree arc of the habitable room window of No. 37 Como Parade East constructed to a minimum sill height of 1.7 metres in accordance with Standard B22

Loss of view There is no view of state significance that will be impacted upon by the proposed development. Outlooks from existing windows are protected via compliance with Standard B19 which requires that buildings opposite existing habitable room windows provide for light courts of at least 3m2 and 1m clear to the sky.

Excessive site coverage The site coverage is proposed at 46% and is wholly compliant with the standard. Furthermore, this figure respects the existing character of the area.

In sufficient side and rear setbacks Side and rear setbacks comply with the ResCode Standards.

Architectural design is poor and of an inappropriately modern vernacular The context of the area within close proximity of the Mentone Major activity Centre reflects an increasingly diverse mix of building styles but with generally consistent single, two and three storey heights. The proposal sits well within this context. The three storey scale of the development accords with the emerging scale of the immediate context, specifically, the school site over the rail line on Como Parade West.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

150

The general building footprint is relatively large, however the design has provided for an excellent level of fenestration to add interest to the form. The façade has been articulated through the use of a variety of materials, with blank expanses avoided. The scale is considered reasonable, where much of the immediate context of the site is not heritage forms, but is of a single to three storey scale and a mixed vernacular. The subject site presents as an opportunity for higher density and larger scale, being located opposite a rail line, rather than opposite dwellings. As such, it is considered that the site currently represents an under-developed section of the streetscape with strong potential for redevelopment. The intense invigoration of the site is supported. The aesthetic reflects a contemporary modernist approach, with some reference to more classical architectural industrial typologies, as can be readily found in the general vicinity. Materials and finishes reflect a controlled mix with complementary tones. The materials, subject to a condition of permit, reflect the desired outcomes for the area. The use of a vibrant palette of materials will allow for good integration of the design within the context.

The proposal includes a large expanse of glazing to the front, southern facade which increases opportunity for passive surveillance of the streetscape, and visual interaction. This is further highlighted at the first level which includes balconies that provide views out on to the street.

Parking and traffic concerns Many objectors noted that there are a number of existing traffic challenges on Como Parade East, including on-street car parking availability and safety concerns due to existing traffic levels. As discussed previously at Section 13.1 of this report, it is considered that the level of on-site car parking is sufficient to meet the needs of future occupants, and the intent of Standard B16 (Parking Provision) of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. The reduction in crossover numbers from three to one assists in creating greater provision of on street parking available in the immediate vicinity. It is considered that the current proposal, with a dispensation of one visitor parking space, will not unduly affect the existing traffic and parking conditions experienced in this location.

Further, while the current proposal now provides for a crossover of 6.2 metres to Como Parade East, this is considered acceptable given the site’s considerable frontage of 51.81 metres. Council’s Roads and Drains Officers had no objection to the proposed arrangement.

Neighbourhood character Objectors submit that the proposed front setbacks, building bulk, and building materials are not in keeping with the character of the locality. Council Officers consider that while there are no three storey residential developments of this scale and intensity in the immediate locality, the proposed development has provided visual relief at the upper level in the form of a building break and generous front setbacks, thus creating the

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

151

illusion of two larger built forms on the land and ensuring that the bulk of the buildings is minimised. The proposed side set back to Barry Street is in accordance with the requirements of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. As discussed at Section 13.1 of this report, the proposed front setback to Como Parade East is acceptable, and consistent with the character of the neighbourhood. Adequate provision for landscaping has been provided in front of the dwellings to enhance the landscape character of the neighbourhood and to soften the built form. The character of this part of Mentone is informed by a suburban vernacular with a varied subdivision pattern, due to recent infill developments-the original pattern being regular, and of a fine grain. The dwellings vary in scale from 1-2 storeys and include single and multi unit developments. The immediate area includes institutional style buildings such as those across the rail line on Como Parade West. Generous side and rear setbacks to the first and second floors provide reasonable, transitional increases in height and scale. The entrance to the development is highly visible and identifiable in nature, being two storeys in height and constructed primarily of glazing. However, it is noted that this feature has been specifically designed so as to allow daylight into the communal atrium within. It is considered that reducing the amount of glazing or a reduction in height would have a detrimental impact on the internal amenity to the communal open space, by way of reduction in solar access. On balance, it is considered that the loss of the solar access would outweigh the gains from a smaller entrance. The entrance to the basement garage is minimized. This reflects the emerging predominant pattern of apartment style development within the municipality which seeks to provide car parking within basements in order to reduce the provision of garages at ground level. The proposal is consistent with the emerging neighbourhood character of medium density, and also respects the policy provision of the Planning Scheme which establishes principles for existing neighbourhood character in locations within close proximity to the Major Activity Centres.

In reviewing the proposal against the policy context it is argued that the proposed development complies with the neighbourhood character which policy seeks to protect. Council policy recognises the challenge of new developments to respond to the established ‘but evolving’ neighbourhood character within the Increased Housing Diversity area, given the vital role that it will play in accommodating the bulk of the municipality’s new medium density housing. It is considered that the proposal respects the character of the broader area while also allowing for the type of intensification sought for within the Increased Housing Diversity area.

Overdevelopment

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

152

While it is acknowledged that many objectors consider that twenty seven dwellings on a lot of this size (2199) amounts to an overdevelopment of the site, it is important to note that the proposal’s performance against the relevant criteria of the Planning Scheme indicates that the number of dwellings proposed is not unreasonable. The proposal does not exhibit the usual indicators of overdevelopment, such as excessive site coverage, inadequate setbacks, excessive building bulk, overlooking and overshadowing, insufficient on-site car parking, poor internal amenity, etc., and is therefore deemed an acceptable number of dwellings for the site.

16.0 CONCLUSION: 16.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported

subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.

16.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:

The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area;

The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and,

The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy (inclusive of the Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines and the Designing Contextual Housing Guidelines), Residential 1 Zoning and the Schedule to the Zone, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).

17.0 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered

reasonable and warrants support. 18.0 RECOMMENDATION: That Council resolve to support the use and development of this site for a childcare centre and two dwellings, based on the following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible

Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 26th March 2010, but modified to show:

a. the provision of a landscape plan in accordance with the submitted development plan and the City of Kingston Landscape Plan Checklist, with such plans to be prepared by a suitably qualified landscape professional and incorporating:

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

153

i. an associated planting schedule showing the proposed location, species type, mature height and width, pot sizes and number of species to be planted on the site. The schedule must be shown on the plan;

ii. the delineation of all garden beds, paving, grassed areas, retaining walls, fences and other landscape works including areas of cut and fill throughout the development;

iii. all existing trees on the site and within three (3) metres to the boundary of the site on adjoining properties, accurately illustrated to represent actual canopy width and labelled with botanical name, height and whether the tree is proposed to be retained or removed;

iv. a range of plant types from ground covers to large shrubs and trees;

v. adequate planting densities (e.g.: plants with a mature width of 1 metre, planted at 1 metre intervals);

vi. the provision of two (2) suitable medium sized (at maturity) canopy trees within the front setback of the property and one (1) small (at maturity) tree within the private open space area of each dwelling, with species chosen to be approved by the Responsible Authority;

vii. sustainable lawn areas and plant species taking current water restrictions into consideration;

viii. all trees provided at a minimum of two (2) metres in height at time of planting;

ix. medium to large shrubs to be provided at a minimum pot size of 200mm; and

x. the provision of notes on the landscape plan regarding site preparation, including the removal of all weeds, proposed mulch, soil types and thickness, subsoil preparation and any specific maintenance requirements.

b. the basement ramp longitudinal section with grades (designed according to AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 Parking facilities Part 1);

c. longitudinal section of the ramp including the verge area and carriageway showing levels, grades and distances to demonstrate that vehicles will not scrape and that the required headroom of 2.2 m can be provided at the entrance to the basement (in accordance with Fig 5.3 of AS28990.1) and throughout the basement;

d. the installation of a convex mirror at the base of the ramp;

e. sectional diagrams showing the air conditioning units to be mounted above the car spaces so as not to interfere with the parking of the 85th percentile of cars;

f. if any security gate is proposed to the basement car park it needs to be shown on the plans and located at least 6 m from the property boundary;

g. the columns to be located at least 0.4 m and not more than 1.4 m from the entry end of the car spaces;

h. the layout of the disabled car space must comply with the requirements of AS 2890.6:2009;

i. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule, including samples (illustrated on an A4 or A3 sheet), for all external elevations and driveways of the development;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

154

j. the location of all externally-located heating and cooling units, exhaust fans and the like, clearly shown;

k. a notation on the floor / site plan(s) stating: “The redundant vehicle crossing must be removed, kerb & channel must be reinstated and the extension to the existing footpath up to the wing of the vehicle crossing must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority”;

l. the deletion of reference to retaining walls and the hard paving to the rear of the site and an appropriate alternative surface nominated such as Lilydale Toppings, crushed rock or granitic sand;

m. details of the form of rear fencing between units 1-6, such as timber batten fencing with minimal footing requirements, in order to protect the root zones of the Peppercorn trees to the rear of the site;

n. details of the ventilation to the basement car park area;

o. the windows of bedroom 1 of dwellings 11-16 and 18-21, inclusive to be fitted with fixed obscure glazing to a height of 1.7 metres above the respective finished floor level directly below, in accordance with Standard B23 of ResCode so as to allow diffused light whilst limiting views to open spaces of other dwellings, and

p. the windows to the internal north-east elevation at ground level screened similarly to the windows to the internal south-west elevation.

2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Prior to the removal of the two trees from the site’s Como Parade East nature strip the Developer/Owner must pay to Council a compensation, removal and replacement fee ($1180.00) (including GST) for the removal of these existing trees. The removal of the trees must be undertaken by Council, and the Developer/Owner must advise Council when these trees are required to be removed (a minimum 2 weeks notice is required).

4. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

5. Before the development commences a sustainable design statement must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The sustainable design statement must outline proposed sustainable design initiatives. When approved, the statement will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

6. The project must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives listed in the endorsed Sustainability Statement, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be complied with, unless with the further prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

8. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater runoff quality and which also retains on site any increase in runoff as a result of the approved development. The system must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

155

Authority. Council's Development Engineer can advise on satisfactory options to achieve these desired outcomes which may include the use of an infiltration or bioretention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system.

9. Before the development commences, a Stormwater Management Plan showing the stormwater works to the nominated point of discharge must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Stormwater Management Plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed stormwater works including all existing and proposed features that may have impact (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).

10. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties.

11. The levels at site boundaries must not be altered, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

12. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the nature strip, kerb and channel, vehicle crossover and footpath must reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

13. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed

and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification.

14. The footpath on Como Parade East must be constructed to Council standards with 200 mm

offset with 2% black oxide by weight, at the full cost of the Applicant/owner of the site, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority

15. The Council footpath and road reserve levels are not to be altered. 16. The vehicle crossing to the basement must remain at Council levels at the building line, with

the crossing to be of industrial strength, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

17. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner.

18. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking

vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be: e. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

f. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans.

g. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

h. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

156

19. All piping and ducting above the ground floor storey of the development (other than rainwater guttering and downpipes) must be concealed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

20. All works on or facing the boundaries of adjoining properties must be finished and surface cleaned to a standard that is well presented to neighbouring properties in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

21. Construction on the site shall be restricted to the following times: Monday to Friday 7:00am to 7:00pm; Saturday 9:00am to 6:00pm; and Sundays and Public Holidays No construction Permitted Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority in writing.

22. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

23. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue.

The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue.

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit.

Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit.

OR

In the event the Council wish to oppose the application, it can do so on the following grounds:

1. The proposal would have an adverse affect on the amenity of an established residential neighbourhood.

2. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site.

3. The proposal exhibits excessive visual bulk and mass.

4. The proposal fails to satisfy all the requirements of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme (ResCode), in particular Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character Objective, Clause 55.02-2 Residential Policy Objective, Clause 55.03-1 Street Setback Objective,,

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

157

Clause 55.03-2 Building Height Objective, Clause 55.03-5 Energy Efficiency Objectives, Clause 55.08-8 Landscaping Objectives, Clause 55.03-11 Parking Location Objective, Clause 55.03-11 Parking Provision Objective, Clause 55.04-6 Overlooking Objective, Clause 55.04-7 Internal Views Objective, Clause 55.05-4 Private Open Space Objective, and Clause 55.06-1 Design Details Objective.

5. The proposal does not fully satisfy the requirements of Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy, of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

The meeting was addressed by Dr Lindel Oster on behalf of the objectors and Bruce Keen on behalf of the applicant who presented Crs with architects impressions and amended plans including two further suggested condition 1q and 1r. Crs Brownlees/West Council resolves to support the use and development of this site for twenty-five (25) dwellings' based on 23 conditions plus: 1q. Removal of Unit 16 at the first floor level and the redesign of Unit 15 to provide an additional setback from the south eastern boundary (currently 3.3 meters) and a minimum of 6 meters building setback from the eastern boundary (currently 4 meters) and 1r. Removal of Unit 24 at the second floor level and provision for an increase in the floor area of Unit 27 to become a 3 bedroom unit (from two bedroom) Carried

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

158

M 152 Planning Application KP404/09 – 180-184 Kingston Road, Heatherton APPLICANT B Weaver-Schouten ADDRESS OF LAND 180-184 Kingston Road, HEATHERTON VIC 3202

(Lot 1 on PS 035645) PROPOSAL Construct buildings and works comprising a

“dependant person’s unit” on land within the Green Wedge Zone

PLANNING OFFICER Helen Walker REFERENCE NO. KP-404/2009 RELEVANT STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 16.03: Rural Living

RELEVANT LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

Clause 21.10: Non-Urban Areas Clause 22.04: South East Non Urban Area Policy

ZONE GWZ2 OVERLAYS DDO5 PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 57: Metropolitan Green Wedge Land GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines DECISION DATE BY 23rd August 2010 STATUTORY DAYS 44 days at 23/08/2010 CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED

8 July 2010

1.0 KEY ISSUES 1.1 The key planning issue arising from this proposal relates to:

Sustainable land management (farming) 2.0 PROPOSAL 2.1 The application is for a retrospective approval of a relocatable dwelling (dependant person’s

unit). The unit comprises two (2) bedrooms, a study, living room, family room/kitchen and amenities. It is sited to the rear of the main dwelling and has its own access via Pine Lane.

2.2 The dependent person’s unit (existing) is relocatable and has existed on this site since 2000

(formally constructed as an annex to the main house from a second-hand building kit). The annex was used as a ‘granny flat’ and extended in 2008. The owner of the site (elderly parent – 77 years old) allowed his daughter to live in the unit and, as he is dependent on her for assisted living, intends to swap houses so that he, the elderly parent, lives in the unit and the daughter takes over and resides in the main house with her family.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

159

2.3 Development summary: Dependent person’s unit

Floor Area (excluding garage / verandah)

Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms existing

No. of Car Parking Spaces provided

1 125.3117m² 90.8m² 3 2 2.4 The building materials, colours and finishes are summarised in the table below:

Roof: “Cottage Green” colourbond sheet roofing Walls: Horizontal cedar cladding Garage doors NA Windows: “Surfmist” Colourbond Aluminium window frames Doors: Stained timber doors

3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS 3.1 The subject site comprises a 2300m2 allotment on the south side of Kingston Road,

Heatherton. It currently contains a single dwelling and a dependent person’s unit. The site does not contain any significant vegetation. The site is encumbered by an easement along its south property boundary. There appears to be no restrictions listed on the Certificate of Title.

3.2 Vehicle access to the site is currently via a single width crossover located on the south side

of the site’s Heatherton Road street frontage (used by the existing dwelling) and a single crossover from Pine Lane (used by the residents of the dependent person’s unit).

3.3 The site is on the corner of Kingston Road and Pine Lane, and is part of a smaller lot

subdivision, surrounded by a larger faming allotment. The existing dependent person’s unit is situated on the south side of the allotment (facing Kingston Road) and does not encroach the existing easement. An existing shed is located to the side of the unit, fronting Pine Lane. The dependent person’s unit is separated form the main dwelling only by a fence, running west to east between the two structures.

3.4 The surrounding area typically comprises of single detached, single storey, brick and

weatherboard dwellings with pitched/flat roofs. Dwellings are sited with generous side setbacks, typical of the Green Wedge zone. There is no predominant fencing style in the neighbourhood.

4.0 TITLE DETAILS 4.1 The Permit Applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there is no

restrictive covenant on the title. 5.0 PLANNING CONTROLS

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

160

5.1 The subject site is located within a Green Wedge Zone 2 and is subject to the Design and

Development Overlay Schedule 5. 6.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS 6.1 Pursuant to Clause 35.04, a planning permit is required to develop and use the land for a

Dependent Person’s Unit. 6.2 Pursuant to Clause 57.01-1, the use “Dependent Person’s Unit” requires a planning permit

application. 6.3 Pursuant to Clause 74 a dependent person’s unit is defined as “a moveable building on the

same lot as an existing dwelling and used to provide accommodation for a person dependent on a resident of the existing dwelling.”. In accordance with Clause 35.04-1 a dependent person’s unit must be the only dependent person’s unit on the lot, and must meet the requirements of Clause 35.04-2.

7.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 7.1 There is no relevant planning history relating to this site.

8.0 ADVERTISING

The proposal was not advertised. 9.0 RELEVANT POLICIES 9.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 16.03: Rural Living

9.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.10 (Non Urban Areas) Clause 22.04 (South East Non Urban Area Policy)

9.3 Particular Provisions

Clause 57 9.4 General Provisions

Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

161

10.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 10.1 State and Local Planning Policy Framework State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the relevant provision of the SPPF, and supports the relevant strategies with regard to non-urban areas, as it is a good example of identifying land that is suitable for rural living and rural residential development (Clause 16).

Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)

Clause 21.10 Non Urban Areas seeks to manage non-urban areas in a sustainable manner, and to protect such areas from encroaching residential development.

The proposal is considered to support the relevant strategies at Clause 21.10 by:

Maintaining the environmental, scenic and landscape values of the area; Providing a development that will be unobtrusive and consistent with the streetscape; Allowing only one (1) dwelling on the land, with the remainder of the land able to be

utilised for a viable agricultural or other suitable non-urban use; and Not encouraging any further subdivision on the land.

The use and development of this land for a dependent person’s unit is not inconsistent with the objectives of Clause 21.10.

Clause 22.04 South East Non Urban Area Policy provides for a wide range of rural, environmental and urban related uses, and effects areas in the City of Kingston, Casey, Frankston and Greater Dandenong. These areas are under pressure for more intensive urban development. The Policy provides a regional approach to the future management of non urban land to allow sustainable land use outcomes to be achieved. The proposal is considered to support the relevant strategies at Clause 21.04 by: Encouraging sustainable land use practice; Not compromising metropolitan urban growth strategies; Protecting and developing the scenic and landscape values of the area; and Providing an urban form which is of a high design standard and low visual impact.

10.2 Zoning Provisions

It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the purpose of the zone, which is: To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy

Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To recognise, protect and conserve green wedge land for its agricultural, environmental,

historic, landscape, recreational and tourism opportunities, and mineral and stone resources.

To encourage use and development that is consistent with sustainable land management practices.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

162

To encourage sustainable farming activities and provide opportunity for a variety of productive agricultural uses.

To protect, conserve and enhance the cultural heritage significance and the character of open rural and scenic non-urban landscapes.

To protect and enhance the biodiversity of the area.

The requirements specified at Clause 35.04-2 (Use of land for a dwelling and dependent person’s unit) can form part of any permit issued. They are: Access to the dwelling must be provided via an all-weather road with dimensions

adequate to accommodate emergency vehicles. The dwelling must be connected to a reticulated sewerage system or if not available,

the waste water must be treated and retained on-site in accordance with the State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria) under the Environment Protection Act 1970.

The dwelling must be connected to a reticulated potable water supply or have an alternative potable water supply with adequate storage for domestic use as well as for fire fighting purposes.

The dwelling must be connected to a reticulated electricity supply or have an alternative energy source.

10.3 Overlay Provisions

It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the overlay requirements of the Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5 found at Clause 43.02.

10.4 Particular Provisions

Pursuant to Clause 57.01-1 (Metropolitan Green Wedge Land), a dependent person’s unit dwelling requires a planning permit application. The application is considered to meet the objectives of this zone (as relevant to this application):-

To protect metropolitan green wedge land from uses and development that would diminish its agricultural, environmental, cultural heritage, conservation, landscape natural resource or recreation values.

To protect productive agricultural land from incompatible uses and development.

To ensure that the scale of use is compatible with the non-urban character of metropolitan green wedge land.

The dependent person’s unit already exists on the site and, as such, has already become part of the landscape on site. There is no foreseen detriment to the continued or future use of agricultural land.

11.0 CONCLUSION: 11.1 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:

The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area;

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

163

The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and

The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Local Planning Policy, Green Wedge Zone Schedule 2, Design and Development Overlay Schedule 5, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).

12.0 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered

reasonable and warrants support. 13.0 RECOMMENDATION: That: A) the application not be advertised as the proposal is consistent with the use and zoning of the

site and therefore, should not cause material detriment to adjoining or nearby properties.

B) Council resolve to issue a Planning Permit to construct buildings and works on this site and to use for a dependent person’s unit, subject to the following conditions:

1. The development and/or use as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

2. The permitted Dependent Person’s Unit must be removed from the land within six (6) months of the cessation of the dependency, unless with the further prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Once the development and/or use has started it must be continued and completed to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 4. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit

will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of this permit.

The development is not completed within one (1) year from the commencement of works.

In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.

NOTE 1: Prior to the commencement of the development or use you are required to

obtain the necessary building permit/approvals, if applicable.

City of Kingston

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 23 August 2010

164

The meeting was addressed by Mr Weaver on behalf of the applicant. Crs Brownlees/ Athanasopoulos The application not be advertised as the proposal is consistent with the use and zoning of the site and therefore, should not cause material detriment to adjoining or nearby properties. Council resolve to issue a Planning Permit to construct buildings and works on this site and to use for a dependent person’s unit, subject to 4 conditions: To add a condition 5 to read as follows: 5. The Permit holder must notify Council ten (10) years from the date of this permit to allow it to conduct an inspection of the buildings and works allowed by this permit to confirm the use of the land for a dependent person’s unit is continuing in accordance with the provisions of this planning permit. Carried Crs Ronke/Brownlees PROCEDURAL MOTION That M168 is brought forward Carried Question Time Gina Discala submitted a question concerning temporary parking arrangements along Chapel Road Moorabbin. The Chief Executive Officer advised that the question would be taken on notice and a written response sent to Ms D Scala. The Chief Executive Officer also added he was however aware that temporary parking arrangements had been put in place around the Holmesglen TAFE in Moorabbin to address the dislocation of on-site student parking caused by construction works currently being undertaken. Cr Brownlees left the chamber at 8.36pm Cr Brownlees returned to the chamber 8.37pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

165

M 168 Adoption of the 2010/11 Budget Author: Paul Franklin, General Manager Corporate Services Approved by: John Nevins, Chief Executive Officer In accordance with Sections 125, 129 and 158 of the Local Government Act 1989 (Act.), Council advertised on Wednesday, 14 July 2010 that its Draft Budget was available for inspection and invited written submissions on any proposal contained in the Draft Budget. The Act requires that the Draft Budget and Statutory Information must be on display for at least 28 days and that Council must consider any submissions received from interested parties pursuant to Section 223 of the Act. Similarly the comments on the Council Plan can be made pursuant to Section 223. The period for submissions relating to the 2010/11 Draft Budget and Statutory Information closed at 5.00pm on Thursday, 12 August 2010. At its Special meeting held on 16 August 2010, Council noted that 7 written submissions had been received relating to the 2010/11 budget at the time of the meeting with John Mair and David Normington speaking about their submissions. Note that a further submission was received on Tuesday 17 August which has been included in the summary below. In summary, the following matters were raised for consideration by Council by the 8 submitters:

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment Mrs Dorothy Galloway

Objected to the 8.0% rate increase stating: That Rates increasing by 8.0% was

arrogant and will eat away at the generous $20 increase in the pensioner rebate.

Acknowledged the need to protect the environment however, suggested we keep in line with neighbouring Councils at around 6.5 – 7.0%.

An 8% rate revenue increase is required so that Council can maintain its current services and ensure that the foreshore and Green wedge expenditure adequately provides for the future needs of the Kingston Community.

Mr D Bastion

Mr Bastion stated the following: The present councillors never stop

bumping up the rates and are only concerned about the environment.

Suggested Council buy two street sweepers rather than have 2 men in a Ute with a water tank on the back.

Refer comments above and note that street sweepers cannot replace the necessary watering of our trees that enhance the appearance of the City of Kingston.

Ms Fay Sutherland

Stated that the rate increase was all about the environment program and time Council thought of the financial pressures on its ratepayers.

Refer comment on rate increase above.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

166

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment Ms Kay Bastion Comments include:

She pays $63.75 to SE Water towards Parks and now Council want us to pay extra to increase/upgrade parks and she is single and never uses the parks.

Unfair to increase rates higher than all other Councils and Ms Bastion is totally opposed to the rate increase.

Council and Melbourne Water are responsible for the maintenance of their own assets and hence have to apply separate charges in order to maintain their own assets. Council’s proposed average rate per assessment is $54 below the average for Inner Metropolitan Councils at $1,368pa. and is higher than the City of Glen Eira ($1,219) but below the City of Bayside ($1,508) and Greater Dandenong ($1,413). A detailed response outlining why municipality rates differ will be sent to Ms Bastion.

Mr Len Kondys (Acting Chairman La Perouse Owners Corporation)

States that residents of the estate are paying twice for Body Corporate and Council Rates who does not pay for the services such as: Maintenance of services and

infrastructure within the estate including roads, stormwater drainage and nature strips.

Future replacement of capital infrastructure within Common property and

They cannot exclude public access through their land.

Suggested that the estate should be subject to a differential rate in accordance with Section 161 or the LGA 1989. The submission noted that Council makes a contribution to Waterways suburb as it has a Section 173 agreement where Council reimburses the Owners Corporation for the provision and maintenance of the Public Open Space located within the suburb.

A detailed response will be sent to Mr Kondys as Chairman of the La Perouse Owners Corporation explaining that: Rates are based on property

values. Rates are not a fee for service.

The impact on Council services of the La Perouse Estate extend beyond the estates boundaries.

The S173 Agreement entered into makes it clear that the responsibility for maintenance of infrastructure and service rests with the body corporate.

The arrangement with Waterways involves Council making a contribution to the Waterways Owners Corporation to maintain Council owned public space, not privately owned land. The land at waterways being of a higher standard of presentation and area than would normally be put in place within an estate or area..

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

167

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment Mr John Mair Comments include:

On a comparative difference with other

councils proposed rates and charges that our average rates and charges are $54.00 less than the Melbourne metropolitan average:

- Are there other councils that we already regard as benchmarks/best practice councils or at least ones that are similar to Kingston Council? Why do you persist in devising a budget

which has an increase well above the CPI. Even if you used the Bureau of Statistics projected CPI figures to formulate your budget it would have more credibility. You can’t continue to devise excessive, unrealistic budgets and expect the ratepayer to `stump-up’. When will you begin to realize that some of your spending will need to wait until we, as a council, is financially better off? An opportune initial date not very far away in this regard is 1 July 2011 when we will be debt-free.

Why don’t we defer the green wedge

initiative ($7.9m), what detrimental effect will occur if this is not started until 2011/12. Has consideration been given to have these sites investigated/tested as wind generated power sites? If this is a `goer’, there could be the opportunity to get some federal money for this green-wedge development initiative. We have waited a long time for foreshore improvements, while I am strongly in favor of implementing improvements, what is another year’s wait at this stage.

In relation to the overall costs of the

Kingston Council administration and services, has some sort of hard-nose review been conducted in recent years? Are we as ratepayers getting value for money in what is being delivered by the council organization? Can the CEO honestly put his hand on his heart and make a declaration to this effect? Has he got some hard evidence to back up his declaration? If not, he has got some

A detailed response will be sent to Mr Mair explaining that: Refer comments on the rate

increase above. We participate in sector

surveys with all Councils. Refer comments on rates

increase above. Council believes the Green

wedge is an important issue that needs to be planned for now. The $7.9 million will be spent over a period of five years.

Council conducts

Benchmarking to monitor where Kingston fits in relation to its peers for both the administration and service delivery.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

168

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment urgently needed review work to undertake and make available to the ratepayers.

Can the CEO in the first instance provide

some simple `head count ‘details for, say, the last four years (broken up, if possible, into permanent, temporary, part-time, seasonal staff).

Has a review ever been undertaken in the

council where each of the sections/departments has been asked the question what would be the impact in terms of staffing/service delivery etc if, say, a 3% reduction occurred in their budget? An investigation of the responses could result in some interesting cost-saving outcomes.

A breakdown of our workforce

is published in our Annual Report and details will be provided along with some indicators of growth in service delivery.

A departmental review occurs annually highlighting the impact on service delivery and the results are presented to council for review.

Mr David Normington

The merits of the development of the green wedge and whether Council should be the lead funding body;

The impact of bringing $1M forward to

implement Structure Plan out comes; The effect of the differential rates

proposed in the budget; Council’s cash position; The quantum of the Landfill Levy /

Increase in Waste Management charges;

Kingston owns or will own significant parcels of land in the Green Wedge and needs to fund its development.

This has been achieved through managing cashflow over 3 years to take the opportunity to purchase land as envisaged in the Mordialloc and Cheltenham Structure Plans. Confirmation will be provided that it is $1 million in total and not $1 million from each year.

Council believes the differential rates in respect of agricultural and extractive/ landfill land will achieve the objectives outlined in the draft Budget.

The funds brought forward are included in the cashflow statements. Following finalisation of year end accounts $2 million of previously approved projects will be carried forward and included in the Budget to be adopted. This is consistent with recent practice.

$603,000 is the correct amount of the landfill levy increase. Additional contract

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

169

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment Employees Costs; The level of expenditure on Road

Infrastructure Renewal; The level of the rate increase as

measured in the cashflow statement; Council’s actions to address

government grants not keeping pace with cost rises;

The capital budget and Council’s practice of bringing forward projects from future years to replace projects that have been delayed;

How Council manages capital grant

funded projects;

costs have been offset by additional income from commercial waste services and recyclables income.

The total increase from 2009/10 forecast to 2010/11 Budget is (3.622 million) 6.58% not 10.69% as submitted. $2.7 million relates to EBA increases and other increases as per Budget book. Increased service provision funded by grants and fees ($0.5 million); and new resources ($0.4 million).

The Budget book attempts to reflect the final accounting treatment of the expenditure. The Capital Budget outlines the total expenditure on the road program. This will fluctuate from year to year depending on the works program.

The rates charges increase is fully explained in the explanation of the Operating Budget and is 7.3% plus 0.7% for landfill levy increase on the annualised rates and charges.

Council continues to advocate for additional grant funding.

Council manages its Capital

Budget each year by bringing forward works from a future year to the current year and deferring the delayed projects to the following. These changes are formally adopted by Council and a total $871,000 are not material. A list of the works “swapped” will be provided in the response. If not “swapped” Council would have a greater level of carry forwards delaying community benefit.

Council fully complies with all funding conditions and acquits these grants to the funding bodies at the

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

170

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment The percentage that rate revenue makes

up of total revenue; Clarification that 2010 valuations have

been used to calculate the rates for 2010/11;

The annual output indicators for the

Finance, (Rate Notice measure of 2nd week August issue not able to be achieved) Governance (number of complaints to Ombudsman and Internal Complaints Manager) and Executive Services (lack of indicators).

The increase in the footpath renewal program from $0.8 million to $2.0 million.

completion of the project. 63% is the correct proportion

of rate revenue. 2010 valuations have been

used in the calculation of the rate in the dollar for 2010/11.

The queries raised will be

addressed in the response to Mr Normington.

Works are consistent with

Council’s Asset Management Plans. A detailed list of works will be provided.

Following the Special Council Meeting a further submission was received. This is detailed below and attached to this report.

Submitter Issue Raised Officer Comment Mr Peter Raymant

Rates that increase by 8% is excessive noting that ratepayers are paying for damage to the foreshore caused by perceived rising sea levels and that the State Government should come to the party. Suggested Councillors see the damage done to the Heads at Portsea recently asserted by Mr Raymant to be related to channel deepening.

Refer comments on the rate increase and additional expenditure on the foreshore above.

A detailed response from the Finance Manager will be provided to the submitters following the adoption of the Budget. As per normal practice, the Budget that was presented to the Community requires the inclusion of the capital carry forward projects which are now known following the end of the financial year. Further the Balance Sheet has been adjusted which moved the non-current Hostel Trust Fund Deposits from Non- Current Liabilities to Current Liabilities as per the advice from our External Auditors. These movements were done to bring the budget figures in line with the Statutory Accounting requirements.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

171

A summary of the adjustments to the Draft 2010/11 Budget on the Statement of Cash Flows are as follows:

Item

Forecast 2009/10 $’000

Budget 2010/11 $’000

Net Effect 30 June 2011

$’000 Carry Forwards Capital (Gross (See Attachment C of Budget Document for Details)

+ 2,017 - 2,017 Nil

Less funded from Capital Grants - 165 + 165 NilNet Cashflow movement + 1,852 - 1,852 NilLess funded from Reserves - 350 + 350 NilNet Cash funded by Rates + 1,502 - 1,502 Nil Balance Sheet adjustments are as follows:

Item

Forecast 2009/10 $’000

Budget 2010/11 $’000

Net Effect 30 June 2011

$’000 Carry Forwards Capital Infrastructure, Property, Plant & Equipment

- 2,017 + 2,017 Nil

Cash and Cash Equivalents + 1,852 - 1,852 NilCapital Reserves + 350 - 350 NilReclassification of Hostel Bonds from Non Current Liabilities to Current Liabilities as per advice from External Audit

Current Trust Deposits + 6,868 + 7,268 + 7,268Non – Current Trust Deposits - 6,868 - 7,268 - 7,268 Copies of the budget as proposed to be adopted are attached to the agenda papers. Further copies are available in the public gallery foyer for perusal by interested members of the public gallery. Recommendation A That:- Council includes in its Budget to be adopted funding for its Library and Education Services as follows: Materials $1,763,430 Employee Costs $3,456,502 Income $999,679 Net Rates Contribution $4,220,253 And; Capital Projects as follows: Clarinda Library Expansion $150,000 Library Amenity Improvements $100,000

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

172

Recommendation B That:- 1. Council adopt the 2010/11 Budget and Statutory Information (including fees and

charges) and Strategic Resource Plan as presented;

2. In respect of Rates and Charges:- a) Declare a differential rate for rateable land having the characteristics specified

in the Schedules to Attachment B of the Budget document, which characteristics will form the criteria for each differential rate so declared:

8.1 General Land (refer to Schedule A) 8.2 Agricultural Land (refer to Schedule B) 8.3 Extractive and Landfill Land (refer to Schedule C); and that the rate of (based on the cents in the dollar of Capital Improved Value set out below) be;

Category cents in the $

General Land Rate 0.20966

Agricultural Land Rate 0.16773

Extractive and Landfill Land Rate 0.35136

b) A Municipal Charge of $100 per rateable property; and c) Waste Service Charges as follows:-

Service Choice A - 120 litre garbage, 240 litre recycling and 240 litre green waste bins

$181 pa

Service Choice B – 80 litre garbage, 240 litre recycling and 240 litre green waste bins

$141 pa

Service Choice C – 120 litre garbage, 240 litre recycling and 120 litre green waste bins

$169 pa

Service Choice D – 80 litre garbage, 240 litre recycling and 120 litre green waste bins

$130 pa

Service Choice E – 120 litre garbage and 240 litre recycling bins

$129 pa

Service Choice F – 80 litre garbage and 240 litre recycling bins $102 pa

Service Choice G – 240 x 2 Share Garbage, 240 Recycle $103 pa

Service Choice H – 240 x 3 Share Garbage, 240 Recycle $89 pa

Service Choice I – 240 x 4 Share Garbage, 240 Recycle $77 pa

Service Choice P – 120 x 2 Share Garbage, 240 Recycle $78 pa

Service Choice W – Additional 120 Green Waste Bin $36 pa

Service Choice X – Additional 240 Green Waste Bin $45 pa

Service Choice Y – Additional 240 Garbage Bin $95 pa

Service Choice Z – Additional 120 Garbage Bin $95 pa

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

173

3. It be recorded that Council will grant a waiver of $80.00 of general rates for the property subject to the State Government Municipal Rates Concession pursuant to Section 171 of the Local Government Act 1989.

4. In addition to payment annually or four (4) times yearly on the dates specified in the

Local Government Act 1989, namely:-

a) in a lump sum on or, before 15 February 2011; or b) by four approximately equal instalments paid on or before 30 September 2010;

30 November 2010, 28 February 2011 and 31 May 2011.

Council may, by further recommendation, specify further options for the manner in

which the general rates, municipal charge and annual service charges may be paid.

5. No incentive be declared for early payment of general rates, municipal charge and

waste service charge.

6. The Chief Executive Officer of Council be authorised to give public notice of the

adoption of the Budget and Statutory Information in accordance with Sections 130(2) of the Local Government Act 1989.

7. It be recorded that Council requires any person to pay interest on any amounts of rates and charges which:-

a) that person is liable to pay; and b) have not been paid by the dates specified for their payment.

8. The interest for the 2010/11 rating year is to be calculated at the rate fixed under

Section 2 of the Penalty Rate Act 1983 that is applicable at 1 July 2010 pursuant to Section 172(2) of the Local Government Act 1989 as amended by the Local Government (Further Amendment) Act 1997.

9. The Manager, Finance be authorised to levy and recover the general rates, municipal

charge and annual service charges in accordance with the Local Government Act 1989.

Cr Brownlees declared an interest in Motion A and left the meeting at 8.37pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

174

Crs Athanasopoulos/Bauer That referring to Recommendation A :- Council includes in its Budget to be adopted funding for its Library and Education Services as follows: Materials $1,763,430 Employee Costs $3,456,502 Income $999,679 Net Rates Contribution $4,220,253 And; Capital Projects as follows: Clarinda Library Expansion $150,000 Library Amenity Improvements $100,000 That the recommendation be adopted.

Carried Cr Brownlees returned to the Chamber at 8.38pm

Crs Brownlees/Ronke Proposed the Motion referring to recommendation B):- 1. Council adopt the 2010/11 Budget and Statutory Information (including fees and charges and strategic resource plan) as presented. 2. In respect of Rates and Charges:- Declare the rates and charges as specified in the Schedules to Attachment B of the Budget document

Cr West Proposed the following amendment

As an amendment to the Motion that Council should add the following to Recommendation B (1) following the words “as presented”. Subject to reducing the overall rate rise from 7.3% (plus the 0.7% State Government Landfill Levy) to 5.25% (plus the 0.7% State Government Waste Levy)

Crs West/Shewan As an amendment to the Motion that Council should add the following to Recommendation B (1) following the words “as presented”. Subject to reducing the overall rate rise from 7.3% (plus the 0.7% State Government Landfill Levy) to 5.25% (plus the 0.7% State Government Waste Levy)

Put & Lost

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

175

Cr Peulich proposed a further amendment

Motion

Crs Peulich/Bauer

That the swapping of Capital Works projects for alternate projects be subject to Community Consultation

The Chairman ruled the motion out of order.

Cr Peulich requested that his disagreement with the ruling be noted in the minutes.

The substantive motion was then put

Crs Brownlees/Ronke That B):- 1. Council adopt the 2010/11 Budget and Statutory Information (including fees and charges and strategic resource plan) as presented. 2. In respect of Rates and Charges:- Declare the rates and charges as specified in the Schedules to Attachment B of the Budget document.

Carried A division was called. Division For Against Mayor Cr Staikos Cr Bauer Cr Athanasopoulos Cr Peulich Cr Brownlees Cr Shewan Cr Dundas Cr West Cr Ronke The Chairperson declared that the motion was carried. Cr Brownlees left the meeting at 9.49pm and returned at 9.51pm

Crs Peulich/Ronke PROCEDURAL MOTION That item M166 be brought forward

Carried Cr Athanasopoulos left the meeting at 9.54pm and returned at 9.57pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

176

M 166 Adoption of Financial Statements to 30 June 2010

Approved by: Paul Franklin-General Manager Corporate Services

Author: Bernard Byrden-Manager Finance

Pursuant to Section 126 of the Local Government Act 1989 and Part 4 of the Local Government Regulations 2001, Council’s 2009/10 Annual Statements have been prepared for adoption in principle and the authorisation of two Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer to certify the Annual Statements following their review and clearance by the Auditor-General. Council’s independent Audit Committee reviewed the 2009/10 Draft Annual Statements at its meeting on 19th August 2010 and recommended that the Statements be adopted by Council and forwarded to the Auditor-General for final clearance. The Audit Committee also commended Council for the strong financial result that was achieved in 2009/10 and complimented Councillors and Officers on the good financial management practices clearly evident at Council. Copies of the “In Principle” Annual Statements are on display in the public gallery foyer for perusal by interested members of the gallery and have been forwarded separately to Councillors. Financial Statements Included are the Financial Statements for Kingston City Council for the year 1 July 2009 to 30th June 2010, which have been drawn up so as to present fairly the financial transactions of Council for the 2009/10 financial year and to report on the financial position of Council as at 30 June 2010. The Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with the Local Government (Democratic Reform) Act 2003, Australian Accounting Standards and other mandatory professional reporting requirements.

To assist understanding of these Financial Statements and accompanying notes it is pertinent to point out circumstances that have an impact on the statements in 2009/10.

Income Statement The reported Profit $24.0 million has been added to the brought forward accumulated surplus of $1,164.5 million which reflect sound financial management of the affairs of the City. The operating Surplus is $21.5 million favourable to the budgeted surplus of $2.5 million. This result is influenced by the following: Cash Developer Contributions of $1.1 million, $0.3 million ahead of budget. These funds

are transferred to the Open Space Reserve and can be utilised in the future for the acquisition and/or development of open space within Kingston.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

177

Developer Asset donations from new estates of $13.7 million exceeded budget expectations by $12.7 million. This consists of:

1. $4.6 million for land under roads 2. $3.5 million for roads, kerbs and footpaths 3. $1.7 million for drainage 4. $3.6 million for land 5. $0.3 million for building assets.

Grants and Subsidies received in advance amounting to $1.6 million for 2010/11 financial

year (including Capital Grants of $0.6 million). Accounting Standards require this revenue to be taken into account in the 2009/10 financial year.

Found Assets of $1.3 million are being recognised as Other Income for the first time in

2009/10 and include buildings ($0.3 million), land ($0.1 million), and drainage ($0.9 million). Other Income also includes total income of $1.2 million as an adjustment for previous fair value revaluations of investment property which were recorded in the asset revaluation reserve rather than profit.

Council’s total Capital expenditure was $26.9 million of which $21.0 million was

capitalised. The balance of $5.9 million was expensed to the Income Statement which was $0.5 million unfavourable to the budget of $5.4 million.

Adjusting for these items would indicate an “underlying” Operating Surplus of $6.6 million and this result yields an underlying favourable variance of $4.1 million. This variance includes the following items: Rate Income $0.8m F

Interest Income on Investments and Rates $1.0m F

User Fees $1.4m F

Net movement in other Operating Accounts $0.9m F

Total $4.1m F Rate Revenue

Rate revenue totalled $85.6 million and is $0.8 million favourable to Council’s Budget 2009/10. This follows the decision by Council to increase overall rates and charges by 5.75%. The rate revenue also includes $0.8 million derived during the year from Supplementary Valuation assessments issued in which the value of the property was adjusted to reflect a physical change to the property and to ensure that all ratepayers continue to contribute equitably to the City. Grants and Subsidies

Total Grants & Subsidies have decreased from $30.0 million in 2008/09 to $29.3 million in 2009/10 largely due to $3.4 million of grants received in advance in 2008/09 compared with only $1.6 million grants received in advance in 2009/10. This includes $0.6 million in capital grants and $1.0 million for Grants Commission funding.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

178

Contributions, Reimbursements & Donations Revenue

Contributions recognised has increased from $7.5 million to $15.1 million in 2009/10, which includes an increase in non-cash contributions from developers for new estates which totalled $13.7 million compared with $5.3 million in 2008/09. Cash contributions from developers of $1.1 million were favourable to budget by $0.3 million. All of these developer cash contributions are transferred to a Reserve Account that can be utilised by Council in the future to acquire and/or develop open space. User Fees & Charges

User Fess & Charges increased by $1.4 million to $23.8 million in 2009/10 and reflects higher income from family and children’s services $0.3 million, local laws $0.2 million, planning and building $0.6 million and higher rental income/facility hire $0.2 million. Employee Costs

Employee Costs increased by $4.7 million during 2009/10 and were $1.4 million unfavourable to budget. This was largely due to a low level of vacancies across all areas of Council, which is being attributed to rising local unemployment and a tighter private job market. This also includes an adjustment of $0.4 million for fringe benefits tax which was budgeted for in materials but treated as employee costs. This includes movements in remuneration for staff in accordance with Council’s Enterprise Agreement. Materials and Services

Materials and Services expenditure has increased by $2.9 million to $61.6 million in 2009/10 when compared to $58.7 million in 2008/09 financial year and was $1.8 million favourable when compared to Budget. This includes an unfavourable variance of $0.5 million related to our capital works program ($5.9 million was taken to the Income Statement of the total capital works expenditure of $26.9 million, compared to budget of $5.4 million) with the balance related to improved operating efficiencies and a favourable $0.4 million adjustment related to fringe benefits tax expense budgeted as materials but treated as employee costs. Depreciation

In accordance with Australian Accounting Standard AASB 116 Property, Plant and Equipment, all non-current assets having a limited useful life are systematically depreciated over their useful lives in a manner which reflects the consumption of the service potential of those assets. In 2009/10 $17.3 million was taken up as an expense in the Income Statement compared with $15.9m in 2008/09, $0.2 million lower than the budgeted amount of $17.5 million. This is a “non-cash” book entry.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

179

Balance Sheet The ‘current portion’ of the Balance Sheet has remained healthy. The Working Capital ratio has only decreased marginally from 132.9% in 2008/09 to 131.6% in 2009/10. This has been affected by a change recognising all Hostel Bond deposits as current liabilities, which was a move of $7.1 million from non current liabilities to current liabilities. Australian Accounting Standard AASB 116 Property, Plant and Equipment requires that the carrying amount of all non-current assets be kept current. Most significantly, a full revaluation was conducted of Council’s Land and Buildings as at 30th June 2010, by our valuers K.A. Reed (Group) Pty Ltd. This revaluation identified a $175 million increase in the value of land and buildings. Transport and Drainage assets have been revalued to their current replacement cost as at 30 June 2010 to reflect a minor change in their underlying value. Land under roads of $400 million has increased by $5.0 million from asset donations by developers. Council now manages $2.2 billion of assets on behalf of the community. Non Current Assets include an Intangible Asset classification representing the value of our Hostel Bed Licences at $7.0 million which has declined by $0.2 million from 2008/09, plus $0.7 million for capitalisation of Software. Non-current Assets also includes Investment Property valued at $1.9 million. In accordance with Council’s 2009/10 Budget, overall debt has reduced from $4.6 million as at June 2009 to $2.5 million at June 2010. Council remains on track to be debt free by July 2011.

Cash Flow Statement In total, Council’s cash holdings have increased by $2.0 million during 2009/10 to $35.7 million. $1.5 million of this will be utilised to pay for capital works carried forward from 2008/09 to 2009/10 and expenditure related to Grants received in advance of $1.6 million. Net cash provided by operating activities is $26.4 million, which is $0.3 million lower

than 2008/09. This is largely due to $6.4 million increase in Rates receipts, mostly offset by $1.5 million more in payments to suppliers and $4.6 million higher payments to employees.

Net cash used in investing activities has increased by $1.9 million to $22.4 million largely due the increase in payments to fund extra capital works of $0.8 million and a $1.1 million reduction in the proceeds from sale of assets when compared to the prior year.

Net cash used in financing activities of $1.9 million which is $1.0 million higher than 2008/09 due to an increase in hostel bonds.

Performance Statement

Section 132 of the Local Government Act 1989 requires local government authorities to develop a performance accountability mechanism which allows for a consistent approach in the collection and reporting of information regarding financial performance, operating costs and community satisfaction.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

180

The published performance standards identified areas of customer satisfaction or financial goals by which Council sought to measure its performance. Detailed commentaries of the outcomes are noted in the Statements. Standard Statements The Local Government (Democratic Reform) Act 2003 requires local government authorities to prepare four Standard Statements and explanatory notes to form a special purpose financial report. Council is required to prepare a Standard Income Statement, a Standard Balance Sheet, a Standard Cash Flow Statement and a Standard Statement of Capital Works that compares the financial results with the original budget. The statements show the difference between the actual result and the original budget. Detailed explanations of the variances are detailed in the Standard Statements. Standard Income Statement The Standard Income Statement demonstrates the year’s financial performance in terms of revenue, expenses and other adjustments from all activities compared to the Adopted Budget. The ‘Total Changes in Equity’ or ‘bottom line’ shows the total difference between the financial position at the beginning and the end of the year. Income was $21.1 million (15%) favourable variance to budget including; Grants of $1.6 million received in advance and contributions from developers which were $12.7 million favourable to budget, rate revenue of $0.8 million favourable, interest income $1.0 million, found assets of $1.3 million and $1.2 million for investment property revaluations which had previously been transferred to the asset revaluation reserve. Total expenditure was favourable to budget by $0.4 million (0.3%) primarily related to Materials and Services $1.8 million favourable (which includes $0.5 million unfavourable related to our capital works program ($5.9 million taken to the Income Statement of the total capital works expenditure of $26.9 million compared to a budget of $5.4 million), depreciation $0.2 million favourable, partially offset by $1.4 million unfavourable in Employee Benefits, $0.2 million unbudgeted loss on disposal of assets and $0.1 million unbudgeted fair value adjustment for investment property following a change in accounting policy.

Standard Balance Sheet The Standard Balance Sheet shows Councils Assets and Liabilities as at 30th June 2010 compared to the Adopted Budget. The accumulated surplus reflects the year on year Surpluses / (Deficits) that Council has achieved.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

181

Total Assets are $2,271 million and are favourable to budget by $531.5 million (30.6%). This consists of the following:

Cash and cash equivalents is higher than budgeted by $9.6m. This is primarily due to higher than budgeted grants received ($1.6 million), greater than anticipated cash contributions from Developers ($0.3 million), higher interest income ($1.0 million), lower than budgeted payments to suppliers ($2.4 million) and higher than projected trust funds and deposits ($2.0 million).

Trade and Other Receivables are unfavourable to budget by $2.3 million due to a higher than anticipated level of debtors. $3.6 million of the receivables balance relates to rate debtors. Total receivables balance is consistent with the previous year.

Infrastructure, property, plant and equipment is favourable to budget by $518 million due to the recognition of Land Under Roads of $399 million which was not budgeted for. The remaining $119 million largely relates to the movement from asset revaluations, particularly land and buildings. The increase in revaluation is in line with the economic environment of increasing property prices.

Total Liabilities total $36.8 million and are unfavourable by $6.4 million consisting of:

Trade and Other Payables unfavourable variance of $1.7 million is primarily due to under budgeted year end payables for Materials and Services expenditure.

Trust Funds and Deposits unfavourable variance of $1.9 million is due to additional accommodation bonds received during the financial year and the retention of current residents resulting in fewer bond refunds during the year. All accommodation bonds are now required to be recorded as current, whilst the budget has these bonds split between current and non-current trusts.

The favourable variance of $405 million in Accumulated Surplus largely reflects the unbudgeted land under roads of $395 million recognised for the first time in 2008/09, plus the $24.0 million favourable surplus for the current year.

Standard Cash Flow Statement A Standard Cash Flow Statement shows what has happened during the year in terms of cash compared to the Adopted Budget. It explains what cash movements have resulted in the difference in the cash balance at the beginning and the end of the year. Total Cash increased to $35.7 million compared to the budget of $26.2 million due to: Capital carried forward to 2010/11 budget of $1.5 million. Grants and Subsidies were $2.4 million favourable largely due to grants received in

advance of $1.6 million. Contributions, Reimbursements & Donations were $0.2 million favourable and

include cash contributions from Developers ($0.3 million favourable to budget) Trust Funds and Deposits $0.4m favourable due to the difference between the value of

incoming and outgoing bonds, reflected the changing resident mix. Detailed explanations are included in the Standard Statements.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

182

Standard Statement of Capital Works A Standard Statement of Capital Works shows what has been spent on the Capital Works program during 2009/10 compared to the Adopted Budget. The projects not completed due to delays brought about by extended consultation, statutory planning or timing issues totalling $1.8 million, will be carried forward to 2009/10. Total Capital Expenditure was $26.9 million compared to the Budget of $27.3 million that is $0.4 million favourable. The main variances include: Information Services came in $0.6 million favourable to budget mainly in the IS

strategy Implementation project $0.1 million, Corporate Business System Review $0.2 million and Corporate Reporting Software project $0.1 million,

Building Infrastructure came in $0.7 million favourable to budget due to a delay in some projects – Public Toilets Refurbishment $0.3 million, Kitchen & Bathroom minor refurbishments $ 0.1 million, Disability Audit Compliance $0.1 million, St Chad’s Baseball Pavilion Recladding $0.1 million and Mordialloc Water Restoration $0.1 million,

Economic Development came in $0.4 million favourable to budget due to works on Shopping Centre Amenity Program carried forward,

Community Services are unfavourable by $0.2 million largely due to unbudgeted expenditure works for Chelsea Community Renewal projects. This was offset by greater federal funding for the JTAPP jobs fund projects,

Leisure & Cultural Planning works was over budget by $0.7 million due to unbudgeted spending on the Governor Road Shared Path ($0.5 million), plus additional spend on upgrades to LF Payne and Kingston Hall ($0.2 million) due to additional Federal funding for Community Infrastructure Renewal,

Capital works expenditure on leisure centres was over budget by $0.1 million due to over-budgeted expenditure on the Waves Change Room Upgrade. This was offset by additional grant money being received for the project,

Parks & Urban Design was $0.6 million favourable to budget across several projects – Operational Plant & Equipment replacement $0.2 million, Chicquita Park $0.2 million and Yammerbook Park $0.1 million,

Total budget overspend of $1.0 million on all drainage and transport works was a total of 10%. Funds were re-directed amongst infrastructure and from other projects to address priority works for the year and will result in lower expenditure budgeted in 2010/11.

Further detailed explanations are included in the Standard Statements. Independent Audit Committee Review Council’s Independent Audit Committee has reviewed the 2009/10 Draft Annual Statements and has recommended that Council adopt the statements in principle. Certification Process

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

183

A council cannot submit its Performance and Financial Statements to the Auditor-General or the Minister unless the council has passed a resolution giving “in principle” approval to the Performance and Financial Statements and authorising two Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer, on behalf of the council, to certify the statements once amendments or changes requested by the Auditor-General have been made. It is recommended that Cr Staikos, as the current Mayor, and Cr Peulich as the second Councillor on the Audit Committee, be authorised to sign off the statements following clearance by the Auditor-General. Should the Auditor-General require any changes to the Annual Statements these will be brought to the attention of the two Councillors, the Chief Executive Officer and the Audit Committee prior to signing the Statements. It should be borne in mind that the purpose of this process is to ensure that Council is aware of, and supports, the annual statements and that the Councillors and the Chief Executive Officer when signing the statements do so with the knowledge, support, commitment and acceptance of responsibility by the Council. Recommendation That Council: 1. Note the recommendation from Council’s Audit Committee; 2. Adopt the 2009/10 Annual Statements as Council’s “in principle” statements for

2009/10 and that these statements be forwarded to the Auditor-General; and 3. Authorise Cr Staikos, Cr Peulich and the Chief Executive Officer to formally sign off

the 2009/10 Annual Statements following clearance from the Auditor-General.

Crs Peulich/Ronke That Council: 1. Note the recommendation from Council’s Audit Committee; 2. Adopt the 2009/10 Annual Statements as Council’s “in principle” statements for 2009/10 and that these statements be forwarded to the Auditor-General; and 3. Authorise Cr Staikos, Cr Peulich and the Chief Executive Officer to formally sign off the 2009/10 Annual Statements following clearance from the Auditor-General 4. That the swapping of Capital Works projects for alternate projects be subject be reviewed and reported back to a Councillor Information Session.

Carried Cr Bauer and Cr Ronke left the meeting at 9.58pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

184

Crs Brownlees/Peulich PROCEDURAL MOTION That an extension of time of one hour be given

Carried

Crs West/Peulich PROCEDURAL MOTION That the meeting be adjourned for 5 minutes

Carried The meeting was adjourned at 9.59pm

Crs Dundas/Shewan PROCEDURAL MOTION That the meeting be reconvened

Carried The meeting reconvened at 10.06pm Cr Bauer returned to the chamber at 10.06pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

185

M 153 Gazettal Approval of Kingston Roads as B-double Routes Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability Author: Con Efremidis, Senior Traffic Engineer

1. Purpose

To seek Council approval for the gazettal of select roads within the Braeside and Redwood Gardens Industrial Estates.

2. Background

B-double permits are issued by VicRoads. Part of VicRoads’ process for B-doubles require transport operators firstly to obtain Council permission prior to receiving a VicRoads permit. Currently, the B-double applications Council received are assessed on a case-by-case basis. VicRoads can gazette local roads approved by Councils for use by B-doubles which alleviates the need for transport operators to seek individual approval from Council. Gazettal means any B-double operator can use the designated road. VicRoads have advised that the next gazettal will occur in September/October 2010. Use of local Council roads by a B-double or Higher Mass Limit vehicle (semi-trailer) is not permitted without written support of the relevant Council. These applications are administered by the Infrastructure Department who have restricted the approvals to Council’s industrial area roads only. If local industry did not have access to B-doubles it would seriously impact on their cost competitiveness.

3. Summary and Conclusion

The gazetting of the B-double routes will significantly alleviate the substantial administrative burden which the processing of applications is placing on Council. Applications for Woodlands Drive / Malcolm Road area / Mills Road area and the Redwood Gardens area, constitute the greater majority of ‘B-double’ applications received by Council. Any Council request for gazettal is still subject to a VicRoads assessment for its appropriateness for B-doubles.

4. Comments Gazettal of B-double roads saves Councils and operators significant administrative time and resources. The gazettal process works both ways; adding routes that are approved and other times Council can review a route and request its removal. Currently, approvals are required to be renewed annually. With an increasing number of applications the administrative burden in processing these applications is progressively increasing.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

186

Gazettals are undertaken by VicRoads once Councils nominate appropriate local roads. In addition to the Government Gazette, VicRoads publishes an information bulletin, titled ‘Local Roads Approved for B-doubles & Higher Mass Limits Trucks’. The publication also shows the arterial roads (freeways, highways and main roads), and lists the approved local roads on which B-doubles and Higher Mass Limits vehicles may travel in Victoria. We assess our local roads on the guidelines below. Where the guidelines can always be met, gazettal is appropriate. However in other situations, applications are considered on a case-by-case basis, which can also limit the number of permits issued. Council’s current list of roads for which B-double assess has been granted is attached. This schedule also highlights the roads to be considered for gazettal. Only roads previously assessed against the guidelines below are suggested for gazettal. The key areas recommended for gazettal are essentially the industrial estates of Woodlands Drive/ Malcolm Road and Redwood Gardens areas. Roads considered suitable for B-double use are assessed according by the following criteria: 1. Structural strength of pavement is appropriate

Specific inspections are undertaken on application for a requested new route. B-double applications are also checked against the pavement condition surveys undertaken tri-annually along with a minimum annual safety inspection.

2. Geometric layout

An engineering assessment of road widths and turning capacity. 3. Impact on amenity Minimise any incursion onto local roads and residential areas. No B-double

routes abut residential areas; access is gained directly from arterial roads.

5. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – For a given freight task, smaller vehicles consume more fuel, produce more emissions and take up more road space.

Social – the movement of B-double vehicles is restricted exclusively to Braeside and Dingley Village Industrial Estates (i.e. entirely within industrially zoned areas).

Financial – Forgoing the administrative component will enable productivity gains in other areas. Facilitating the delivery and transport needs of businesses will foster economic development in ‘Kingston’.

6. Recommendation

1. That Council approve the gazettal of roads (shaded in Attachment 2), as B-double routes.

2. VicRoads be informed of this action. Attachments: Attachment 1: Locality Plan / Attachment: 2: Roads for B-double approvals

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

187

Crs Brownlees/Athanasopoulos That: 1. Council approve the gazettal of roads (shaded in Attachment 2), as B- double routes. 2. VicRoads be informed of this action.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

188

M 154 Dog Control Enforcement Order Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability Author: Neil Sheppard Team Leader Local Laws

1. Purpose

Review Council’s current Order for the control of dogs in public places. Address concerns of members of the public regarding the control and enforcement of dogs along Patterson River walking pathways.

2. Background

The Domestic Animals Act 1994 (“the Act”) is the legislation that provides for management of dogs in public places. A Municipal Order under Section 26 (2) was adopted in October 1996 to require all dogs walked in the City of Kingston are on a leash unless in a reserve or part of a reserve that has been designated as an off leash area.. Municipal Councils are responsible for day-to-day enforcement of the law as specified in the Act. The aims of the Act are to promote responsible ownership of dogs and cats, and protect people and the environment from nuisance and dangerous dogs.

3. Summary and Conclusion

Council amend the current Order pursuant to section 26(2) of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 to update the Order introduced in October 1996. The new Order will require dogs to be on leash at all times whilst in any public place except for designated dog off leash areas. The revised Order will also provide further provisions to effectively control dogs within our Municipality. The new Order will assist in providing a safer environment for our community. Minor amendments to Council’s Local Law 6 are recommended and contained in the Options section of this report.

4. Consultation

In accordance with S223 of the Local Government Act 1989 the process for the implementation of a proposed amendment to a Local Law is as follows: Public Notice of Council’s intention; local papers, Government Gazette, display

information on Kingston website; and submissions invited. Submissions close (following a 14 day period to receive submissions). Section 223 Submission Committee hearing (verbal submissions). Report to Council (Council Meeting) including consideration of Section 223 Committee

submissions; National Competition Policy Review; and Council decision. Advertisement in the Government Gazette. Local Law amendments and the amended Order come into operation once advertised in

the Government Gazette or on any date specified in the Order.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

189

5. Issues

The current Order introduced in October 1996 is limited in it’s effectiveness as it does not address all public places. Council is aware of a number of serious attacks and nuisances caused by unrestrained dogs along the Patterson River walking/cycling path. This area is not under the control of Council therefore not covered by the current Order. Council has a duty to provide a safe environment and address known risks. The amended Order will allow Authorised Officers to educate and enforce along the Patterson River walking/cycling path and other public areas not covered currently. This will have an impact on the current work load of Local Laws Officers therefore Council will need to monitor the capacity to patrol and enforce in this area. Council will invite owners of shopping centres and private school grounds to enter into enforcement agreements (at no cost) should they wish Council to control dogs off leash on their property.

6. Options

Option 1 Amend the current Order to read as follows: 1. Dogs must be on leashes The owner of the dog must keep attached to the dog a chain, cord or leash not exceeding 2 metres in length and held by the owner when in any public place not designated as an off leash area, school grounds, railway land, or shopping centres where an agreement pursuant to Section 26 (2A) of the Domestic Animals Act 1994 is in place in the municipality. 2. Owners must be equipped to remove dog faeces The owner of a dog must not allow any part of that dog’s excrement to remain on any public place, school ground, shopping centre or railway land in the municipality. The owner must carry a litter removal device to pick up and remove all of the dog’s faeces and must produce the litter removal device upon request of an Authorised Officer. 3. Owner’s obligations 3.1 A dog may be exercised off a chain, cord or leash in a designated off leash area

provided the owner: a. Carries a chain, cord or leash not exceeding 2 metres in length, sufficient to bring

the dog under effective control if the dog behaves in a manner which threatens any person or animal;

b. Remains in effective voice or hand control of the dog and within constant sight of the dog so as to be able to promptly place the dog on a chain, cord or leash not exceeding 2 metres in length if that becomes necessary; and

c. Does not allow the dog to worry, cause a nuisance or threaten any person or animal.

3.2 If a dog is off a chain, cord or a leash in a designated area it must be brought under

effective control by means of a chain or cord or a leash not exceeding 2 metres in length if the dog is or likely to be within 20 metres of: a. The arena or ground of an organised sporting or practice event

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

190

b. A children’s play equipment area c. A principal location of an organised public meeting or event d. A permanent barbecue or picnic area.

4. Meaning of words In this order ‘Owner’ has the same meaning as the Domestic Animals Act 1994; and ‘Designated off leash area’ means any reserves, or part of a reserve, declared by resolution of the Council. “Litter removal device” means an apparatus designed for or able to be used for the purpose of removing dog excrement and includes a paper or plastic bag. ‘Public Place’ means any reserves, or part of a reserve and Road (as defined in the Local Government Act 1989). This option is recommended Option 2 Amend Local Law 6.20(1) to read A person in charge of a domestic animal or livestock must not allow any part of domestic animal or livestock excrement to remain on any road or Council land or on or in any public place. This option is recommended Option 3 Amend Local Law 6.20(2) to read A person in charge of a domestic animal or livestock on any road or Council land or on or in any public place must carry a litter device and must produce the litter device upon request of an Authorised Officer. This option is recommended

7 Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – The amended Local Law pertaining to animal litter will continue to contribute to providing a clean environment.

Social – The amended Order aims to improve community safety and reduce the number of reported nuisances and dog attacks.

Financial – There will be a cost for statutory advertising and new signage. At this stage Local Laws do not anticipate a need to increase staff resources, although this will be monitored and reviewed prior to the next budget cycle.

8. Recommendation

That Council resolve to support Option 1, Option 2 and Option 3 and advertise in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and invite public comment to determine if these Options as defined in this report be introduced.

Cr Peulich returned to the Chamber at 10.11pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Minutes 23 August 2010

191

Crs Shewan /Bauer That Council resolve to support Option 1, Option 2 and Option 3 and advertise in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act 1989 and invite public comment to determine if these Options as defined in this report be introduced.

Carried Crs Peulich/West AMENDMENT TO MOTION M154 That the words “not exceeding 2 meters in length” be removed from all parts of the options.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

192

M 155 Climate Change and Biodiversity Reference Group Author: Tony Rijs, General Manager Environmental Sustainability Council, at its July meeting, appointed ten Village Committee representatives and four Environmental Group representatives to the Climate Change and Biodiversity Reference Group. (Attachment A: Terms of Reference) The resolution also included a direction that the “community representatives be held in abeyance until the positions are filled”. The purpose of this report is to seek clarification regarding the extent of the membership of the Climate Change and Biodiversity Reference Group. The options are as follows: Option A Restrict the group to the fourteen members appointed at the July meeting and all interested Councillors. If this proposal is supported Council should resolve: That the membership of Climate Change and Biodiversity Reference Group be restricted to ten Village Committee representatives, four representatives of Environment Groups, any interested Councillors and nominated Council officers and that the Terms of Reference of the group be modified accordingly. Option B That the membership of the group be expanded beyond the members approached at the July Council meeting to enable the inclusion of community representatives. If this option is supported Council should resolve: That Council advertise its intent to enable members participating in Council’s Climate Change and Biodiversity Reference Group and that Council consider nominations received and that the Terms of Reference be modified to enable the appointment of community representatives.

Recommendation

A direction from Council is sought on this matter, and if Option B preferred, how many community representatives. Cr Peulich Foreshadowed a Motion for Option B if Option A is lost

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

193

Crs West/Shewan That the membership of the Climate Change and Biodiversity Reference Group be restricted to ten village committee representatives, four representatives of environment groups, any interested Councillors and nominated Council Officers and that the terms of reference of the group be modified accordingly.

Carried A division was called. Division For Against Mayor Cr Staikos Cr Peulich Cr Shewan Cr Dundas Cr Athanasopoulos Cr Brownlees Cr Bauer Cr West The Chairperson declared that the motion was carried.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

194

M 156 Stormwater Drainage Improvements along Mentone Foreshore

Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability

Author: Alan West – Team Leader Engineering Design

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to clarify Council’s support for a range of stormwater improvements along the Mentone foreshore (refer to attachment 1 for a site plan). Melbourne Water and Council have been working in partnership to develop a package of affordable drainage works that will result in:

(i) The removal of three Council stormwater pipes across the sand beach located opposite Charman Road, Sea Parade and Mundy Street and;

(ii) Improving the appearance and function of Melbourne Water’s large main drain outlet pipe located opposite Marina Road.

A detailed community consultation process was undertaken during May and June 2010 to inform residents and stakeholders about the latest proposal. Melbourne Water is now seeking Council’s agreement to allow works to commence in September this year.

2. Background

Scope of Works

Following detailed investigations, the original proposal to redirect all stormwater outlets towards Charman Rd was found to be too expensive and impractical.

An alternative proposal to redirect stormwater towards the Marina Rd outlet was considered and an in-principle funding arrangement (based on an agreed scope of works) between Council, Melbourne Water and the Department of Sustainability & Environment was reached. On the 6th April 2010 the Victorian Premier announced that the project would proceed based on the revised option with the works scheduled to commence in 2010. Melbourne Water officers presented the scope of works to Councillors at an information session held on the 10th May 2010 whereby the general agreement was for the two organisations to undertake a joint consultation program to seek the community’s views. This approach was also featured within a Kingston Your City newspaper article.

Project Details

The proposed stormwater drainage improvements were founded on the principles of:

Minimising the impact of drainage infrastructure on foreshore aesthetics.

Ensuring residents and visitors have a safe and accessible recreational facility.

Minimising disturbance and removal of native vegetation.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

195

The consultation process focused on the following package of proposed stormwater drainage improvements (comprising the agreed scope of works) between Charman Road and Mundy Street foreshore carpark: (i) Marina Road Foreshore Outlet (Stage 1) Replacing the pipe with a box culvert including significant enhancements to improve the operation and physical appearance of the outlet between the end of the existing pipe and the sea wall (refer to section 4 for further discussion on the outlet options). (ii) Pipe Diversion works through foreshore car park (Stage 1) A key component of this project involves the construction of approximately 85m of stormwater pipe through the carpark to divert flows from the Mundy Street catchment (7.5 Ha) into the large Marina Road main drain. (refer to section 6 for further discussion on stormwater quality improvements). (iii) Removal of Foreshore Pipe Outlets (Stage 1) Following the completion of car park diversion works, the Council stormwater outlet opposite Mundy Street can be fully removed from the beach. The pipe removal works will be managed by Melbourne Water with the aim of minimising disruptions to beach users. (iv) Pipe Diversion works along Beach Road (Stage 2) Another key component of this project involves the construction of approximately 300m of stormwater pipe along Beach Road to divert flows from the Charman Road catchment (3.3 Ha) and the Sea Parade catchment (1.1 Ha) into the Marina Road main drain (refer to section 6 for further discussion on alternative alignments). (v) Removal of Foreshore Pipe Outlets (Stage 2) Finally, following the stage 2 diversion works along Beach Road, the remaining two Council stormwater pipes opposite Charman Road and Sea Parade can be fully removed from the beach.

3. Summary and Conclusion

The consultation process confirmed that the majority of residents and stakeholders accept the reasons for the current proposal and the advertised scope of works and would like to see this project proceed as soon as practical.

Stage 1 Works

To allow stage 1 works to commence and be completed prior summer (by the 1st December 2010), the project will need to commence during September 2010. The project team (compromising of Melbourne Water and Council officers) support the proposal to upgrade the Marina Rd outlet across the beach in a manner that is consistent with option 1- tapered sandstone treatment.

A number of residents also requested the scope of works be broadened to include a Gross Pollutant Trap (GPT) to improve stormwater quality. The proposed solution discussed under section 6 represents a significant improvement with council officers supportive of this proposal on the basis that Melbourne Water has agreed to increase their financial contribution to cover the cost of implementing this component.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

196

Stage 2 Works

The removal of the remaining outlets (opposite Charman Road and Sea Parade) are scheduled to occur after summer (after 28th February 2011) due to complexities associated with choosing the most appropriate pipe alignment between Charman Road and Marina Road. Attachments 1 & 2 show alternative alignments with attachment 2 being the preferred option subject to affordability and approvals.

Further investigations and negotiations need to occur, taking into consideration Vic Roads requirements, the alignment of the proposed Bay Trail, the impact on foreshore vegetation and Coastal Management Act consent. If the alignment shown in attachment 2 proves to be viable (i.e boring under Beach Road and vegetation), it would be advisable to seek tenders for both alignments and report back to Council on the comparative costs and benefits of each option.

4. Consultation

Community workshops were originally undertaken during 2006 and more recently a detailed joint venture communication program was undertaken during May and June 2010. Melbourne Water’s ‘Community Engagement & Consultation Report’ summarizes the extent of consultation undertaken, the scope of works including proposed treatment options and the feedback received. It was recognised that a key element of the consultation would be the proposed treatment of Melbourne Water’s Marina Road outlet. The project team, consisting of senior officers from Melbourne Water and Council considered the merits of the following approaches:

Treatment Philosophy Issues to be considered A treatment that ‘stands out’ and attracts the community to this location.

The treatment would need to be iconic The water is very shallow and a pier would need

to extend around 200m to deeper water (see section 6 for further discussion).

Inherent safety and liability concerns with attracting people near a stormwater outlet.

The community likes to walk along the beach and past the outlet at low tide.

Budgetary constraints Is this Kingston’s highest foreshore priority for

major capital investment? A treatment that aims to ‘blend in’ and doesn’t attract attention.

Difficult to ‘hide’ a drain whose primary function is to provide major flood protection for Mentone.

The treatment needs to be safe and minimise the risk associated with walk on or jumping off.

Budgetary constraints

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

197

The ‘blend in’ option was considered more appropriate and three options were presented to Councillors at an information session held on the 10th May 2010. The three options are described in more detail below:

Options Presented Primary Objectives & Considerations Option 1: Tapered Sandstone The intention is for the sandstone coloured rocks to

‘blend in’ with the beach as the least visible option. The interlocking rocks to slope away from the box

culvert to minimise the risk of jumping off (similar to the rock wall near the Mordialloc Sailing Club).

Option 2: Bluestone cladding The intention is for the bluestone facia to

complement the existing bluestone sea wall (see section 6 for further discussion).

This option may eventually require a handrail to prevent people from jumping off the sides.

Option 3: Rock Groyne The intention is for large rocks to be placed

randomly on top of and around the box culvert to create a natural looking rocky outcrop.

The rocks may create a safety hazard for climbers. The rocks may look out of place in the middle of a

more formalised beach. An information bulletin was distributed to around 2500 residents (within a 400m radius) and to stakeholders providing information and an invitation to attend a Community Information session held on the 3 June 2010. The above-mentioned three options were presented at this Community Information session and were also on display within the foyer of Council’s Mentone office for 6 weeks during June and July and on Melbourne Water’s website. The detailed consultation program attracted a surprisingly small number of attendees, phone calls and correspondence. Feedback from those who did respond can be summarised as follows: A preference for no pipes on the beach with a general understanding and acceptance of the

proposed package of works. Attendees who voted indicated a majority preference for option 1. The second most

favoured treatment was option 3. Requests for the project to include measures to improve stormwater quality such as a

‘gross pollutant trap’. Following the consultation process, Melbourne Water’s consultant has finalised detail design plans based on Option 1 (sandstone treatment) and Council officers have prepared preliminary design plans to incorporate a gross pollutant trap within the Mundy Street car park.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

198

5. Issues

Council officers are aware of the following issues that should be taken into consideration when deciding on the preferred package of works: Coastal Management Act Consent All proposed works of significance along the foreshore require formal written consent from the Department of Sustainability & Environment (DSE). Melbourne Water submitted a detailed 30 page application earlier this year plus a detailed ‘Fauna & Flora’ assessment prepared by Biosis Research and a detailed ‘Cultural Heritage Management Plan’ by Terra Culture. Following a lengthy evaluation process, DSE has granted consent (based on the current scope of works) subject to further approval from Aboriginal Affairs Victoria. Any proposed changes to this project will require an amended application to DSE resulting in further delays. Melbourne Water Assets Melbourne Water is the responsible authority for the main drainage system including any alterations to the Marina Road outlet. Whilst Council has an important role to play with foreshore management and advocating on behalf of our community, the final decision regarding structural alterations will be decided by Melbourne Water in accordance with their standards taking into consideration flood management objectives, ongoing asset management requirements and ‘value for money’ for this project compared to the competing needs of all drainage infrastructure across the broader metropolitan region. Vic Roads Approval Vic Roads is the responsible authority for main roads and any proposed drainage diversion works impacting on Beach Road are subject to their stringent construction requirements and potentially very expensive traffic management requirements aimed at minimising disruption to road users. The alignment of Council’s proposed works along Beach Road will be heavily influenced by whatever option Vic Roads prefers. Budgetary Constraints Any proposals that will require significant modifications to the package of works covered by the original in-principle funding arrangement between Council, Melbourne Water and the Department of Sustainability & Environment may jeopardise funding allocated towards this project. Since the original funding arrangement, Melbourne Water are now offering to undertake additional components including stormwater quality at their cost subject to Council’s timely support. State Government funding for this project is understood to be somewhat linked to the objective of completing a substantive component of construction works during 2011.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

199

Timing of Works Melbourne Water has written to Council seeking an urgent response to their correspondence which outlines the scope of works and responsibilities of each organisation to implement various components of this project.

Stage 1 Subject to Council support, Melbourne Water has scheduled the package of works listed under Stage 1 (comprising of the Marina Road outlet, Mundy Street drain diversion and the removal of the Mundy Street outlet) to commence in September 2010. These works would be undertaken by Melbourne Water’s Pipes Alliance contractor with the intention of completion prior to the busy summer period. Stage 2 The package of works under Stage 2 (comprising of the drain diversion along Beach Road and the removal of the Charman Road and Sea Parade outlets) is unlikely to commence until after summer (after 28th February 2010) due to delays associated with confirming the most appropriate alignment, seeking approval from Vic Roads followed by 8 weeks to complete the design and tender process.

6. Alternative Options

Marina Road Pier

Constructing a substantial pier at the Marina Road outlet would be a significant variation to the current funding arrangements and would require further extensive consultation with the community and the various state government agencies. This option was not identified within Kingston’s ‘Coastal Management Plan’ and if investment of this scale was to be fully investigated, further consideration should be given to the most appropriate location for a pier along the foreshore. Historically, a 200m long pier was originally located beside the Mentone Life Saving Club coinciding with the existing Naples Road stormwater outlet (see photographs below). Potentially, Council may wish to undertake further feasibility investigations and seek community feedback on a pier option as part of any future proposal to upgrade the Naples Road outlet. Ball park estimates indicate that a pier of this size would cost several million dollars.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

200

Former Pier opposite Naples Road

(decommissioned following storm damage around the 1960’s)

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

201

Alignment of the Beach Road Diversion Drain

To remove the Charman Road and Sea Parade pipe outlets, a 300m long x 600mm diameter diversion pipe needs to be constructed somewhere along Beach Road (from 30m west of Charman Road within the City of Bayside down to Melbourne Water’s Marina Road main drain). The challenges associated with various alignment options are outlined below:

Along the residential side

The current preliminary design plans are based on constructing a pipe predominately within the parking bay along the residential side of Beach Road. This option would require the reconstruction of the parking bay and Vic Roads has provided in-principle support for this alignment.

Along the foreshore shoulder

The option of constructing a pipe along the foreshore side of Beach Road has been investigated. The drainage trench would need to be located away from the root zone of the foreshore vegetation and would necessitate the existing asphalt shoulder to be excavated and reinstated. Vic Roads has rejected this option as they consider the reinstated pavement at this location to be a greater risk for long term pavement maintenance and a greater risk to cyclists.

Along the Kingston Bay Trail alignment

This option requires further investigation as it is subject to Council determination of the Bay Trail alignment and subsequent Coastal Management Act consent and Vic Roads approval. It is anticipated that the timelines for approving the Bay Trail alignment are significantly longer than the desirable timeframe to remove the pipes from the foreshore. If the Bay Trail alignment was likely to be formally adopted by the end of 2010, it would be worth investigating the feasibility of combining the drainage works as part of one larger project.

Boring through the foreshore reserve

Another option under consideration involves boring a tunnel and ‘jacking’ the pipe along sections of the alignment (refer attachment 2 for an alignment plan). This option would involve:

Boring the pipe from the north-west corner of Charman Road (naturestrip) approximately 80m diagonally across Beach Road to the grassed foreshore area;

Constructing a 60m open trench through the grassed foreshore area up to the edge of the foreshore trees and vegetation and;

Boring the pipe a further 120m through and under the foreshore vegetation to connect into the Marina Road main drain on the access track near the toilet block.

The advantages of this option are:

Significantly less disruption to traffic and residents along Beach Road.

No pavement reinstatement and;

Minimal impact on foreshore vegetation as the bored pipe would be 2 to 3m underground and located below their shallow root system.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

202

The disadvantages of this option are: Approval would be subject to further foreshore management investigation to support a

revised application seeking amendments to the previous Coast Management Act consent.

The cost is very difficult to predict as there is limited competition (i.e only one main contractor undertakes this type of work in Victoria).

Council officers believe that it would be appropriate to undertake further investigation of the most appropriate alignment for stage 2 without the need to further delay the commencement of stage 1. The first step in confirming the feasibility of a ‘bored’ alignment would be to seek preliminary advice from DSE. If this option proves to be feasible, Council could seek tenders to confirm if the cost is within budgetary constraints.

Marina Road Outlet - Bluestone Option

Feedback from people who attended the Community Information Session generally supported option 1 (tapered sandstone), however there didn’t appear to be any strong objection to option 2 (bluestone cladding). Section 4 is this report summarises the objectives and issues associated with each option. Whilst the sandstone option is preferred by the project team, there are no feasibility constraints or financial reasons preventing the bluestone option being implemented (subject to Melbourne Water’s support).

Stormwater Quality improvements Stormwater quality improvement options were not included in the original scope of works due to budgetary constraints and an understanding that the upstream residential catchment is not considered a major pollutant generator (compared to industrial areas and major shopping centres). Following feedback from the consultation process, Melbourne Water and Council officers identified an option to divert low flows from the main drain through a gross pollutant trap (GPT) located within the Mundy St car park. Melbourne Water has offered to fund the installation cost of this treatment provided that Council accepts ongoing responsibility for maintenance (i.e monitoring and cleaning around twice a year). Council is already maintaining three similar GPT devices as part of our stormwater maintenance program.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

203

7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – Stormwater flows for all the catchments will be diverted through a proposed gross pollutant trap to improve the quality of stormwater discharging into the bay. This project also aims to minimise the removal of native vegetation and allows for the revegetation of disturbed areas by Council’s Natural Resources team.

Social impact – The proposal to remove three pipes is consistent with Kingston’s Municipal Strategic Statement - Clause 21.08-3 : To provide fair and equitable access to all coastal areas and to promote a wide range of social, recreational and coastal experiences which seek to optimise community enjoyment of the foreshore. The proposal is also consistent with Kingston Coastal Management Plan - objective 4d: To minimise the requirement of servicing infrastructure on the foreshore environment.

Financial – At an Ordinary Council meeting on the 22 February 2010, Council resolved to commit a maximum of $400,000 towards this project. Since then, Council officers have negotiated additional funding from the state government towards various aspects of the project without the need to increase Council’s original commitment.

8. Recommendation That Council:

1. Advise Melbourne Water of Council’s support for them to commence Stage 1 works that include upgrading the Marina Road outlet across the beach in a manner that is consistent with option 1- tapered sandstone treatment, constructing the stormwater drainage diversion works through the Mundy street carpark including the gross pollutant trap option and removing the Mundy street foreshore outlet.

2. Advise Melbourne Water that Council will accept maintenance responsibility for all drainage works associated with the Mundy Street diversion drain including maintenance of the gross pollutant trap.

3. Request Council officers to continue to investigate the option of an alternative pipe alignment between Charman Road and Marina Road as shown in attachment 2 as part of stage 2 works and, if this alignment is viable, seek tenders for both alignments shown in attachments 1 & 2 and report back to Council on the comparative costs and benefits.

Attachments: 1. Site Plan 2. Alternative Alignment for diversion to Marina Road Main drain

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

204

Crs Brownlees /West That Council: 1. Advise Melbourne Water of Council’s support for them to commence Stage 1 works that include upgrading the Marina Road outlet across the beach in a manner that is consistent with option 1- tapered sandstone treatment, constructing the stormwater drainage diversion works through the Mundy street carpark including the gross pollutant trap option and removing the Mundy street foreshore outlet. 2. Advise Melbourne Water that Council will accept maintenance responsibility for all drainage works associated with the Mundy Street diversion drain including maintenance of the gross pollutant trap. 3. Request Council officers to continue to investigate the option of an alternative pipe alignment between Charman Road and Marina Road as shown in attachment 2 as part of stage 2 works and, if this alignment is viable, seek tenders for both alignments shown in attachments 1 & 2 and report back to Council on the comparative costs and benefits

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

205

Attachment 1: Site Plan

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

206

Attachment 2: Alternative alignment

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

207

M 157 Amendment to Recreation Vehicle Local Law Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability Author: Neil Sheppard Team Leader Local Laws

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to investigate the appropriateness to amend Local Law 5 Part 3 Recreational Vehicles and include the power to impound and subsequently destroy impounded recreational vehicles if the required fees are not paid within the specified time.

2. Background

Attachment 1 – Local Law 5 Part 3 Recreational Vehicles (includes definitions). Patterson River Village Committee advised that the illegal riding of monkey bikes and trail bikes is a perennial problem in the Carrum area and suggest that the implementation of a Local Law similar to the Frankston model would be seen as a positive attempt to control this public nuisance issue. Victoria Police state that they do not currently have problems with recreational vehicles. When occasional issues have occurred, they have successfully undertaken educational and enforcement programs. Frankston on the other hand have had a significant issue with recreational vehicles. Frankston was the first Victorian council to introduce an impoundment provision of ‘monkey bikes/trail bikes’ and this has proven to be successful in reducing the incidence of these vehicles being ridden on roads and in other public places within their municipality. Since the introduction of Frankston’s Local Law in October 2007 Frankston has impounded a total of 51 motor cycles and assorted powered vehicles. 27 motorcycles were impounded in the first four weeks of the Local Law being introduced and the incidence of this occurring has now dropped to less than one per week. Should Kingston Council pursue an impounding provision, it is proposed to include penalties similar to those included in Frankston’s Local Law that range from fines, which increase for subsequent offences, and impoundment of illegally used motor cycles.

3. Summary and Conclusion

Review of Local Law 5 Part 3 Recreation Vehicles and advice received from Maddocks has resulted in a number of recommended amendments to the current Local Law. These are contained in the options section of this report. The current local law already contains an offence to use a recreational vehicle which includes motor bikes. In addition a new clause has been identified as an option to deal with the impounding of motorcycles. Under the proposals powers will exist to destroy any motorcycle impounded if the owner has not paid the fines within twenty eight (28) days upon receiving the penalty notice. Any seizure/impoundment of a recreational vehicle would be undertaken by Victoria Police.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

208

4. Consultation

Council sought advice from Maddocks who have stated that whilst the thrust of the proposed amendment is legally sound, there are some difficulties associated with doing exactly what is proposed. There may be some compatibility issues with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter). Victoria Police have been consulted and have not requested Council to introduce this Local Law empowering them to impound unregistered recreational vehicles. District Inspector Margaret Lewis has stated “Even though Kingston does not have a problem in this area with monkey bikes etc, I would like to think that we are supporting your efforts in addressing possible future problems”. In accordance with S223 of the Local Government Act 1989 the process for the implementation of the proposed amendments to Local Law is as follows: Public Notice of Council’s intention; local papers, Government Gazette, display

information on Kingston website; and submissions invited. Submissions close (following a 14 day period to receive submissions). Section 223 Submission Committee hearing (verbal submissions). Report to Council (Council Meeting) including consideration of Section 223 Committee

submissions; National Competition Policy Review; and Council decision. Advertisement in the Government Gazette. Local Law amendments come into operation once advertised in the Government Gazette.

5. Issues

Maddocks have stated that introducing provisions regulating the riding of unregistered recreational vehicles would enliven the right to not be deprived of property under the Charter. Advice indicates that there is a basis for concluding that the impoundment provisions are justifiable given the adverse effect on amenity. However, this cannot be certain as there remains an argument that other less restrictive means exist to achieve the same end. There remains an argument that impoundment is a disproportionate response to the mischief sought to be addressed by the provision which is planned. Maddocks state that whilst the general effect of this proposed amendment is open to implementation, they have reservations about doing precisely what is proposed.

6. Options

Option 1 Delete Clause 26(c)(ii) of local law 5 which defines a recreational vehicle as any vehicle registered with the Victorian Roads Corporation or registered pursuant to the Road Safety Act 1986. This option is recommended Option 2 Add a new clause to Local Law 5.27(4): (h) if the recreation vehicle to be used is registered.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

209

This option is recommended Option 3 Renumber Clause 27(1) to Clause 27(1)(a) and add a new clause to Local Law 5.27(1)(b) Clause 27(1a) does not apply to a maximum of 2 (two) recreation vehicles owned by the occupier of any private land. This option is recommended Option 4 Add a new Clause 27(6)(a) A Person must not use or cause or permit to be used a Recreation Vehicle on any land in a manner that causes or is likely to cause damage or injury to any Person or property. Penalty: Five (5) Penalty Units This option is recommended Option 5 Add a new Clause 27(6)(b) A Person must not use or cause or permit to be used a Recreation Vehicle on any Land in a manner that is or is likely to interfere with, inconvenience, obstruct, hinder, endanger the safety of, prevent the free passage of or cause alarm to any Person. Penalty: Five (5) Penalty Units This option is recommended Option 6 Add new clause Local Law 5.27(6) that provides the power to a member of Victoria Police to impound a recreational vehicle being used in contravention of the Local Law. The new provision will also need to specify the conditions of release and disposal. Due to the legal accountability associated with impounding of a vehicle, it is recommended that Maddocks be engaged to word the new provisions on Council’s behalf. This option is recommended

7 Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – The current Recreational Vehicle Local Law provides the means to address offending users of recreational vehicles which assists to protect reserves and grassed areas.

Social – Amending the Local Law will give Victoria Police an additional tool to deal with problems relating to the illegal riding of motorcycles and other recreational vehicles, assisting to provide a safe environment for the community.

Financial – If this amendment to the Local Laws is adopted there would be additional on going costs to Victoria Police and/or Council for the impounding and storage of ‘monkey bikes’. These costs could be off set by the suggested penalties to be imposed. There will also be costs for the statutory advertising under Section 223 Local Government Act. There will also be costs for new signs to advise the public of the new Local Law.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

210

8. Recommendation

That Council resolve to: 1. Delete Clause 26(c)(ii) of local law 5 which defines a recreational vehicle as any vehicle

registered with the Victorian Roads Corporation or registered pursuant to the Road Safety Act 1986.

2. Add a new clause to Local Law 5.27(4): (h) if the recreation vehicle to be used must be registered. 3. Renumber Clause 27(1) to Clause 27(1)(a) and add a new clause to Local Law

5.27(1)(b) Clause 27(1a) does not apply to a maximum of 2 (two) recreation vehicles owned by the occupier of any private land.

4. Add a new Clause 27(6)(a) A Person must not use or cause or permit to be used a Recreation Vehicle on any land in a manner that causes or is likely to cause damage or injury to any Person or property. Penalty: Five (5) Penalty Units

5. Add a new Clause 27(6)(b) A Person must not use or cause or permit to be used a Recreation Vehicle on any Land in a manner that is or is likely to interfere with, inconvenience, obstruct, hinder, endanger the safety of, prevent the free passage of or cause alarm to any Person. Penalty: Five (5) Penalty Units

6. Add new clause Local Law 5.27(6) that provides the power to a member of Victoria Police to impound a recreational vehicle being used in contravention of the Local Law. The new provision will also need to specify the conditions of release and disposal.

Due to the legal accountability associated with impounding of a vehicle, that Maddocks be engaged to word the new impounding provisions on Council’s behalf. Attachment 1 – 08/74988 Local Laws 5 Part 3 Recreational Vehicles Attachment 2 – 10/73531 Email from District Inspector Victoria Police Attachment 3 – 10/68888 Advice from Maddocks

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

211

Crs Brownlees /West That Council resolve to: 1. Delete Clause 26(c)(ii) of local law 5 which defines a recreational vehicle as any vehicle registered with the Victorian Roads Corporation or registered pursuant to the Road Safety Act 1986. 2. Add a new clause to Local Law 5.27(4): (h) if the recreation vehicle to be used must be registered. 3. Renumber Clause 27(1) to Clause 27(1)(a) and add a new clause to Local Law 5.27(1)(b) Clause 27(1a) does not apply to a maximum of 2 (two) recreation vehicles owned by the occupier of any private land. 4. Add a new Clause 27(6)(a) A Person must not use or cause or permit to be used a Recreation Vehicle on any land in a manner that causes or is likely to cause damage or injury to any Person or property. Penalty: Five (5) Penalty Units 5. Add a new Clause 27(6)(b) A Person must not use or cause or permit to be used a Recreation Vehicle on any Land in a manner that is or is likely to interfere with, inconvenience, obstruct, hinder, endanger the safety of, prevent the free passage of or cause alarm to any Person. Penalty: Five (5) Penalty Units 6. Add new clause Local Law 5.27(6) that provides the power to a member of Victoria Police to impound a recreational vehicle being used in contravention of the Local Law. The new provision will also need to specify the conditions of release and disposal. Due to the legal accountability associated with impounding of a vehicle, that Maddocks be engaged to word the new impounding provisions on Council’s behalf. Further that the alterations be subject to a S223 community consultation process.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

212

M 158 Storage of Aerosol Spray Cans Local Law Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability Author: Neil Sheppard, Team Leader Local Laws

1. Purpose

This report is to request that Council consider re-implementing the repealed Local Law

5.10A(1) relating to the storage of aerosol spray paint containers in order to address an

identified gap in the Graffiti Prevention Act 2007.

2. Background

The Graffiti Prevention Act 2007 (The Act) was passed and received Royal Assent on 27 November 2007. The Act deals with the control of spray cans and contains clauses relating to the sale of aerosol spray cans to minors. However the Act does not have controls regarding the storage of aerosol spray cans at the point of purchase. Council introduced a Local Law to control the storage of aerosol spray paint cans and had undertaken extensive education with all relevant retailers. Unfortunately this was later repealed when the Graffiti Prevention Act 2007 came into operation as it was anticipated the Act would cover the provision.

3. Summary and Conclusion

Council and Victoria Police have undertaken a successful joint operation to address the sale of aerosol paint containers to minors. It was determined during this operation that it would be advantageous to be able to restrict the access to aerosol spray paint containers to reduce the opportunity for these types of cans to be shoplifted and assist in the controlled sale of these products. As there is no provision in the Act pertaining to the storage of aerosol spray paint containers, it would be beneficial to re-introduce the repealed Clause 10A(1) of Council’s Local Law 5 relating to the storage of aerosol spray paint containers at the point of purchase Council will need to initiate the statutory process required for any changes to be made to Kingston’s Local Laws.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

213

4. Issues

As there is no current provision in the Graffiti Prevention Act 2007 to control the storage of aerosol spray paint containers, Authorised Officers are unable to enforce this activity. However if the Local Law was re-introduced this could be addressed. Recent advice from the Department of Justice indicates that they will not be amending the Act to include a provision for the storage of aerosol paint containers.

5. Options

Option 1 Re-introduce previously repealed Local Law relating to the storage of aerosol spray paint containers as follows: Local Law 5.10A (1) A person who:

a. offers for sale any aerosol spray paint container; or b. owns, operates or manages a business from premises on which an aerosol spray

paint container is offered for sale must not c. store or display; or d. cause to be stored or displayed; or e. allow to be stored or displayed any aerosol spray paint container in an area that is accessible to the public.

Penalty: Two (2) Penalty Units

(2) An Authorised Officer may seize or impound any aerosol spray paint container which

is found where there has been a contravention of Clause 10A. This option is recommended

6. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – The effect of taking positive action around the graffiti issue will continue to enhance the general appearance of the municipality.

Social – Continuing to take positive action to both enforce the provisions of The Act and re-introducing controls around the storage of aerosol spray paint cans will demonstrate Council’s commitment to protect and improve the general amenity of the municipality for residents and other users.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

214

Financial – Council will incur a cost for the statutory advertising needed to re-instate the Local Law. Council will also have minimal ongoing cost for resources for an education and enforcement program. Some retailers will incur a cost for securing these products.

7. Recommendation

That Council resolve to support Option 1 and in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act advertise its intention to reinstate Clause 10A (1) of Local Law 5 as defined in this report and invite public comment to determine if it should be reintroduced. Attachments: Attachment 1: 08/44088 Report to CIS on Graffiti Prevention Act 2007

Crs Brownlees /West That Council resolve to support Option 1 and in accordance with Section 223 of the Local Government Act advertise its intention to reinstate Clause 10A (1) of Local Law 5 as defined in this report and invite public comment to determine if it should be reintroduced.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

215

M 159 Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager, Environmental

Sustainability Author: Brian Trower – Team Leader Roads & Drains

1. Purpose

To present a policy for Council adoption in relation to vehicle crossings to residential properties from Council’s local roads.

2. Background

The current standards used with vehicle crossings was developed over 10 years ago to the merging of standards from the five former municipalities covering Kingston. With high-density living and high demand for kerbside parking it is appropriate that current standards be supported by a policy framework to ensure there is the appropriate balance between property access and traffic mobility, safety, parking and the streetscape. Engineering standards relate to geometric layout covering widths, splays, ramped kerb profiles, structural integrity and quality of materials.

3. Summary and Conclusion

Some community members have sought clarity around Council’s policy and practices in relation to setting the width of the vehicle crossings to residential properties. The policy presented relates to properties that do not have their vehicle access controlled by a planning approval for the site. The objectives of the policy are to establish an appropriate balance between functional access to properties, while providing for the safety of all road users and maintenance of the integrity of all road-based assets. The policy outlines maximum and minimum width standards, broad objectives behind establishing such standards, however provides for variation to the policy subject to a specific application. Such applications are to be considered in line with objectives of the policy. The policy reinforces the responsibility and cost for providing and maintaining vehicle crossings rest with the owner, with Council not making a contribution.

4. Outline of policy

The extent of the policy is limited to those properties which do not have their vehicle access controlled by a planning approval under the Planning and Environment Act, which is otherwise subject to broader planning considerations for the development of the site. The policy proposes a framework for setting minimum and maximum width of vehicle crossing and the number of crossings per property provide for reasonable egress and access.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

216

Other geometric layout considerations cover the vehicle crossing alignment to the building line and streetscape impact. The policy also allows for consideration of variation to such standards however this is subject to a specific application. The guidelines in policy aim to establish the balance between a property’s right of access, where such exists, from a local road optimising kerbside parking, safety of all road users and the protection of road assets, including street trees along with assets utility agencies.

5. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – construction widths are minimized thereby reducing carbon footprint of construction activity.

Social – the policy recognises a property is right for vehicle access to a Council local road.

Financial –. The establishment of vehicle crossings are the financial responsibility of owners, and therefore there is no financial impact on council.

6. Recommendation That the residential vehicle crossing policy as presented be adopted.

Attachments: Residential Vehicle Crossing Policy

Engineering standard drawings

Crs Athanasopoulos/Dundas That the residential vehicle crossing policy as presented be adopted.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

217

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

218

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

219

M 160 Municipal Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability Author: Neil Sheppard, Municipal Fire Prevention Officer Warren Ashdown, Manager Infrastructure

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to brief Councillors on Council’s obligations regarding Neighbourhood Safer Places (NSP) plans.

2. Background

In its Interim Report, the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission recommended that neighbourhood safer places, or ‘NSPs’, be identified and established to provide persons in bushfire affected areas with a place of last resort during a bushfire.

In response to this recommendation, the Victorian Government has introduced the Emergency Services Legislation Amendment Act 2009 (Vic) (‘ESLA Act’) which amends the Country Fire Authority Act 1958 (Vic) (‘CFA Act’) and the Emergency Management Act 1986 (Vic) (‘EM Act’). The effect of these amendments will be to require the Country Fire Authority (‘CFA’) to certify NSPs against the CFA’s Fire Rating Criteria, and Victoria’s Councils to identify, designate, establish and maintain suitable places as NSPs in their municipal districts. A Neighbourhood Safer Place is a space which is a place of last resort for individuals to access and remain in during the passage of fire through their neighbourhood without the need to take a high risk journey. It is intended to provide a place of relative safety, but does not guarantee the survival of those who assemble there, and should only be accessed when personal bushfire survival plans cannot be implemented or have failed. Council has a statutory responsibility to complete a Neighbourhood Safer Places (NSP) Plan before designating a NSP. This Plan provides the criteria against which Council will assess each CFA-certified NSP for vegetation clearance, access and egress, buffer zone uses, and land ownership (and re-assess it each year).

3. Summary and Conclusion

Kingston does not have vast tracts of open bushland with isolated communities and Kingston does not have a history of bushfires in the municipality. The fire prevention programs undertaken each fire danger period by the City of Kingston, the MFB and the CFA is considered to be appropriate for an urban municipality. Council received a letter (Attachment 2: 10/64729) from Michael Wootten Acting CEO CFA on 2 July 2010. This letter confirmed that from a State perspective there were no identified “high risk bushfire zones” in Kingston and therefore no NSP’s were identified in preparation for the 2009-10 fire season by the CFA.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

220

The MFPO and MERO have determined that the City of Kingston is not required to implement a Neighbourhood Safer Place due to the low bushfire risk in the CFA area. A draft Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan (Attachment 1: 10/47470) has now been prepared and needs to be considered and adopted by Council.

4. Consultation

Council’s Municipal Fire Prevention Officer has liaised with the CFA and MFB and members of the City of Kingston Municipal Fire Prevention Committee and it has been determined that Kingston is a low risk area for bushfires as there are no bushland areas located within the CFA area of Kingston. The CFA previously under their statutory obligation (2009) considered NSP for Kingston and did not nominate any for our municipality. The draft KNSP plan has been considered by the MEMP Committee and supported by the committee members.

5. Issues

A Neighbourhood Safer Place is an area that provides a level of protection from the immediate life threatening effects of a bush fire (direct flame contact and radiant heat). The City of Kingston is not easily exposed to this risk as it is serviced by good

interconnecting roads enabling evacuation in many directions Immediate life threatening effects of a bush fire is considered minimal. The City of Kingston does not have or is required to have a Township Protection Plan.

It is important to understand that Neighbourhood Safer Places are not to be confused with Fire Refuges, Relief Centres, Recovery Centres, Assembly Centres, or Informal Places of Shelter each has a different and specific purpose. Council has now met its statutory obligation of considering NSP’s prior to May 2010 and must now consider and adopt a Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan.

6. Options

Option 1 That the Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Place Plan be presented to Council for consideration and adoption. This option is recommended

7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – The Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Place Plan coupled with the current fire prevention programs give thorough consideration to the bushfire related environmental impact on the safety of Kingston residents.

Social –Council can demonstrate their commitment to fire prevention and inform the residents and businesses that Council considers the CFA zone of the municipality to be at low risk of bushfire and that there is no requirement for NSP’s.

Financial – N/A

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

221

8. Recommendation

That Council note the contents of this report and adopt the draft Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan.

Attachments: Attachment 1: 10/47470 Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan Attachment 2: 10/64729 Letter from Michael Wootten Acting CEO CFA

Crs West/Shewan That Council note the contents of this report and adopt the draft Kingston Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan and that the plan should show that the City of Kingston is not required to implement a Neighbourhood Safer Places Plan.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

222

M161 Draft Tree Management Policy Approved by: Jonathan Guttmann, A/General Manager Environmental

Sustainability Author: Tim Ford, Supervisor Tree Planting and Establishment

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement to release the Draft Tree Management Policy for a formal public consultation process. (refer Attachment 1 – Draft Tree Management Policy).

2. Background

Council manages approximately 90,000 trees located within reserves, streets and Council managed facilities. Protecting and enhancing Kingston’s urban forest through proper management is vital to sustaining a healthy vibrant community. The residents and Council have made trees a priority for the quality of life benefits they provide. The Urban Forest is the sum total of all trees growing within an urban area. It includes trees on private and public managed land. The City of Kingston Draft Tree Management Policy, however, pertains solely to trees located on Council managed land. In response to the growing appreciation of trees and to respond to the increasing challenge of managing trees in the urban environment, Council has developed a Draft Tree Management Policy. The Draft Tree Management Policy outlines Council’s policies and strategic direction in regard to the management of the public component of the urban forest. It seeks to create a vision on how the urban forest should look and provide the guidelines for achieving the visions. The Draft Tree Management Policy deals with all aspects of tree management. The main objectives of the Draft Tree Management Policy are: To protect, enhance and maintain a safe urban forest. To have a fully stocked urban forest consisting of an acceptable blend of species

diversity suited to the sites in which they are placed. To meet the challenges of climate change by aiming to increase canopy cover and

density, and through selecting and using trees to reduce energy use and absorb carbon dioxide.

To budget effectively to maintain these resources and to follow planned maintenance cycles.

To perform maintenance activities to acceptable arboricultural industry standards. To communicate with residents and businesses of the City of Kingston with regard to

tree maintenance activities. Council has planted on average 74% native trees and 26% exotic trees in the annual street tree planting programs over the past five years.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

223

Planning will commence shortly for the 2011 street tree planting program. The proposed 2011 street tree planting program will continue to have a strong emphasis on improving the amenity of Kingston’s main road network as outlined within the Street Tree Management Plan 2000. The 2011 Street Tree Planting Program will be finalised December 2010 at which time orders for plant stock will be placed. The following categories make up the annual street tree planting program. Infill street tree planting - 500 trees

The infill street tree planting is based upon resident requests for new or replacement street trees and averages around 450 to 500 requests annually. This component of the planting program is subject to individual site inspections and consultation.

Main Roads planting - 250 trees

The main road planting focuses on Kingston main road network, including arterial and collector roads. The main road component of the planting program is subject to approval from the relevant road authorities and community consultation.

Whole street planting – 1000 trees

Whole of street planting is either planting out all available nature strips within a street or undertaking street tree removal and replacement. This is subject to undertaking community consultation and priorities for planting are based upon the condition of the existing streetscape, priorities identified in the Street Tree Management Plan 2000 and the need to obtain an even distribution of new street tree plantings across the municipality.

Road Reconstruction Planting – 250 trees

The road reconstruction planting consists of planting out all available nature strips within a street and or undertaking street tree removal and replacement in conjunction with Councils Road reconstruction program. This component of the program is subject to confirmation of the infrastructure works program and community consultation.

3. Summary and Conclusion

The Draft Tree Management Policy provides an overview of the strategic direction for the management of the public Urban Forest, and is supported by Technical Guidelines that underpin the implementation of the policy and outlines best arboricultural practice for tree management functions. In summary, the Draft Tree Management Policy identifies: 7 key areas of tree management.

1. Tree Establishment 2. Tree Maintenance 3. Tree Protection 4. Tree Removal 5. Tree Risk Management 6. Assigning a Monetary Tree Value

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

224

7. Challenges for the Future It further notes that Council will: Place public safety as a priority. Seek to achieve a sustainable urban forest taking into consideration ecological

principles, the dynamic nature of trees in the urban landscape community expectations and the built environment.

Implement and manage appropriate tree removal / replacement programs that ensure the tree resource is continually renewed thereby ensuring a biological diverse and sustainable tree population.

Implement tree management in line with relevant legislative requirements, strategic policies and accepted tree care practices. Any operation that is known to be detrimental to long-term tree health is not appropriate.

Maintain and enhance the existing tree population for inheritance by future generations by preserving tree health, biological diversity, aesthetic appearance and amenity value.

Maintain high standards of tree management to current best practice and recognised standards and provide adequate resources to ensure proper tree management.

Utilise a program of systematic tree assessment and best practice tree management to mitigate tree risk for residents and visitors to the City.

Remove hazardous trees and inappropriate species where necessary and plant replacement trees in order that the City’s landscapes are reinvigorated and maintained with regard to safety.

Select tree species for planting based on their suitability to the site, climatic conditions biological diversity, performance, and potential to contribute to the landscape. Tree selection, placement and planting of trees will be undertaken to mitigate potential conflicts with infrastructure and to reduce long-term risk.

Undertake planting programs to achieve a net increase of trees across the City. Protect Council trees from development and other activities that threaten their health

and viability. The conflict between trees and infrastructure will be minimised where possible.

Implement design solutions to enable residents to develop a sense of pride and ownership and reduce the incidence of vandalism

Consult with the community about all major projects involving tree removal and tree planting.

Maintain accurate and current documentation on the management of Council’s tree assets

4. Consultation

The Draft Tree Management Policy was circulated to internal stakeholders to seek feed back and input during the drafting. Departments consulted include Parks, Roads and Drains, Infrastructure, Statutory Planning, Local Laws and Maintenance Contracts and Waste. It is proposed to undertake extensive community consultation once the Draft Tree Management Policy is approved for consultation. Key stakeholders have been identified including: Council managed facilities and centres Village Committees

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

225

Local community through Council’s website, media releases, KYC and the community radio programme

The Draft Tree Management Policy will be available in an electronic format on Council’s website and in hard copy at Kingston Libraries and Customer Service Centres

5. Issues

A wide range of tree concerns can evoke passion from the community. Issues with tree removal and tree planting are contentious and can be controversial at a local community level without the context of supporting recommendations. All avenues and stands of trees have a finite life span and at some point in time trees need to be removed and replaced. Tree removals are an acceptable management option in nature strips, parks and reserves and other council managed land to ensure human health and safety, to protect infrastructure, to facilitate approved development and to maintain a healthy urban forest. The community will be actively consulted as part of the tree removal and replacement process. Council’s Street Tree Management Plan 2000 (refer Attachment 2 – Street Management Plan) is currently used as a guide when planning the annual street tree planting program. The Street Tree Management Plan provides an overview of street trees within the city and outlines priorities for street tree planting works for both main roads and residential streets. Since the adoption of Councils Street Tree Management Plan 2000 a number of priorities within the management plan have been addressed. The document is now over ten years old and in need of review. Once the Tree Management Policy has been adopted it is proposed to review and update the Street Tree Management Plan 2000 to update planting priorities and tree species selection to reflect current landscape and environmental conditions. As part of this review extensive consultation will be undertaken.

6. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Social – Protecting and enhancing the urban forest to sustain a healthy and vibrant community.

Financial – Directing Council resources in a strategic manner based on existing and projected recurrent expenditure.

Environmental – Recognising the importance of a healthy and sustainable urban forest and the environment benefits it provides

7. Recommendation That Council endorse the Draft Tree Management Policy for public consultation.

Attachments: Draft Tree Management Policy (Volume 1) Street Tree Management Plan 2000 (Tabled)\ Cr West proposed and Cr Shewan Seconded the flowing motion which was an amendment than the recommendation which was before Council

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

226

Cr Dundas proposed an amendment to remove point 2 from the motion

Crs Dundas /Athanasopoulos That point 2 of the motion be removed

Lost

Cr Peulich /Bauer That the motion be put

Carried

Crs West/Shewan That: A) The Draft Tree Management Policy be placed on public consultation from the 31st August, 2010 to the 5th October, 2010; and B) Upon completion of the public consultation period a report be brought back to Council summarising the public consultation process and seeking direction from Council in relation to the draft Tree Management Policy. To add the following words after “Draft tree Management Strategy” and before” public consultation” “subject to the addition of policies covering: 1. Street tree Removal (for instance) 7 days notification to all residents in the streets will be required before removal of any street trees, except where they are dangerous; residents who object will have right to appeal such a decision to an independent arborist. 2. Native tree plantings in Streets and Parks; for instance; In general, native trees should be planted unless there is good reason for other varieties, e.g. where residents of a street want something else; complimentary indigenous or native trees should be planted in streets adjacent to natural resource and foreshore areas, including parks and reserves with remnant vegetation.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

227

10. Community Sustainability Reports M 162 Proposal to Become a Fair Trade Council Approved by: Mauro Bolin, General Manager Community Sustainability Author: Susan Heywood, Social Strategies Coordinator

1. Purpose

This report provides an overview of Fair Trade issues and recommends that Council considers options in relation to progressing Fair Trade principles. This report relates to the visions set out in the City of Kingston Council Plan 2009 - 2013, including: Strategy 2.4. A leader in sustainable practices; Strategy 3.2. Strong, cohesive and engaged communities; Strategy 3.3. Local communities connected through knowledge and information; Strategy 3.4. Monitor and plan for the changing needs and aspirations of the community;

and Strategy 4.2. Inform and network our local business community.

2. Background

This report has been prepared at the request of Councillor Shewan in response to an email received from Mr Gerry Thornewell of the Social Justice Ministry of the Syndal Baptist Church. Particular sections of this report has been reproduced (with permission) from information provided by the Fair Trade Communities Initiative forwarded to Council by Mr Thornewell. This information has been confirmed as accurate following discussions with the Fair Trade Association of Australia and New Zealand (FTAANZ) that manages the Fair Trade Communities Initiative. Fair Trade means: a fair price for the producer’s goods (i.e. one that covers the cost of production and guarantees a sustainable livelihood); long-term contracts to provide better income security; and for many, support to gain the knowledge and skills needed to develop their businesses. Fair Trade labelled products empower consumers with the choice to make more ethical and sustainable purchasing decisions. Fair Trade products currently available in Australia include coffee, tea and chocolate. There is a growing international Fair Trade movement focused on delivering improved outcomes for farmers in third world and developing countries. Fair Trade represents an alternative approach to conventional trade. Through the provision of a fair trading price, protection of worker’s rights and the promotion of sustainable production practices, Fair Trade has made a significant contribution to poverty alleviation in many parts of the world. Fair Trade Communities Initiative The Fair Trade Communities Initiative has been developed by FTAANZ in order to provide goals and guidelines which organisations and communities across Australia and New Zealand can adopt as a focus for promoting Fair Trade within their sphere of influence. Participants

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

228

within the initiative work towards achieving a set of goals to promote Fair Trade within their organisation’s procurement practices, workplaces and local community. There are six broad steps for Local Governments wishing to participate in the Fair Trade Communities Initiative developed by FTAANZ. These are: Step 1 – Local Council Resolution The Council passes a resolution stating Council’s support for Fair Trade and commits the Council to available Fairtrade Certified products at its meetings and in its offices as well as committing to working towards meeting the steps outlined below either in part or full within 12 months. Step 2 – Community Steering Group Establish a local Fair Trade community steering group to ensure continued commitment of the Council to achieving Fair Trade Community status. It is suggested that the steering group include a Councillor, people representing schools, churches, community organisations and local businesses in the municipality. The group would be responsible for ongoing monitoring of progress towards achieving its goals and for expanding the availability of Fairtrade Certified products and promotion of Fair Trade through displays, media and signage. Step 3 – Availability of Fair Trade Products in Local Shops A range of Fair Trade Certified products are currently available from cafes and retailers within the municipality. As other Fair Trade Certified products such as tea and chocolate become more available in Australia, this program would promote products to become more readily available in the area. In order to retain the Fair Trade Community status in future years, the community steering group would work to ensure growth in the number of retail outlets stocking Fair Trade products. Step 4 – Use of Fairtrade Certified Products in Local Enterprises Council would work through the Steering Committee and Council’s Economic Development Unit to encourage local business to promote the Fair Trade Communities Initiative. The Steering Committee would also work with local schools and community groups in the area to use and promote Fair Trade products. Step 5 – Media Coverage The Steering Committee would promote the Fair Trade Communities initiative through Council’s web site, community newsletters, club and school newsletters as well as press releases. This would include a local Fair Trade directory. Step 6 – Progress Goals The Steering Committee would develop progress goals to ensure ongoing growth of the program.

3. Summary and Conclusion

A commitment to purchasing Fair Trade products and promotion of Fair Trade would enable Council to contribute to poverty alleviation in many parts of the world, protect worker’s rights and promote sustainable production practices. Council is currently committed to purchasing Fair Trade tea and coffee for Council owned and/or managed facilities. Participation in the Fair Trade Communities Initiative at any level would provide a way for Council to build upon this commitment and work with the local Kingston community including local businesses,

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

229

organisations and community members to increase community awareness and the availability and use of Fair Trade products in the municipality.

4. Consultation

Officers contacted the FTAANZ to discuss the Fair Trade Communities Initiative and the steps required for a local government to become a Fair Trade Community. Staff from FTAANZ provided officers with the Fair Trade Communities guidelines, application form, and a Fair Trade procurement guide that provides an overview of the program, suggested actions and minimum standards that need to be achieved to become a Fair Trade Community as a part of the Fair Trade Communities Initiative. An officer from FTAANZ would be available to provide ongoing support to assist Council to become a Fair Trade Community. Advice received indicated that most councils participating in the Initiative were able to achieve accreditation within 12 months of commencing the activity. It was also made clear that the initiative was designed to be used as a community engagement tool whereby awareness of Fair Trade issues and products takes place in a community, local businesses increase their supply of Fair Trade products and local organizations similar to Council commit to the exclusive use of Fair Trade tea and coffee in addition to promoting the use of Fair Trade products. Council’s Social Strategies Coordinator has consulted with the City of Yarra and City of Monash regarding their experiences as Fair Trade organizations. The City of Monash experience is that the steering committee members are highly motivated but need close support to enable them to contribute meaningfully to committee activities. Monash also has found that first year activities are primarily about educating the local community including local businesses about Fair Trade and how they can be involved. In 2006 the City of Yarra was the first council in the southern hemisphere to become a Fair Trade community and is currently providing annual funding to the Fair Trade Association. Yarra established a steering committee that was chaired by a councillor and had representatives from the Brotherhood of St Laurence, church groups and local businesses, however after a 12 month period the committee ceased to meet. Officers from Yarra suggested that Council be clear about its commitment and ongoing role in the initiative prior to commencing the activity.

5. Issues

Several Victorian local governments have committed to being a Fair Trade Community and are educating, encouraging and supporting the broader community to consider purchasing Fair Trade products. Victorian based councils that have already committed include Yarra, Monash, Whitehorse, Stonnington and Casey. Some of those considering becoming a Fair Trade Community are Hobsons Bay, Maroondah and Greater Dandenong. Discussion on the anticipated costs associated with participating in the Fair Trade Communities Initiative follows. First, in some cases, Fairtrade Certified products are more expensive than alternatives due to fairer prices being paid to the producers. Despite this, Council does provide Fair Trade tea and coffee at its offices. FTAANZ also charge participating councils a one off administrative fee which is determined by a sliding scale based upon council revenue. The maximum possible charge is $1,200 (minimum $350). There is also an annual fee of $132 to become an Associate Member of FTAANZ. It is anticipated that to establish and support the activities of a Fair Trade Steering Group, Council would require an estimated $12,000 additional expenditure per annum. This would include costs associated with producing and erecting street signs (where applicable), developing and

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

230

distributing promotional materials, conducting promotional activities at community events, advertising in the media, undertaking selected mail outs, and resourcing the Fair Trade Steering Group. The potential additional expenditure of $12,000 to Council’s current budget would need to be factored into the 2010 - 2011 mid year budget review process.

6. Options

Option 1 That Council continue with current arrangements providing Fair Trade Certified tea and coffee in Council buildings, and also undertake broader community awareness raising activities but not as a part of the Fair Trade Communities Initiative. Community awareness raising activities could be undertaken by Council’s Community Engagement team, for example, by profiling Fair Trade issues in Council’s KYC publication and Council’s Economic Development unit could encourage local businesses to offer Fair Trade products. Priorities and oversight of Fair Trade activities could be provided by an internal staff working group. This option can be conducted within existing resources. Option 2 Participate in the Fair Trade Communities Initiative and follow the six steps as outlined in the body of this report and be accredited by FTAANZ as a Fair Trade Community. It is however anticipated that to establish and support the activities of the Steering Group, Council would require an additional estimated $12,000 per annum. This additional expenditure would need to be factored into the 2010 – 2011 mid year budget review process. Option 3 Continue with current arrangements to provide Fairtrade Certified tea and coffee, but do not actively pursue other community awareness raising activities. Option 4 This option involves registering with, and becoming a member of, FTAANZ and undertaking the promotional activities and commitments outlined in Option1. Council would not undertake all of the six steps to become accredited by FTAANZ as a Fair Trade Community. A Community Steering Group would not be established but input from Council’s already established Access and Equity Committee would be sought. The cost of this option would be around $1,200.

7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – The Fair Trade Communities Initiative educates farmers regarding sustainable land use practices ensuring that the land is productive and that the surrounding environment is not damaged. Participation in the initiative is also an opportunity to provide information to the local community about Fair Trade and its relationship to broader environmental sustainability issues.

Social impact - The ultimate social beneficiaries of the initiative are the communities in the developing world who benefit from a guaranteed fair and sustainable price for their products, better working conditions, and a contribution toward community development. The general Kingston community however would also benefit from an increased understanding of Fair Trade issues. Community members that become actively engaged in promoting Fair Trade in the local community are better engaged in community life.

Financial - The FTAANZ charge an administrative fee to councils participating in the initiative. Fairtrade Certified products are generally a little more expensive than their

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

231

conventionally traded counterparts however Kingston currently provides Fair Trade coffee and tea in its offices. Overall, to fully participate in the Fair Trade Communities Initiative would cost approximately $12,000 per year.

8. Recommendation

That Option 2 is adopted by Council. That is, that Council participates fully in the Fair Trade Communities Initiative and follow the six steps as outlined in this report and be accredited by FTAANZ as a Fair Trade Community.

Cr Shewan /Athanasopoulos That Option 2 is adopted by Council. That is, that Council participates fully in the FairTrade Communities Initiative and follow the six steps as outlined in this report and be accredited by FTAANZ as a Fair Trade Community. That the Access and Equity Committee shall perform the role of community steering group.

Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

232

M 163 Positive Ageing Annual Review Approved by: Mauro Bolin, General Manager Community Sustainability Authors: Yvonne Honey, Positive Ageing Community Development

Officer Kate Daddo, Community Development Coordinator

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is provide an overview of the implementation of Kingston Council’s Positive Ageing Plan, with details of the initiatives and projects that have been successfully delivered under the guidance of the Positive Ageing Advisory Committee between June 2009 and June 2010. In addition, the report highlights key areas that need to be focused on to ensure that Council continues to deliver high quality outcomes for older people in line with the strategic objectives of its Positive Ageing Plan. This report relates to the strategies set out in the City of Kingston Council Plan 2006 – 2013, including:

Strategy 3.1 Promote the health, wellbeing and independence of older adults, people with a disability and their carers by implementing the positive ageing strategy and community care services

Strategy 3.2 Strong, cohesive communities Strategy 3.3 Local communities connected through knowledge and information.

2. Background

As part of Council’s commitment to developing a healthy community, Council endorsed the Kingston Positive Ageing Plan in October 2007. The Plan, which was developed after extensive community consultation, outlines the strategic direction for Kingston City Council to promote the wellbeing of the older community and to encourage the implementation of initiatives by organisations within the municipality. The Positive Ageing Advisory Committee was established in November 2008 to set priorities and guide the implementation of the Positive Ageing Plan. Through its commitment, skill, innovation and hard work, the Committee, comprised of older people from across Kingston, has ensured the success of the positive ageing initiatives that have been delivered. The Committee has been instrumental in gaining external funding of $25,000 to enable Council Kingston to implement the Active Transport Project.

3. Summary and Conclusion

The Positive Ageing Plan has been successfully implemented during 2009/2010. Council continues to engage with key stakeholders of the Plan which has led to significant achievements in the many projects that have been undertaken. The response from older people in Kingston to the initiatives of the Plan has been extremely positive with a demonstrated commitment by many older persons to be actively involved in the Positive Ageing Committee and associated activities and to participate in a wide variety of community projects.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

233

Community organisations continue to be involved in partnerships and promotions to deliver objectives from the Positive Ageing Plan. They have described the benefits of networking and working together with Council in a cohesive manner to maximise resources and service delivery. Strong partnerships have also been developed between community groups through the delivery of Positive Ageing initiatives. Information and support to older people through the seniors festival, groups, expos, forums, ongoing marketing and publicity have all delivered high quality outcomes for older Kingston residents as indicated through the evaluation of activities. Promotion of services available in Kingston has also been highly effective. There has been an increase in the involvement of seniors in existing Kingston services including physical activities at Council’s leisure centres, Council supported walking groups, and scooter safety workshops. Through Council’s support of the Positive Ageing Plan during 2010/2011 a diverse range of projects and events that support the ageing community in Kingston will continue to be implemented.

Achievements

Through the implementation of the Positive Ageing Plan over the past 12 months a number of positive outcomes have been achieved for older residents. The achievements have occurred across all of the themes within the Positive Ageing Plan:

Community Planning

Community Participation and Engagement

Transport and Mobility

Living in the Community

Lifelong Learning and Employment

Health and Wellbeing

Information, Communication and Service Access.

Highlights of the 2009/10 achievements

Kingston Seniors Festival

The aim of the Festival Program of Events is to inform the community of the many activities available to older people in the City of Kingston; to increase the profile and membership of local community groups and to provide the opportunity for older people to make social connections through engaging in a range of enjoyable, locally hosted activities and events. The success of the festival was due to the strong partnership approach across Council departments and with community groups and agencies. Promoting positive profiles of what is currently available in the community with ongoing and special festival events enabled residents across the municipality to become involved. Over 40 community organisations took the opportunity to host events and showcase their activities. Feedback from organisations and groups involved show that the festival has had a positive impact on increased membership and volunteer numbers.

Age Friendly Transport Project

As an initiative of the Advisory Committee, the Age Friendly Transport Project was developed in response to community need. The project, funded by the Municipal Association of Victoria, successfully engaged three culturally and linguistically diverse

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

234

groups - Chinese, Pilipino and Italian - to encourage greater use of public transport and support the transition from driver to non driver. Information sessions were organised with local and metropolitan transport providers. These were followed by a number of outings on public transport where participants were supported to practice all aspects of public transport use. Over 100 older people participated in the project. An increased confidence in public transport as a result of the project has been reported. A project report was produced and distributed to relevant Council departments and community networks.

Positive Ageing Volunteer Group

Council provided mentoring training for a group of older residents in partnership with the Council on the Ageing (COTA). On completion of the course, the participants formed the Positive Ageing Volunteer Group, a volunteer leadership group that supplements the strategic directions and work of the Positive Ageing Advisory Committee. The aim of the group is to provide information, resources and support to older people in Kingston to reduce social isolation and increase community connectedness. Over the past year the Positive Ageing Volunteer Group has planned, organised and delivered two community forums. The group also developed a very successful model of information dissemination at a local level. In the process, the group is creating strong community networks that will support the ongoing implementation of the Positive Ageing Plan through the Advisory Committee.

Fun for Over Fifties Expo

The Rotary clubs of Bentleigh Moorabbin Central, Mordialloc and Hampton have been the driving force behind the Expo which has been held at Kingston City Hall for the past two years. Council has encouraged and supported the increased involvement of community groups at the event. This has seen the focus of the event shift and contributed to the significant increase in participants to the event. In the first year approximately 400 people came to the weekend Expo and this year, 2009/10, the numbers more than doubled. Evaluation of the event has highlighted the value and importance of community organisations being involved. The combination of showcasing activities with the opportunity for community groups to network has proven to be a valuable community engagement component. Council also encouraged a partnership approach with neighbouring councils, facilitating the involvement of Bayside and Glen Eira Councils.

Volunteers Supporting Community Programs

Council’s ongoing commitment in strengthening volunteer programs to assist older residents continued during the reporting period. With over 600, mainly older volunteers, Council was able to provide support to programs including Meals on Wheels, transport assistance for frail elderly residents to attend medical and other health related appointments, socialization programs in Council’s residential aged care facilities, and delivery of books to housebound residents and to those in residential aged care facilities. These programs have provided many older residents who volunteer with an opportunity to assist others, socialize with other volunteers, maintain their own wellbeing, and remain active in their communities.

For details of all Positive Ageing Achievements for 2009/10, please see Attachment A.

4. Consultation

The Positive Ageing Plan was developed after a lengthy community consultation, including household questionnaires, community engagement workshops and service provider questionnaires and forums. ‘Research for an Ageing Society: Supporting Positive Ageing in

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

235

the City of Kingston’, an evidence based literature review, was also undertaken as part of the consultation process. Evaluation and feedback avenues have been utilised during the implementation of the first two years of the Positive Ageing Plan. Evaluation is undertaken at the conclusion of all major events and projects.

5. Issues

Key areas that will be focused on during 2010/2011 to continue the successful implementation of the Positive Ageing Plan include:

Further engagement with marginalised older people to ensure that Council is fulfilling the Positive Ageing Plan commitment to all older residents. Further projects will be explored in partnership with Council’s Social Inclusion Officer and Aged and Disability Services Staff to reduce social isolation in the community.

That the Leadership program will be further developed and expanded to support the Positive Ageing Volunteers to be adequately resourced and have the capacity to recruit and train new members. This group will then facilitate programs and activities for seniors in local community settings.

Strengthening partnerships with Council’s Youth Services to further develop intergenerational projects.

Ongoing strategy development to successfully engage ‘baby boomers’ so that they continue to participate more fully in community life.

To promote Positive Ageing across Council departments to continue a collaborative approach to programs being implemented.

A new Positive Ageing Advisory Committee to be formed in 2011 with a focus on formalising roles and enabling members to take ownership.

A new marketing strategy will be developed to promote Positive Ageing initiatives and to increasingly promote its achievements throughout the broader community.

7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental Opportunities continue to be developed which create environmentally focused projects with older people. Examples of this include community gardens, foreshore plantings and carbon reduction projects.

Social Implementation of the Positive Ageing Plan promotes health, well being and independence of older people. Projects undertaken seek to reduce social isolation and increase community participation, acknowledging the life experiences and skills older people bring to the community.

Financial Council funds the position of Community Development Officer, Positive Ageing. This position currently also has an annual budget of $20,000 allocated to the implementation of the Positive Ageing Plan.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

236

During 2009/2010 a successful submission from Council to the Municipal Association of Victoria resulted in a $25,000 grant to Kingston to implement the Active Transport Project.

8. Recommendation

That Council: 1. Note the achievements related to the Positive Ageing Plan during 2009/2010 and the

priorities for the 2010/11 financial year. 2. Note the contribution of the Positive Ageing Planning Committee in guiding the initiatives

that have been implemented in the Positive Ageing Plan and also the efforts of community members, volunteers, and community organisations that have been involved.

Attachments: Attachment A: Positive Ageing Achievements 10/74320

Cr Brownlees /West That Council: 1. Note the achievements related to the Positive Ageing Plan during 2009/2010 and the priorities for the 2010/11 financial year. 2. Note the contribution of the Positive Ageing Planning Committee in guiding the initiatives that have been implemented in the Positive Ageing Plan and also the efforts of community members, volunteers, and community organisations that have been involved. Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

237

11. Organisational Development & Governance Reports M 164 Expenditure of Ward Funds Schedule Approved by: Elaine Sowerby, General Manager Organisational Development

& Governance Author: Michael Fry, Team Leader Council Business

1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to seek formal Council approval of the expenditure of Ward funds in accordance with the ‘Expenditure of Ward Funds Policy’.

2. Background The Council, on 23 March 2009, adopted a revised policy for the expenditure of ward funds. Each financial year during a Council term, Kingston Councillors are allocated $6,000 in ward funds for utilisation in accordance with the adopted policy. Part 2 of the policy, which outlines the limitations on the expenditure of ward funds, specifies that Councillors may propose that ward funds be allocated for initiatives that aim to:

“a) assist a recognised community group (including sporting/recreational body, arts/cultural group, charity, youth group, pre-school, playgroup, senior citizens club, historical society, friendship group, environmental group, trader organisation or toy library) which provides a service, program or activity used by or of benefit to Kingston residents;

b) assist an individual who is a resident of the City of Kingston to participate in a sporting, recreational or cultural activity, or other pursuit of a personal development nature, or who is in necessitous circumstances;

c) Support an event or activity which will be of benefit or interest to residents of the

City of Kingston;

d) Support the key external themes of enhancement of the physical environment or the development of community well being, identified in the Council Plan.”

It should be noted that the policy also enables a Ward Councillor to propose that his / her ward funds be expended outside of the Councillor’s specific ward, provided that the ward funds are expended for the benefit of the Kingston community, and that one or more of the criteria set out above are met.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

238

The table below lists the Councillor requests for the expenditure of ward funds received since the last Ordinary Council Meeting. Table of Councillor requests:

Councillor Ward Initiative Request

Date Amount

$

Mayor, Cr Staikos

North Friends of Moorabbin Reserve

Operational Costs

10/08/2010 $250

Cr Athanasopoulos

North Friends of Moorabbin Reserve

Operational Costs

10/08/2010 $250

Cr Brownlees Central Lantern

Program at Stanley Avenue, Cheltenham

10/08/2010 $200

Mayor, Cr Staikos

North Lantern

Program at Stanley Avenue, Cheltenham

10/08/2010 $200

Cr West Central Lantern

Program at Stanley Avenue, Cheltenham

10/08/2010 $200

Cr Brownlees Central Southern United Hockey Association

Operating Expenses

10/08/2010 $250

Cr West Central Southern United Hockey Association

Operating Expenses

10/08/2010 $250

Mayor, Cr Staikos

North Jackson Ja

Attendance at Science Expo in Japan

11/08/2010 $100

Recommendation That Council approve the expenditure of ward funds in accordance with the table of Councillor requests.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

239

Cr Athanasopoulos /Bauer That Council approve the expenditure of ward funds in accordance with the table of Councillor requests. Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

240

M 165 Media Guidelines Approved by: Elaine Sowerby, General Manager OD&G Author: Joanne Mulcahy, Acting Manager Communications

1. Purpose

These draft guidelines are provided in response to a recent Councillor Information Session action for a review of Council’s policy concerning Council’s official newsletter, Kingston Your City (KYC). These guidelines also address Council’s policy concerning media relations. The purpose of these guidelines is to enhance and protect the good reputation of Council by promoting, informing, engaging and educating the community on Council decisions, initiatives, policies, programs, activities and events.

The intent of these guidelines is that all official Council communication will be a positive reflection of Council’s commitment to informing the community in a manner that is non-political, clear, concise, and consistent with Council decisions and policies.

These guidelines are to support Council’s existing Media/External Communications Policy (2008).

It is Council’s intention to review and update the Media / External Communications Policy (2008) at a later date to incorporate media relations, publications (including KYC), online communications, social media and other forms of corporate communication.

2. Background

This matter was raised at the Councillor Information Session on 19 July 2010 and also discussed informally at the CIS on 2 August 2010.

3. Summary and Conclusion

The attached draft guidelines seek to establish a clear direction for Councillors and Officers in terms of media relations and the publication of Council’s official newsletter, Kingston Your City. The guidelines provide clear direction on Councillor and Officer obligations in these matters. Where there is a variance between the Media Policy (2008) and the Guidelines, these Guidelines will prevail.

5. Issues

The issues are addressed in the attached draft guidelines.

7 Triple Bottom Line Checklist

Environmental – n/a

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

241

Social – n/a Financial – n/a.

8. Recommendation

That Council approve the attached guidelines and that these guidelines have precedence over the Media Policy 2008.

Attachments: Guidelines for Media Relations and Kingston Your City Cr Bauer declared an interest in this item as she is a candidate for Carrum in the forthcoming State elections and left the meeting at 10.15pm

Cr West/Brownlees

That Council approve the attached guidelines and that these guidelines have precedence over the Media Policy 2008.

Cr Peulich/Brownleess Moved a Motion to defer to ensure KYC is consistent with key legislative instruments, best practice and principles of accountability transparency integrity and impartiality Lost

Cr West /Brownlees PROCEDURAL MOTION To extend the meeting by a further 30 minutes Carried

Cr Brownlees/West That the item before Council be dealt with in Camera due to the nature of the debate which may prejudice Council or an individual Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

242

A division was called. Division For Against Mayor Cr Staikos Cr Peulich Cr Shewan Cr Dundas Cr Athanasopoulos Cr Brownlees Cr Bauer Cr West The Chairperson declared that the motion was carried

Cr Athanasopoulos/Brownlees That the item be debated in Camera at the end of the meeting Carried Cr Bauer returned to the Chamber at 10.58pm

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

243

M 167 2010 General Valuation Report Approved by: Paul Franklin, General Manager Corporate Services Author: Julian Harvey, Manager Property Services

1. Purpose

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the recent completion of the 2010 General Valuation.

2. Background Council is required to undertake a General Valuation of all rateable properties within the municipality once every 2 years. The most recent valuation has a relevant date of 1 January 2010. General Valuations in Victoria that are made for rating purposes are overseen by the Valuer General. The conduct of the General Valuation follows the Valuations Best Practice Guidelines which includes 5 stages of certification by the Valuer General. The Valuer General has advised that the 2010 General Valuation for the City of Kingston has been made in accordance with Valuation Best Practice Standards. The Valuer General has certified to the Minister that the 2010 General Valuation is “generally true and correct” (attachment 1). The Minister for Environment and Climate Change has declared that the valuations are suitable for adoption pursuant to section 7AF of the Valuation of Land Act 1960 (attachment 2).

3. Issues The General Valuation submitted to the Valuer General for certification has a total Capital Improved Value (CIV) of $36,994,009,601 (attachment 3) which includes 6 non rateable properties with a total CIV of $1,881,000. The 2010 General Valuation has seen an increase in the total CIV for the City from $33 billion to $37 billion. This equates to an increase in overall values of approximately 12% over the past 2 years with Value movements for:

Residential 11.23% Commercial 3.81% Industrial 5.56%

4. Summary and Conclusion The 2010 General Valuation has been completed and certified by the Valuer General as “generally true and correct” and has been determined by the Minister as suitable for adoption. Council is now in a position to adopt the 2010 General Valuation for rating purposes.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

244

5. Recommendation That Council: Note the return of the 2010 General Valuation; Formally adopt the 2010 General Valuation made and prepared by Mr Brett Reed of K A Reed (Group) Pty Ltd with the following total values:

Site Value $24,421,447,301 Capital Improved Value $36,994,009,601 Net Annual Value $2,026,396,888

Attachments x 3:

Cr Athanasopoulos/Dundas That Council: Note the return of the 2010 General Valuation; Formally adopt the 2010 General Valuation made and prepared by Mr Brett Reed of K A Reed (Group) Pty Ltd with the following total values: Site Value $24,421,447,301 Capital Improved Value $36,994,009,601 Net Annual Value $2,026,396,888 Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

245

M 169 Investment Policy Report – June 2010 Quarter Approved by: Paul Franklin, General Manager Corporate Services Author: Bernard Byrden, Manager Finance

1. Purpose

In accordance with Council’s adopted Investment Policy, the purpose of this report is to advise Council where Kingston’s working capital is currently invested. Kingston’s funds that are not immediately required for operating purposes are invested in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements and policy requirements, with consideration of risk and at the most favourable rate of interest available to it at the time, for that investment type, while ensuring that our liquidity requirements are being met.

2. Background

Council’s Investment Policy that was adopted by Council in October 2008 requires Council to be regularly updated on our investment portfolio. The Investment Policy guides how Council manages its working capital and amounts held on behalf of other parties (eg Hostel Bonds held in Trust; employee Long Service Leave entitlements) or held for restricted purposes (eg Open Space Reserve, Hostel Renewal Reserve). This report compares our investments as at 30 June 2010 compared to the overall portfolio limits specified in the Investment Policy.

3. Summary and Conclusion

At the 30 June 2010 Council had a total of $36.4 million held in Cash and Investments. These funds were held in the following categories: June 2010 June 2009 Category Amount ($’000) Amount ($’000) Unrestricted Cash 10,746 9,424 Restricted Assets – Asset Development Reserve 6,502 6,695 Restricted Assets – Long Service Leave 6,500 6,500 Restricted Assets – Trust Funds and Deposits 12,685 11,592 Total 36,433 34,211

4. Discussion

Cash has been invested in the following ways: June 2010 June 2009 Type of Investment Amount ($’000) Amount ($’000) Cash at Bank 783 1,561 Cash At Call 5,000 12,000 Funds Invested (Fixed term investments) 30,650 20,650 Total 36,433 34,211

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

246

Council had funds of $30.6 million invested as at 30 June 2010 with $19.5 million held in shorter term investments up to 3 months. The interest rates achieved as at 30 June 2010 were largely in the range of 5.00% to 6.10% p.a. Cash At Call ($5.0 million) was held in RaboDirect (formerly Rabobank), a AAA rated bank attracting 4.75% p.a. on at call funds. The attached Investment Schedule details our investments by credit rating, by bank and by maturity and demonstrates compliance with the Investment Policy. It should be noted that the four major Australian Banks credit ratings are now AA rated and therefore we do not have 75% of our portfolio invested in AAA investments however, as stated in the policy, this is subject to availability. The schedule shows that 93% of funds are invested in AA or AAA rated investments compared to the prescribed minimum of 75%. The majority of funds are invested as follows: National Australia Bank 29%; Commonwealth Bank 24%: Westpac 20%; and Bank West 20%. All are below the 60% maximum required by the Investment Policy. 100% of funds are invested for less than 1 year.

5. Portfolio Performance

AVERAGE INTEREST RATE

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

July

Augus

t

Septe

mbe

r

Octob

er

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne

AVERAGE Y

TD

MONTH

INT

ER

ES

T R

AT

E

Avg Interest Rate City of Kingston

90 Day Bank Bill Rate + 20pts

The average interest rate for the year to 30 June 2010 is 4.49% which is 40pts ahead of the average 90 Day Bank Bill Rate of 4.09% and 20pts ahead of the investment policy target of the average 90 Day Bank Bill Rate plus 20pts (4.29%).

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

247

INTEREST INCOME 2009/10

$-

$200,000

$400,000

$600,000

$800,000

$1,000,000

$1,200,000

$1,400,000

$1,600,000

July

Augus

t

Septe

mbe

r

Octob

er

Novem

ber

Decem

ber

Janu

ary

Febru

ary

Mar

chApr

ilM

ayJu

ne

AMOUNT

MO

NT

H Actual InterestReceived onInvestments (YTD)Budgeted Interest Received onInvestments (YTD)

Interest Income received on investments at 30 June 2010 totals $1.5 million that is $784k favourable to the budget of $723k due to the higher cash holdings held and the higher than anticipated interest rates achieved on our investments. Higher cash holdings are partly due to Grants received in advance and a higher level of Hostel Bonds held.

Average Weighted Interest Rate by Institution (Fixed Term Deposits)

5.50% 5.30% 5.31% 5.52%5.83%

3.75%

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

Bank ofCyprus

Bank West BendigoBank

NationalAustralia

Bank

Westpac CBA

As at 30 June 2010 the average weighted interest rate per institution ranges from 3.75% to 5.83%. The investment in CBA expires in August 2010 which will increase the average interest rates going forward.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23 August 2010

248

5. Recommendation

That Council note that funds at 30 June 2010 are being invested in line with the risk management profile prescribed in Council’s Investment policy.

Attachment: Investment schedule – TRIM 10/73862

Cr Athanasopoulos/Dundas That Council note that funds at 30 June 2010 are being invested in line with the risk management profile prescribed in Council’s Investment policy Carried

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23/08/2010

249

13. Notices of Motion M 170 Notice of Motion - Cr Peulich: Upper House Inquiry on

Public Transport and Proposed Delegation on Kingston’s Public Transport Needs

I move: “That Kingston Council writes to the Treasurer of Victoria, forwarding information as to how Kingston Council’s 2009 submission to the Upper House inquiry on public transport was formed with the extract of the minutes as an attachment. And that he be requested to receive a delegation of interested Councillors and relevant officers on the subject of Kingston’s public transport needs.” Signed Cr Paul Peulich North Ward

Cr Peulich/Bauer That Kingston Council writes to the Treasurer of Victoria, forwarding information as to how Kingston Council’s 2009 submission to the Upper House inquiry on public transport was formed with the extract of the minutes as an attachment. And that he be requested to receive a delegation of interested Councillors and relevant officers on the subject of Kingston’s public transport needs Lost A division was called. Division For Against Cr Peulich Mayor Cr Staikos Cr Bauer Cr Athanasopoulos Cr Brownlees Cr Shewan Cr West Cr Dundas The Chairperson declared that the motion was lost.

City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting

Agenda 23/08/2010

250

15. Items in Camera Cr Dundas foreshadowed a matter of urgent be considered in Camera

Cr Dundas/Brownlees That in accordance with the provisions of section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, the meeting be closed to members of the public for the consideration of confidential items M 171 as it relates to a contractual matter; and M 172 as it contains information, which, if disclosed, would prejudice the Council or

any person. M 173 as it contains information, which, if disclosed, would prejudice the Council or

any person. Carried

Cr Athanasopoulos /West That the meeting be reopened to members of the public Carried

There being no further business the meeting closed at 12.05am Confirmed………………………………….His Worship, the Mayor 27 August 2010.