planning committee meeting - city of kingston€¦ · planning committee meeting notice is given...

Planning Committee Meeting

Notice is given that a Planning Committee Meeting of the Kingston City Council will be held on 7.00pm on Wednesday 30 January 2013 at 1230 Nepean Highway Cheltenham.

Business will be as follows:

1. Apologies

2. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meeting

3. Foreshadowed Declaration by Councillors, Officers or Contractors of any Conflict of Interest

4. Environmental Sustainability Reports

City of Kingston Planning Committee Meeting

Agenda 30 January 2013

Notice is given that a Planning Committee Meeting of Kingston City Council will be held at 7.00pm at the Cheltenham Office, 1230 Nepean Highway, Cheltenham, on Wednesday 30 December 2013. 1. Apologies 2. Confirmation of Minutes of the Previous Meeting Minutes of Planning Committee of 3 December 2012 3. Foreshadowed Declaration by Councillors, Officers or Contractors of any Conflict of

Interest (Note that any Conflicts of Interest need to be formally declared at the start of the meeting and immediately prior to the item being considered – type and nature of interest is required to be disclosed – if disclosed in writing the CEO prior to the meeting only the type of interest needs to be disclosed prior to the item being considered.)

4. Environmental Sustainability Reports

PC 71 Town Planning Application Decisions – December 2012 PC 72 KP373/12 - 28-34 Garfield Street, Cheltenham PC 73 KP206/12 - 106 Warren Road, Mordialloc PC 74 KP580/12 - 238 Old Dandenong Road, Heatherton PC 75 KP489/12 - 41 Clay Street, Moorabbin PC 76 Amendment C121- Moorabbin Activity Centre

Town Planning Application Decisions – December, 2012 Approved By: Rachel Hornsby -General Manager, Environmental Sustainability Author: Ian Nice – Manager, Planning Attached for information is the report of Town Planning Decisions for the month of December, 2012. A summary of the decisions is as follows:

Type of Decision Number of Decisions Made

Percentage (%)

Planning Permits 67 79 Notice of Decision 5 6 Refusal to Grant a Permit 6 7 Other - Withdrawn (0) - Prohibited (0) - Permit not required(2) - Lapsed (5) - Failure to Determine (0)

7 8

Total 85 100 (NB: Percentage figures have been rounded) Recommendation That the report be noted.

2 of 10

Planning Decisions December, 2012

APPL. No. PROPERTY ADDRESS

SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED

Proposal Description DECISION VCAT DECISION

KP-899/2005/B

1 Harding Lane BONBEACH 19/07/2011 3/12/2012

The Development Of This Site For Three (3) Dwellings, In Accordance With Plans To Be Submitted Pursuant To Condition 1 Hereof:- Permit Issued No

KP-643/2012

4 35 Albenca Street MENTONE 26/10/2012 3/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Verandah Permit Issued No

KP-702/2012 22 Ebb Street ASPENDALE 20/11/2012 3/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) Lots Permit Issued No

KP-581/2012

53A Embankment Grove CHELSEA 24/09/2012 3/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Storage Shed On Land Subject To A Special Building Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-128/2009/A

8 Kallay Street

CLAYTON SOUTH 18/09/2012 3/12/2012

The Development Of This Site For Two (2) Dwellings Be Issued Within Land Subject To Inundation Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-895/2010 4 94-102 Keys Road CHELTENHAM 13/12/2010 4/12/2012

Section 32 Plan - 2 Lot Subdivision Permit Issued No

KP-893/2010

278-281 Nepean Highway EDITHVALE 9/12/2010 4/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Eight (8) Dwellings Permit Issued Yes

KP-508/2012 131 Parkers Road PARKDALE 15/08/2012 4/12/2012

Use And Develop The Land For The Construction Of Eight (8) Dwellings And Two (2) Offices, With A Reduction Of The Car Parking Requirement Refused No

KP-403/2011 3 Roycroft Avenue ASPENDALE 15/06/2011 5/12/2012 Two (2) Dwellings Permit Issued Yes

KP-171/2011

Shop 2 380-382 Clayton Road

CLAYTON SOUTH 17/03/2011 5/12/2012 Buildings & Works Permit Issued Yes

3 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-302/2012

38 Old Dandenong Road

OAKLEIGH SOUTH 18/05/2012 5/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings Permit Issued No

KP-75/2006/E

93 Wells Road

CHELSEA HEIGHTS 19/03/2012 5/12/2012 Change Of Use Permit Issued No

KP-583/2012

16-24 Childers Street MENTONE 28/09/2012 6/12/2012

Develop The Land For Alterations To The Existing Education Centre Permit Issued No

KP-664/2012 2 10 Enright Street HIGHETT 1/11/2012 6/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Verandah Permit Issued No

KP-738/2012 70 Devon Street CHELTENHAM 4/12/2012 6/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Front Fence

Permit Not Required No

KP-459/2012

88-120 Edithvale Road EDITHVALE 30/07/2012 7/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Sports Pavilion In A Land Subject To Inundation Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-557/2011 38 Albenca Street MENTONE 2/08/2011 7/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) Dwellings Permit Issued No

KP-712/2012 17 Norma Avenue CHELTENHAM 21/11/2012 7/12/2012


KP-637/2012 7 Walker Street BRAESIDE 22/10/2012 7/12/2012 Boundary Realignment Permit Issued No

KP-566/2012 41 First Street

CLAYTON SOUTH 17/09/2012 10/12/2012 Subdivide Into Four (4) Lots Permit Issued No

KP-629/2012 273 Wells Road

CHELSEA HEIGHTS 19/10/2012 10/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Mezzanine Floor Permit Issued No

KP-647/2012

260-280 Chesterville Road MOORABBIN 26/10/2012 10/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Storage Sheds To The Rear Of Existing Warehouse Permit Issued No

4 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-457/2012

416A Nepean Highway CHELSEA 27/07/2012 10/12/2012

Use The Land For The Sale And Consumption Of Liquor (Restaurant And Cafe License) Under Clause 52.27 Of The Kingston Planning Scheme Permit Issued No

KP-563/2012

208 Balcombe Road MENTONE 17/09/2012 10/12/2012 Subdivide Into Four (4) Lots Permit Issued No

KP-369/2011 36 Canberra Street CARRUM 3/06/2011 10/12/2012 Three (3) Dwellings Refused No

KP-12/2012

21A Boundary Road MORDIALLOC 16/01/2012 10/12/2012

Use The Land For Motor Vehicle Sales (Retrospective) Permit Issued No

KP-552/2012 24 Station Road CHELTENHAM 6/09/2012 10/12/2012

Use The Land For A Medical Centre (Osteopathic Clinic) With A Reduction In Car Parking Requirements Pursuant To Clause 52.06 Of The Kingston Planning Scheme Permit Issued No

KP-696/2012 23 Mount View Street ASPENDALE 16/11/2012 10/12/2012


KP-622/2012

1 31 Cleeland Road

OAKLEIGH SOUTH 15/10/2012 10/12/2012

Use The Land As A Retail Premises (Cafe) With A Reduction Of The Car Parking Requirements Pursuant To Clause 52.06 Of The Kingston Planning Scheme Permit Issued No

KP-714/2012 242 Station Street EDITHVALE 21/11/2012 11/12/2012


KP-652/2012

86 Blackwood Avenue MENTONE 25/10/2012 11/12/2012

Develop The Land For Alterations To An Existing Dwelling In A Special Building Overlay Permit Issued No

5 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-221/2012 19 Stewart Avenue PARKDALE 11/04/2012 11/12/2012

Develop The Land For A Dwelling Extension In A Special Building Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-541/2012 34 Fourth Street PARKDALE 30/08/2012 11/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of One (1) Double Storey Dwelling Permit Issued No

KP-642/2012 107 Devon Street CHELTENHAM 23/10/2012 11/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) Lots And Creation Of Easement Permit Issued No

KP-659/2012 3 Joyce Street CARRUM 29/10/2012 11/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Four (4) Lots Permit Issued No

KP-644/2012 4 Delville Avenue MENTONE 23/10/2012 11/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Three (3) Lots Permit Issued No

KP-861/2010

88 Sherwood Avenue CHELSEA 30/11/2010 11/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings On Land Affected By A Land Subject To Inundation Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-265/2012

590-598 Clayton Road

CLAYTON SOUTH 2/05/2012 12/12/2012

Develop And Use The Land For The Construction And Display Of Advertising Signage

Notice of Decision No

KP-641/2011

217 Gladesville Boulevard

PATTERSON LAKES 26/08/2011 12/12/2012 Replace Jetty 136 Permit Issued Yes

KP-270/2012 26 Kalimna Street CARRUM 4/05/2012 12/12/2012


KP-768/1998/A

91-93 Valetta Street CARRUM 19/11/2012 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Eight (8) Dwellings

Permit Not Required No

KP-845/2011 378 Station Street BONBEACH 31/10/2011 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Six (6) Dwellings Permit Issued Yes

KP-453/2012 21 Howard Road

DINGLEY VILLAGE 23/07/2012 12/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Three (3) Lots Permit Issued No

6 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-189/2012

98 Gladesville Boulevard

PATTERSON LAKES 26/03/2012 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Ten (10) Dwellings Permit Issued No

KP-788/2011 15 Patty Street MENTONE 11/10/2011 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) Dwellings And Extensions To Two (2) Existing Dwellings Refused No

KP-210/2012 12 Ross Street ASPENDALE 3/04/2012 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Four (4) Dwellings Refused No

KP-196/2012 7 Phillip Street MENTONE 28/03/2012 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Eight (8) Apartment Style Dwellings Refused No

KP-707/2012 57 Nepean Highway ASPENDALE 21/11/2012 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Alterations And Additions To An Existing Dwelling On Land Within A Design And Development Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-547/2012 34 Swanpool Avenue CHELSEA 30/08/2012 12/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings


KP-886/2011 27 Bevan Avenue

CLAYTON SOUTH 17/11/2011 13/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) Dwellings


KP-618/2012 4 Harlow Court MOORABBIN 12/10/2012 13/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) Lots Lapsed No

KP-445/2012

27-29 Nepean Highway MENTONE 18/07/2012 13/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Display Of Advertising Signage (Two (2) Pylon Signs) Within A Special Building Overlay Area Permit Issued No

7 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-392/2004/A

53-59 Sunmore Close HEATHERTON 18/10/2012 14/12/2012

To Construct Buildings And Works On This Site And To Use For Industry/Warehouse/Office With A Reduced Car Parking Requirement Pursuant To Clause 52.06 Of The Kingston Planning Scheme, And To Remove Native Vegetation From This Site Permit Issued No

KP-380/2009/B

2 Wallum Road EDITHVALE 14/08/2012 17/12/2012 Two Dwellings Permit Issued No

KP-66/2012 25 Nepean Highway MENTONE 9/02/2012 17/12/2012

Use The Land For The Purpose Of Motor Vehicle Sales And Develop The Land For The Display Of Three (3) Internally Illuminated Business Identification Signs And One (1) Internally Illuminated Pylon Sign Permit Issued No

KP-536/2012 12 Margaret Street PARKDALE 28/08/2012 17/12/2012

Develop For The Land For Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings. Permit Issued No

KP-692/2011 1 11 Peace Street HIGHETT 12/09/2011 17/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings Permit Issued Yes

KP-865/2004/B

31 Oak Avenue CHELTENHAM 15/05/2012 18/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings Lapsed No

KP-623/2012 51 Whatley Street CARRUM 16/10/2012 18/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of One (1) Dwelling To The Rear Of An Existing Dwelling Lapsed No

KP-487/2012 17 Smith Street CARRUM 7/08/2012 18/12/2012

Subdivide The Land Into Four (4) Lots Permit Issued No

8 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-269/2012 14 Munro Avenue EDITHVALE 4/05/2012 18/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) Dwellings Lapsed No

KP-609/2012 38 Munro Avenue EDITHVALE 9/10/2012 19/12/2012

Use The Land As A Food And Drink Premises (Cafe) And The Display Of Business Identification Signs, With A Waiver Of The Car Parking Requirements Permit Issued No

KP-317/2012 4 John Street MORDIALLOC 24/05/2012 19/12/2012


KP-364/2012 696 Nepean Highway CARRUM 13/06/2012 19/12/2012


KP-357/2011/A

Unit 1 13 Bondi Road BONBEACH 3/12/2012 19/12/2012

Subdivision Of The Land Into Five (5) Lots And Common Property Permit Issued No

KP-732/2012

19 Brigantine Court

PATTERSON LAKES 29/11/2012 19/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No

KP-735/2012 135 Palm Beach Drive

PATTERSON LAKES 29/11/2012 19/12/2012

Develop The Site For The Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No

KP-675/2012

18 1 Canberra Street

PATTERSON LAKES 7/11/2012 20/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No

KP-739/2012 53 Scotch Parade BONBEACH 4/12/2012 20/12/2012


KP-610/2012 39 Royal Road BONBEACH 9/10/2012 20/12/2012


KP-224/2012 14 Golf View Road HEATHERTON 11/04/2012 20/12/2012


KP-374/2012 618 Warrigal Road

OAKLEIGH SOUTH 12/07/2012 20/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of One Dwelling To The Rear Of An Existing Dwelling Lapsed No

9 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-489/2011 3 Meriton Place

CLAYTON SOUTH 14/07/2011 20/12/2012

Use The Land For Motor Vehicle Repairs And Spray Painting With A Variation To Clause To 52.10, Reduction Of The Car Parking Requirement Pursuant To Clause 52.06 And Waiver Of Loading Bay Requirement Pursuant To Clause 52.07 Of The Kingston Planning Scheme Permit Issued No

KP-746/2012

122 Charman Road MENTONE 5/12/2012 20/12/2012


KP-315/2012 42 Bowman Street ASPENDALE 23/05/2012 21/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) Dwellings. Permit Issued No

KP-547/2011

107-109 McLeod Road

PATTERSON LAKES 2/08/2011 21/12/2012

To Use The Land For Dwellings With A Reduction In The Car Parking Requirements Pursuant To Clause 37.02 (Comprehensive Development Zone) And To Construct Two (2) Five-Storey Buildings Containing Eighty-Eight (88) Dwellings On Land Subject To Inundation Overlay Permit Issued No

KP-585/2012

Restaurant 1 361 Nepean Highway PARKDALE 1/10/2012 27/12/2012

Use Of The Land For A 24 Hour Fitness Centre


KP-495/2012 2 5 Walden Road MENTONE 9/08/2012 27/12/2012

Develop The Land For An Extension To The Existing Dwelling Permit Issued No

KP-525/2012 8 Phoenix Court BRAESIDE 23/08/2012 27/12/2012

Develop The Land For Extensions To An Existing Warehouse And A Reduction In Car Parking Requirements Permit Issued No

10 of 10



SUBURB APPL. DATE

DATE DECIDED


KP-598/2012

27 23-35 Bunney Road

OAKLEIGH SOUTH 5/10/2012 27/12/2012

Develop The Land For Alterations To The Existing Office/Warehouse Permit Issued No

KP-443/2012 11 Central Avenue MOORABBIN 17/07/2012 28/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Mixed Use Development Comprising Three (3) Shops, Eight (8) Offices And Thirty (30) Dwellings With Reduced Carparking. Permit Issued No

KP-324/2012 31 Garfield Street CHELTENHAM 28/05/2012 28/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Three (3) Storey Building Containing Twenty Two (22) Dwellings Refused No

KP-709/2011

419 Centre Dandenong Road HEATHERTON 14/09/2011 28/12/2012

Use And Develop The Land For A Place Of Worship And A Reduction Of The Car Parking Requirement Of Clause 52.06 Of The Kingston Planning Scheme


KP-530/2012

1239-1241 Nepean Highway CHELTENHAM 27/08/2012 28/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Display Of Business Identification Signage Permit Issued No

KP-422/2012

43-45 Canterbury Road BRAESIDE 9/07/2012 28/12/2012

Develop The Land For The Display Of Internally Illuminated Signage Permit Issued No

28-34 Garfield Street Cheltenham (Lot 45 on LP2975) – Planning Permit Application No. KP-373/2012

Executive Summary for the Planning Committee APPLICATION No: KP-373/2012 LAND: 28-34 Garfield Street Cheltenham (Lot 45 on LP2975) PLANNING OFFICER: Tanya Sokolowski PROPOSAL: Develop the Land for the Construction of Thirty Five

(35) Dwellings PERMIT TRIGGER: Construct two or more dwellings on a lot EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS: Single storey dwelling on each lot APPLICANT: Finnis Architects Pty Ltd ZONE / OVERLAYS: Residential 1 Zone RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA Increased Housing Diversity OBJECTIONS Seventeen (17)

1.0 RELEVANT HISTORY

1.1 A previous application for this site (KP75/2011) was refused by Council on 28

September 2011, with this decision upheld by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) on 3 January 2012. The application proposed forty (40) apartments within a three storey apartment style building with basement car parking.

1.2 Council’s grounds of refusal related to visual bulk and mass, non-compliance with local residential policies, non-compliance with numerous ResCode standards including: neighbourhood character, street setback, building height, site coverage, walls on boundaries, overlooking, insufficient private open space, design detail, front fences and site services.

1.3 The Tribunal determined that a three storey apartment building was acceptable in this location and on a consolidated site of four lots, but the proposal did not provide a recessed upper floor to fit within the streetscape. The Tribunal did not agree with Council regarding off-site amenity impacts, but did determine that further consideration was required in any re-design regarding achieving adequate internal amenity for daylight to habitable room windows. Member Sibonis also considered that any new application would need to reduce the appearance of elongated massing to the street by introducing vertical elements to the front façade.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 2.1 It is proposed to demolish the exiting dwellings on the site and construct a three

storey apartment building containing thirty-five (35) apartments, with basement car parking. It is proposed to provide a mix of dwellings with one, two and three bedroom compositions. Thirty-six (36) car parking spaces would be provided for residents and seven (7) visitor car spaces. Sixteen bicycle spaces are proposed within the basement, comprising five allocated for visitors and eleven for residents. The main

differences in this application compared to the previous application include: built form now wholly contained within a discernible single building, increase in front and rear setbacks and recessed upper floor.

3.0 SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDS 3.1 The following map illustrates the subject site in its surrounding context.

3.2 The subject site is located on the eastern side of Garfield Street Cheltenham,

between Sinclair Street and May Street. The site is comprised of four regular shaped allotments with a combined frontage width of 60.96 metres, a maximum depth of 37.97 metres, and an overall area of 2,298 square metres. Each lot is occupied by a single storey dwelling of either brick or weatherboard materials. Each lot has a crossover to Garfield Street.

3.3 The surrounding area is generally characterised by a predominant mix of single and

double storey housing. Examples of multi-dwelling and infill development are common, with an older style double storey apartment building abutting the subject site at No. 26 Garfield Street and a three dwelling development is located at No. 29 Garfield Street. On the corner of Garfield Street and May Street is a three storey apartment building. Further north-west along Garfield Street can be found examples of newer housing stock that is double storey and attached in form. The area is experiencing change and has been noted by members of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal as being an area that is “evolving” and in “transition”.

4.0 KEY PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 4.1 The key planning considerations relate to:

(a) The current applications response to the previous Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal decision relating to the site

Whilst this application is a new proposal, the Tribunal has set some parameters for development on this site as a result of the previous decision. It has determined that a three storey development is acceptable, subject to a sufficient street setback of an upper floor which is ‘evidently recessive within the context of the overall built form’. The application now proposes street setbacks at every floor level which are notably greater than the previous application, and where the upper floor is recessed from the floors below, providing a noticeable transition in height. It is considered that this new proposal has responded to the Tribunal’s direction, and satisfied any former areas of non-compliance. Conditions have been recommended to provide some cosmetic design changes to finishes and materials to further differentiate the upper floor from the levels below and enhance its recessive nature, which is currently treated with the same colours and finishes as the rest of the building.

4.2 The subject site is identified within Area 31 of the Kingston Neighbourhood Character

Study (May 2003). However, the average lot size within this area has not been calculated as the subject site is not located within a Residential 3 Zone.

5.0 OBJECTOR CONCERNS 5.1 Seventeen (17) objections were received to the application. A summary of the

concern and response to each ground is provided below:

(a) Neighbourhood Character/Height/Visual Bulk Objectors contend that the proposal is not consistent with what they consider to be a predominant existing single and double storey built form character, and that any ‘evolving’ character is double storey in form. These submissions state that the proposed height, visual bulk and appearance of the building are considered out of character and an overdevelopment of the site.

As discussed above, the Tribunal has already ruled on this matter, subject to sufficient front and upper level setbacks.

(b) Off-site amenity impacts – Overlooking, overshadowing and noise Objectors raised concerns that the height of the building and orientation of windows

and balconies will result in unreasonable overlooking opportunities and overshadowing. The prospect of increased noise as a result of more residents and traffic was also raised, along with one objector concerned about the noise resulting from the location of the basement entry next to his property boundary.

The proposal satisfies the requirements of both Standard’s B21 and B22 with regard

to overshadowing and overlooking. Overshadowing will fall primarily within the site, whilst overshadowing which occurs to No. 36 Garfield Street in the afternoon will still enable the private open space of that dwelling to receive the required amount of sunlight to the majority of its backyard area during the day. Overlooking has been addressed through a combination of high sill heights to windows, and screening treatments to windows and balconies, preventing unreasonable views. A condition is recommended however to extend the balcony screening of apartments 27 and 35 for the full length of the south-east side of each balcony to ensure views to No. 36 Garfield Street are sufficiently limited.

Noise associated with this development would be normal residential noise that would be expected in this residential setting, and is not considered to be unreasonable.

(c) Traffic impacts and insufficient car parking

Objectors are concerned that the proposal will have an unreasonable impact on existing on-street parking conditions and traffic in Garfield Street and surrounding streets.

The proposal satisfies the parking provisions of Clause 52.06 with each apartment

being provided with one car park, and the 1 three bedroom apartment proposed will be provided with two parking spaces. A total of 7 visitor spaces is proposed, meeting Clause 52.06 requirements.

It is acknowledged that the proposal will result in increased traffic on local streets in the area, however the increase is not considered unreasonable. The issues identified by local residents with regard existing traffic conditions in the area are related to the layout of narrow local streets which restrict traffic flow and access to and from Nepean Highway. Unfortunately these issues extend beyond the scope of this particular application and require a precinct scale response on the part of Council and VicRoads.

(d) Drainage and infrastructure impacts and waste management

Objectors are concerned that the extent of the proposal will have an unreasonable impact on local drains and sewerage infrastructure

The proposal has been referred to Council’s Drainage Engineers who did not object

to the proposal subject to conditions relating to stormwater management to limit outflow from the site. An existing stormwater pipe that dissects the site will be required to diverted at the cost of the developer. Standard conditions recommended on the permit will require a drainage strategy, incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design treatments to reduce stormwater run-off. The proposal entails a 20,000 litre water tank to capture rainwater, which could be re-used for irrigation and toilet flushing. The development will need to make application to the appropriate suppliers for water, sewerage, electricity, gas and phone services for other infrastructure services.

A Waste Management Plan was not submitted with the application, however the applicant did provide written information indicating that it was considered that sufficient room was allocated in the basement, and requested that if a permit were to be issued that a condition be included to require a Waste Management Plan. A condition is recommended to provide a Waste Management Plan and a condition 1 requirement that plans be amended to show any changes that might be required to the basement area if through the preparation of the Plan it was found that additional area is required. Council’s preference is for collection to be undertaken by Council’s own waste collection service, however this will be determined once a Plan has been prepared and reviewed by Council’s own Waste Management Co-ordinator.

(e) Inadequate on-site amenity – daylight to windows and internal overlooking

Objectors raised concerns that the design does not provide adequate daylight to

some windows and that internal views will be possible from upper levels to private open spaces below.

Conditions have been recommended to delete overhanging built form to bedroom

windows that are provided in a saddleback arrangement, improving daylight access to those windows. Conditions are also recommended to ensure that overlooking of ground floor private open spaces that are located within the front setback from upper level balconies will be limited to meet the requirements of Standard B23 of ResCode.

The following objections raised are not valid planning considerations:

• Devaluation of property • Loss of views • The apartments will be rented out and occupied by tenants in the future

rather than owners 6.0 CONCLUSION 6.1 Based on a thorough assessment of the application against the relevant provisions of

the Kingston Planning Scheme and taking into consideration the concerns raised by objectors, the proposal, subject to the inclusion of conditions, is deemed appropriate and should therefore be supported.

RECOMMENDATION That Council determine to support the proposal and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit to Develop the Land for the Construction of Thirty Five (35) Dwellings at No. 28-34 Garfield Street Cheltenham, subject to 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 11 December 2012, but modified to show:

a. the provision of a landscape plan and associated planting schedule for the site showing the proposed location, species type, mature height and width, pot sizes and number of species be planted on the site, 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. any paving or deck areas within the secluded open space areas of ground floor apartments on a permeable base;

iv. 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;

v. a range of plant types from ground covers to large shrubs and trees;

vi. adequate planting densities (e.g.: plants with a mature width of 1 metre, planted at 1 metre intervals);

vii. the provision of five (5) suitable medium sized (at maturity) canopy trees within the front setback of the property, with species chosen to be approved by the Responsible Authority;

viii. sustainable lawn areas and plant species taking current water restrictions into consideration;

ix. all trees provided at a minimum of two (2) metres in height at time of planting;

x. medium to large shrubs to be provided at a minimum pot size of 200mm; and

xi. 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 deletion of overhanging built form from saddleback windows on the ground and first floor, providing breaks between each balcony on the first and second floors;

c. materials and finishes to the second floor that differentiate it from the floors below, including deletion of solid roofing to balconies and replaced with

adjustable pergola louvers, reduction of protruding white design elements and use of the darker render finish ‘R2’ to walls;

d. the screening provided to the south-east sides of balconies to apartments 27 and 35, extended for the full length of the south-east side of each respective balcony;

e. privacy screening between balconies oriented to the front and rear of the site a maximum of 1.7 metres height;

f. balcony screening to north-east facing apartments (except for apartment 23) reduced in height to 1 metre and alternative screening devices preventing downward views to ground level private open spaces provided in accordance with Standard B23 (ResCode) of the Kingston Planning Scheme;

g. balcony screening to south-west facing first floor balconies to prevent internal views in accordance with Standard B23 (ResCode) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, whilst retaining views to the street;

h. the existing 450/525mm diameter stormwater drain traversing the property with a notation on the plan stating: “Existing drain must be diverted and upgraded with associated works as shown on Proposed Stormwater Diversion Concept Plan No 110801 C01 (Rev. P4) prepared by BDD Engineering P/L dated 9 September 2011”;

i. the proposed minimum 2.2 metre wide drainage easement for the diverted drain shown with a notation on the plan stating: “easement to be clear from any obstruction and buildings”;

j. a longitudinal section of the basement ramp with apex, grades and levels to AHD;

k. a comprehensive drainage strategy for the development of the site incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) treatments, and any resultant changes to plans required by the strategy;

l. any changes to the bin store area and access areas as required by the amended Waste Management Plan at Condition 3 of this Permit;

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

n. the provision of external clothes drying facilities, with these screened from public view;

o. full details and dimensions of the proposed bicycle parking area in the basement, with specifications of any proposed racks;

p. sight splays or areas free of visual obstruction in accordance with the requirements of Clause 52.06-8 of the Kingston Planning Scheme to either side of the basement ramp;

q. 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 with the number of materials and colours selected simplified (no more than two materials or two colours);

r. the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the endorsed Sustainable Management Plan (SMP) required by Condition 4 of this Permit; and

s. the location of all externally-located heating and cooling units, exhaust fans and the like, clearly shown and screened from public view, located outside of primary secluded open space areas.

Endorsed Plans

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

Waste Management

3. Prior to the endorsement of plans pursuant to Condition 1, 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 permit. Three copies of the plan must be submitted. The plan must include but is not limited to:

a) The manner in which waste will be stored and collected including: type, size and number of containers.

b) Spatial provision for on-site storage.

c) Details whether waste collection is to be performed by Council’s services or privately contracted.

d) The size of the collection vehicle and the frequency, time and point of collection.

The waste management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The waste management plan must not be modified unless without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Sustainable Development

4. Prior to the endorsement of plans pursuant to Condition 1, a Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) that outlines proposed sustainable design initiatives 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.

The SMP must incorporate consideration of the following sustainable design criteria:

a. Indoor environment Energy efficiency b. Water resources c. Stormwater management d. Building materials e. Bicycle parking f. Waste Management g. Urban Ecology h. Innovation i. Ongoing building and site management In relation to these sustainable design criteria, an SMP must; a. Identify relevant sustainability targets or performance standards; b. Document the means by which the appropriate target or performance will be

achieved; c. Identify the different areas of responsibility and provide a schedule for

implementation, ongoing management, maintenance and monitoring; and d. Demonstrate that the design elements, technologies and operational practices

that comprise the SMP can be maintained over time.

5. Prior to the endorsement of plans pursuant to Condition 1, a STORM report (or

similar) with STORM rating of at least 100% or equivalent with a reliability not less than 80%, to demonstrate that the development meets Victoria’s best practice stormwater targets pursuant to Clause 19.03-2. Achieving compliance with this condition must not conflict with other conditions contained within the permit.

Construction Management

5. Before the commencement of any buildings and 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. When approved, the plan will be endorsed as evidence of its approval and will then form part of the permit and shall thereafter be complied with. The CMP must specify and deal with, but is not limited to, the following:

a. a detailed schedule of works including a full project timing;

b. a traffic management plan for the site, including when or whether any access points would be required to be blocked; an outline of requests to occupy public footpaths or roads, or anticipated disruptions to local services; and preferred routes for trucks delivering to the site;

c. the location for the parking of all construction vehicles and construction worker vehicles during construction;

d. delivery of materials including times for loading/unloading and unloading points; expected frequency; and details of where materials will be stored and how concrete pours would be managed;

e. proposed traffic management signage indicating any inconvenience generated by construction;

f. a fully detailed plan indicating where construction hoardings would be located;

g. a waste management plan including the containment of waste on site, disposal of waste, stormwater treatment and on-site facilities for vehicle washing;

h. containment of dust, dirt and mud within the site and method and frequency of clean up procedures in the event of build up of matter outside the site;

i. business operations on the site during construction;

j. site security;

k. public safety measures;

l. construction times, noise and vibration controls;

m. restoration of any Council assets removed and/or damaged during construction;

n. protection works necessary to road and other infrastructure (limited to an area reasonably proximate to the site);

o. remediation of any damage to road and other infrastructure (limited to an area reasonably proximate to the site);

p. an emergency contact that is available for 24 hours per day for residents and the Responsible Authority in the event of relevant queries or problems experienced;

q. traffic management measures to comply with provisions of AS 17 42.3-2002 Manual of uniform traffic control devices - Part 3: Traffic control devices for works on roads; and

r. all contractors associated with the construction of the development must be made aware of the requirements of the Construction Management Plan.

6. Prior to the commencement of any buildings and works on the land, a pre construction site and immediate surrounds inspection and condition assessment of all road ways and footpaths abutting the development is to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Responsible Authority. This must occur in a media (photos/video) which is able to accurately illustrate the full condition of all potentially impacted assets prior to the construction commencing. In the event of damage during construction, such damage will be required to be repaired by the developer, at the developer's cost and to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. During the construction, the following must occur:

a. any stormwater discharged into the stormwater drainage system is to comply with EPA guidelines;

b. stormwater drainage system protection measures must be installed as required to ensure that no solid waste, sediment, sand, soil, clay or stones from the premises enters the stormwater drainage system;

c. vehicle borne material must not accumulate on the roads abutting the site;

d. the cleaning of machinery and equipment must take place on site and not on adjacent footpaths, roads or parks;

e. all litter (including items such as cement bags, food packaging and plastic strapping) must be disposed of responsibly; and

f. all site operations must comply with the EPA Publication TG302/92 (including all revisions or replacement guidelines).

Drainage and Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD)

8. Prior to the endorsement of plans under Condition 1, a Concept Stormwater Diversion Plan must be submitted for approval, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. The existing stormwater drain traversing the property must be relocated and upgraded in accordance with conditions 1h) at the developer’s cost prior to any building works commencing over the existing drain. All works associated with drainage diversion including reinstatement of all affected assets must be in accordance with engineering plans submitted to and approved by the Council. A priced schedule of works within the proposed easements, road reserve and rear laneway and the payment of Council’s engineering fees of 3.25% of the cost of works are required to be submitted prior to the approval.

10. The existing stormwater drain with all associated works must not be disturbed until the temporary/new diverted pipe is constructed.

11. The diverted drain must be capable of transferring runoff from 1 in 100 year ARI storm events from the low point in the rear laneway to Garfield Street. These flows must be discharged to Garfield Street such that they can flow overland along Garfield Street.

12. During the construction a temporary stormwater diversion arrangement must maintain the capacity of the existing drain. The plan showing proposed arrangement must be submitted to the Council for approval prior to any works on site.

13. The proposed drain must be protected during building works.

14. Any other under ground proposed services, trees and structures are not permitted within the proposed easement.

15. The laneway and Garfield Street reserve must be reinstated to Council’s satisfaction.

16. The minimum 2.2 metre wide easement in Condition 1(i) must be created in favour of Kingston City Council, for the purpose of a diverted stormwater drain.

17. An apex (ie hump) at a minimum of RL 35.45 AHD across the entrance to the basement must be provided or implement an alternative engineering solution for major flooding, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. This apex must isolate the basement entrance from any flood waters/overland flow to this level. The apex is to be a permanent structure (eg. hump in concrete driveway).

18. Stormwater Quality Measures must be implemented during the construction.

19. 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. The detention system must have a restricted outflow limited to 18 l/s and store run-off that exceeds the run-off from 35% of the site area.

20. 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. crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).

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

Infrastructure and Road Works

22. Property boundary and footpath levels must not be altered without the prior written consent from Council’s Roads and Drains Department.

23. The replacement of all footpaths, including offsets, must be constructed the satisfaction of Council’s Roads and Drains Department.

24. All reinstatements and vehicle crossings must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, with the vehicle crossing to be constructed to Council’s industrial strength specifications.

25. All redundant vehicle crossings must be removed (including redundant portions of vehicle crossings) to the satisfaction of Council’s Roads and Drains Department.

Parking construction

26. 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.

e. Line-marked to indicate each car space and all access lanes, with the basement ramp line-marked to indicate two way traffic.

f. Kerbing provided to the side of the pedestrian path accessing the basement.

g. Provided with wheel stops to the front of each car parking space designed to meet Australian Standards AS2890.1 – 2004, Parking Facilities: Off-street parking.

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

Lighting

27. Exterior lighting must be installed in such positions as to effectively illuminate all communal areas. Such lighting must be designed, baffled and located to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to prevent any adverse effect on neighbouring land.

General amenity conditions

28. The obscure glazing shown on the endorsed plans must be through frosted glass or similarly treated glass, and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Adhesive film or the like that can be removed must not be used.

29. All fixed external screening to prevent overlooking marked on the endorsed plans shall be maintained by the owner of the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

30. 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.

31. 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.

32. Service units, including air conditioning/heating units, must not be located where they will be visible from any public area, and must not be located near bedrooms of immediately adjacent existing dwellings.

33. Prior to the removal of the street tree from the site’s Garfield Street nature strip, payment must be made to Kingston City Council’s customer service in accordance with Council’s Street Tree Removal Procedures. The removal of these trees must be undertaken by Council at the expense of the Developer/Owner.

Completion

34. Prior to the occupation of any building approved under this permit, written confirmation from the author of the endorsed Sustainable Management Plan is to be submitted to the Responsible Authority that all of the required measures specified in the SMP have been implemented.

35. 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.

36. 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.

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

Time Limits

38. 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: No resident parking permits will be issued to occupiers of the development.

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.

Note: The fee for removal of the street tree from the nature strip is ($1451.00 including GST), payable to Kingston City Council’s Customer Service Department - refer to cashier code “STRE”. Customer Service will confirm payment to the Parks

Department. The removal of the tree requires a minimum of 2 weeks notice from the Developer/Owner.

OR In the event that Council wishes to oppose the application, it can do so using the following grounds:

1. The proposal fails to provide adequate daylight to new windows, not satisfying the objective of Clause 55.05-3 – Daylight to New Windows, of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

2. The proposal fails to consider requirements to prevent unreasonable overlooking and internal views, not satisfying the objectives of Clause 55.04-6 – Overlooking, and Clause 55.04-8 – Internal Views of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

3. The proposal fails to provide an ‘attic style’ third storey in accordance with Clause 22.01 – Cheltenham Business Centre Policy.

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT

1.0 RELEVANT LAND HISTORY 1.1 Planning Application KP75/2011 was refused by Council on 28 September 2011, with

this decision upheld by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal on 3 January 2012 in Boxtel Homes Pty Ltd v Kingston City Council & Ors [2012] VCAT 3. The application proposed forty (40) apartments within a three storey apartment style building with basement car parking.

1.2 Council’s grounds of refusal related to visual bulk and mass, non-compliance with local residential policies, non-compliance with numerous ResCode standards including: street setback, building height, site coverage, walls on boundaries, overlooking private open space, design detail, front fences and site services.

1.3 In Boxtel Homes Pty Ltd v Kingston City Council & Ors, Member Sibonis indicated that local residential policies identified the area as suitable for medium density development in the form of apartments. It was considered reasonable to expect the development of the site for an apartment building, given the opportunity provided by consolidating four lots. Any building, however, would need to appropriately respond to the site’s context. The Tribunal found that the proposed design did not adequately address the intent of local policy contained within Clause 22.01 – Cheltenham Business Centre Policy, through the building having an insufficiently recessed upper floor. Member Sibonis noted that “on a site as large as this, it should be possible to design a third floor element that is evidently recessive within the context of the overall built form.” The question of whether the third floor should be in the form of an attic has been interpreted to mean that this floor should be recessed. This approach is consistent with other recent Tribunal decisions in this locality, including opposite the site at No. 31-33 Garfield Street (ARPC Consultants Pty Ltd v Kingston City Council & Ors [2012] VCAT 100) and at No. 36-40 Jean Street, Cheltenham (Beyprop Pty Ltd v

APPLICANT Finnis Architects Pty Ltd ADDRESS OF LAND 28-34 Garfield Street Cheltenham PLAN OF SUBDIVISION REFERENCE

Lot 45 on LP2975 Lot 1 on TP255815 Lot 47 LP2975 Lot 48 LP2975

PROPOSAL Develop the Land for the Construction of Thirty Five (35) Dwellings

PLANNING OFFICER Tanya Sokolowski REFERENCE NO. KP-373/2012 ZONE Residential 1

OVERLAYS Not applicable OBJECTIONS Seventeen (17) CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED

11 December 2012

ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE SENSITIVTY

No

Kingston CC [2012] VCAT 1271). The application at No. 36-40 Jean Street has been granted a permit by the Tribunal, for a three storey apartment building with basement car parking. That proposal does not entail a noticeably recessed upper floor. It is also noted that there is a three storey apartment style building on the corner of Garfield Street and May Street which does not entail an attic style third storey.

1.4 In addition to concerns regarding insufficient street setbacks and the design of the upper floor, Member Sibonis determined that the proposal entailed a high degree of ‘horizontality’ which would need to be addressed in any new application, along with further consideration of daylight to habitable rooms.

1.5 The Tribunal determined that the proposal would not have resulted in unreasonable off-site amenity impacts with regard to overshadowing, overlooking, side and rear setbacks and daylight to existing windows. Member Sibonis considered that the provision of car parking was adequate and accepted that the traffic generated by the increase in residents would also not be unreasonable.

2.0 SITE PARTICULARS 2.1 The subject site is located on the eastern side of Garfield Street Cheltenham,

between Sinclair Street and May Street. The site is comprised of four regular shaped allotments with a combined frontage width of 60.96 metres, a maximum depth of 37.97 metres, and an overall area of 2,298 square metres. Topography of the site is relatively flat. Whilst no easements encumber the site, there is an existing stormwater drain which dissects the site along the side boundary between No’s 30 and 32 Garfield Street.

2.2 Each lot is occupied by a single storey dwelling of either brick or weatherboard materials. Each lot has a crossover to Garfield Street. A number of trees and shrubs are scattered throughout the site. Four street trees are located to the front of the site – one to the front of each separate lot.

2.3 No restrictions are listed on the Certificates of Title. 3.0 SURROUNDING ENVIRONS 3.1 The surrounding area is generally characterised by a predominant mix of single and

double storey housing. Examples of multi-dwelling and infill development are common, with an older style double storey apartment building abutting the subject site at No. 26 Garfield Street and a three dwelling development is located at No. 29 Garfield Street. On the corner of Garfield Street and May Street is a three storey apartment building. Further north-west along Garfield Street can be found examples of newer housing stock that is double storey and attached in form. The area is experiencing change and has been noted by members of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal as being an area that is “evolving” and in “transition”.

3.2 The site is located approximately 250 metres south of Southland Shopping Centre (a Principal Activity Centre) and approximately 590 metres north of the Cheltenham Train Station which is located within the Cheltenham Major Activity Centre.

3.3 Land directly abutting the subject site and opposite is described as follows:

North-west: No. 24-26 Garfield Street is occupied by an older style double storey brick apartment building. The building has a concrete tiled roof and a internal courtyard. Car parking appears to be provided at the rear of the building accessed from the laneway. The building has a street setback of 8.9 metres.

North-east: a 3 metre wide laneway is to the rear of the site, it extends between Sinclair and May Street and appears to provide vehicle access to the rear of some properties on Garfield Street and Nepean Highway. Beyond the laneway are properties which are oriented to Nepean Highway – the majority of which are commercial premises. The exception is No. 1182 Nepean Highway, which is a dwelling with a notable number of outbuildings to its rear. South-east: No. 36 Garfield Street is occupied by a single storey weatherboard dwelling with a transverse gabled iron roof. A crossover is located towards its south-eastern side boundary. The dwelling has a street setback of 6 metres to its verandah and a setback of approximately 8 metres to the dwelling’s front wall. South-west: No’s 29-35 Garfield Street are located opposite the subject site, with No. 29 occupied by three single storey dwellings in a tandem arrangement and No’s 31-35 each occupied by single storey brick dwellings. All of these dwellings have concrete tiled hipped roof forms.

4.0 PROPOSAL 4.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing dwelling and outbuildings on the land and

construct a three storey apartment building containing thirty-five apartments with a basement car park. A mix of predominantly one and two bedroom apartments is proposed, with one 3 bedroom apartment included.

4.2 Within the basement a total of thirty-six (36) resident car parking spaces are proposed, and seven (7) visitor parking spaces. At the front of each resident parking space would be located a storage cage, with a minimum of 8 cubic metres. Sixteen bicycle spaces would be provided, comprising five allocated for visitors and eleven for residents. A waste disposal area is proposed within the basement, along with lift and stairwell access to the floors above. A 20,000 litre rain water tank would be located beneath the basement ramp.

4.3 A total of thirteen (13) apartments would be on the ground floor, comprised of 10 two bedroom apartments and 3 one bedroom apartments. Each apartment would be provided with ground level private open space, varying in area between 30 square metres and 98 square metres. The ground floor has an 8.5 metre street setback (it is noted that plans provide a notation for the setback being 8.85 metres however when measured, the setback is 8.5 metres).

4.4 Thirteen apartments would also be located on the first floor, all with two bedrooms each. Balconies for each apartment are oriented to the street or to the rear of the site and varying in area between 12 square metres and 21 square metres. The first floor has a 8.85 metre street setback, with balconies encroaching 1.8 metres into this setback.

4.5 Nine apartments are proposed on the second floor, with 8 two bedroom apartments and 1 three bedroom apartment. Balconies for each apartment vary in size between 10 square metres and 76 square metres. Balconies for apartments 27, 29, 30 and 35 include areas which are oriented to side boundaries. A modulated façade is proposed at this level, providing staggered street setbacks varying between 12.76 metres and 13.87 metres. Balconies encroach up to 3.2 metres into the street setback.

4.6 The building would have an overall height of 9.1 metres. A contemporary architectural style is proposed with a flat roof form. Two coloured rendered finishes are proposed for walls, with a mix of glass balustrading and rendered balustrades to balconies. Front fencing of 1.5 metres height with timber pickets would be provided.

4.7 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 60% and a permeability of 21.3%. 5.0 PLANNING PERMIT PROVISIONS

Zone 5.1 Residential 1 Zone: Pursuant to Clause 32.01-4 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a

planning permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55 of the Scheme. The Schedule to the Residential 1 Zone includes a variation to one of the standards within Clause 55, relating to front fence height.

Particular Provisions

5.2 Car Parking: Pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required to reduce or waive the car parking requirements associated with a dwelling. The proposal satisfies the car parking requirement and a reduction is not sought.

5.3 Clause 55 - Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings – (Refer to

Appendix A for the Planning Officer’s full assessment against this report).

General Provisions 5.4 The Decision Guidelines of Clause 65 of the Kingston Planning Scheme are relevant

to this application and require consideration to be given to a variety of matters including planning scheme policies, the purpose of the zone, orderly planning and the impact on amenity.

6.0 RELEVANT POLICIES 6.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)

Clause 11 Settlement Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage Clause 16 Housing

6.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.05 Residential Land Use Clause 22.01 Cheltenham Business Centre Policy

Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy 6.3 Other

6.4 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document under Clause

21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF). The land is located within Area 31 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines.

6.5 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.

7.0 ADVERTISING 7.1 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. Seventeen (17) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:

• Neighbourhood character/Height/Visual bulk/overdevelopment • Parking and traffic concerns • Overlooking • Overshadowing • Internal overlooking • Poor internal amenity with regard to daylight access • Drainage • Noise from increased residents and cars • Waste management

7.2 The following objections raised are not valid planning considerations: • Devaluation of property • Loss of views • The apartments will be rented out

7.3 The valid grounds of objection are addressed in the assessment section further in the

report. 8.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 8.1 A preliminary conference was held on 11 October 2012 with the relevant planning

officer, Ward Councillor, the permit applicant and objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

8.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and

the objections still stand. 9.0 SECTION 57A – AMENDMENT TO PLANS

9.1 Following the preliminary conference meeting the Permit Applicant lodged amended plans on 11 December 2012, pursuant to Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 the amended plans incorporated the following changes:

Deletion of the pitched attic style or mansard roof and replaced with a flat roof

to achieve a reduction of building bulk. Deletion of two apartments from the upper level (and moved to the ground

floor) and overall decrease of the upper level footprint. The street setback of this level has been increased from 8.75 metres to a minimum of 12.76 metres and maximum of 13.87 metres.

Reduction in floor area of some ground floor apartments to accommodate an increase in total apartments on this level.

Modifications to the design of the main entry. The reduction of a three bedroom apartment to two bedrooms has resulted in

the deletion of one car space from the basement that is no longer required. 9.2 The amended plans were not re-advertised as they essentially reduced potential off-

site amenity impacts by increasing setbacks at the upper floor, whilst retaining proposed setbacks of the ground and first floors. The reduction of one (1) car parking space still satisfies the parking provision requirements of Clause 52.06 and a car parking reduction was therefore not sought.

9.3 It is these plans that form the basis of this recommendation and are described at section 4 of this report.

10.0 REFERRALS 10.1 The application was referred to the following internal departments:

• Council’s Development Engineer – raised no objection to the application, subject to conditions included on any permit issued relating to stormwater management and drainage of the site, and the requirement for an apex along the front boundary access to the basement. Conditions are required regarding a drainage easement to be created, which is to contain a diverted stormwater drain which currently dissects the subject site.

• Council’s Vegetation Management Officer - raised no objection to the application,

subject to conditions requiring a landscape plan which would entail the planting of a minimum of five (5) canopy trees within the front setback.

• Council’s Traffic Engineering Department – raised no concern with the provision

of parking, but did note concerns with regard to access to Nepean Highway for future residents via a one-way service road. Initial discrepancies with the dimensions and length of the basement ramp were raised which were subsequently addressed by the applicant via amended plans.

• Council’s Roads and Drains Department – raised no objection to the application

subject to standard conditions regarding footpath and boundary levels and construction and reinstatement of crossovers and reiteration of conditions required by Council’s Development Engineer.

• Council’s Sustainable Development Advisor – provided comments on the original plans submitted, noting that a Sustainable Management Plan is required for a development of this size. On the basis of those plans some concerns were raised regarding the adequacy of daylight achieved to some bedrooms which rely on a saddleback or battle axe design with built form overhanging windows and considerable depth between windows and primary bedroom spaces. Some recommendations were made to improve the overall sustainability measures incorporated into the design, such as ventilation for the basement, the provision of ceiling fans to apartments, increasing bicycle parking and permeable surfaces.

• Council’s Waste Management Co-ordinator – raised no objection to the proposal.

A Waste Management Plan will be required by way of permit condition to ensure that waste can be accommodated within the basement and appropriately managed.

• Council’s Street Trees Co-ordinator – consents to the removal of the street tree

that is located in the nature strip to the front of No. 34 Garfield Street, subject to a condition that the tree is removed and replaced at the full cost of the owner/developer.

11.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:

State Planning Policy Framework 11.1 The State Planning Policy Framework sets out the relevant state-wide policies for

residential development at Clause 11 (Settlement), Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) and Clause 16 (Housing). Essentially, the provisions within these clauses seek to achieve the fundamental objectives and policy outcomes sought by the Metropolitan Strategy – ‘Melbourne 2030’ and its recent update ‘Melbourne @ 5 Million’, which have been removed from an individual clause and integrated throughout the State Planning Policy Framework.

11.2 The settlement policies at Clause 11 seek to ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for all forms of land use in Victoria. Of particular relevance to housing, Clause 11 promotes housing diversity and urban consolidation objectives in the established urban realm. Clause 11.02-1 states that Planning Authorities should plan to accommodate projected population growth over at least a 15 year period, taking account of opportunities for redevelopment and intensification of existing urban areas as well consideration being had for environmental aspects, sustainable development and the costs associated with providing infrastructure. This clause states: Planning for urban growth, should consider:

o Opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment and intensification of existing urban areas;

o Neighbourhood character and landscape considerations; o The limits of land capability and natural hazards and environmental

quality; o Service limitations and the costs of providing infrastructure.

11.3 Clause 11.01-2 places particular emphasis on providing increased densities of housing in and around activity centres or sites that have good access to a range of services, facilities and transport options.

11.4 Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) aims to ensure all new land use and development appropriately responds to its landscape, valued built form and cultural context, and protect places and sites with significant heritage, architectural, aesthetic, scientific and cultural value.

11.5 Policies pertaining to urban design, built form and heritage outcomes are found at

Clause 15 of the State Planning Policy Framework. Of particular significance, Clause 15.01 encourages development to achieve high quality architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to neighbourhood character, minimises detrimental amenity impacts and achieves safety for future residents, and the community, through good design. The provisions of Clause 15.02 promote energy and resource efficiency through improved building design, urban consolidation and promotion of sustainable transport.

11.6 Clause 15.03-2 (Aboriginal Cultural Heritage) seeks to ensure the protection and

conservation of places of Aboriginal cultural heritage significance. 11.7 The Subject Land is not identified in an area of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage

Sensitivity. 11.8 Housing objectives are further advanced at Clause 16. This Clause aims to

encourage increased diversity in housing to meet the needs of the community through different life stages and respond to market demand for housing. In much the same vein as Clause 11, this Clause advances notions of consolidation of existing urban areas, particularly in and around activity centres and employment corridors that are well served by all infrastructure and services.

11.9 The policies contained within Clause 16.01-4 encourage the provision of range of housing types to meet the increasingly diverse needs of the community. Emphasis is placed on development of well-designed medium density housing with respect to neighbourhood character. Further, this Clause aims to make better use of the existing infrastructure and provide more energy efficient housing.

11.10 It is submitted that the proposed development satisfies the aforementioned State

strategies and policy direction. Specifically, the subject site is located on land earmarked for residential purposes, whereby residential development is an ‘as of right’ use under the zoning provisions. Subject to appropriate conditions on any permit issued, the development itself achieves an acceptable design outcome for the site and its immediate abuttals, whilst enjoying convenient and direct access to community facilities and the like, including public transport nodes.

Local Planning Policy Framework

11.11 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.

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

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 ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.

11.13 Council’s Local Planning Policy at Clause 21.05 essentially reinforces State Planning

Policy relevant to housing, stressing the need to encourage urban consolidation in appropriate locations and to accommodate projected population increases.

11.14 Clause 22.01 Cheltenham Business Centre Policy specifies that this area is located within Area J (Medium Density Residential Precinct) under the Cheltenham Business Framework Plan. Medium Density Residential Precinct

11.15 The key policies relating to new development within this precinct (where relevant), are as follows: • Medium density residential development be encouraged with a mixture of

accommodation types and building scales. • Development optimises site utilisation, is innovative, responsive to its streetscape

context and incorporates the following design features: o A high level of articulation in building setbacks, facades and roof lines. o Open landscaped front gardens. o Low or transparent front fencing styles.

• Where site consolidation is proposed, the following design responses may be

supported where the amenity of adjoining properties will not be significantly reduced: o Multi-level buildings (up to a maximum of two storey plus attic, giving three

levels).

o Construction of single storey walls on side boundaries. o Flexibility in the size and layout of private open space. o Reduction in street frontage setbacks.

(emphasis added)

11.16 The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the above policies. The proposal has sought to address previous Tribunal comments regarding street setbacks and the design of the upper floor in order to meet the intent of this policy with regard to multi-level buildings – that is, to ensure that any third level is recessed from the built form below it. This issue was considered critical and the previous application was refused primarily on the ground that the design would present an unreasonable degree of bulk to the streetscape. Whilst the above policy contemplates a reduction in street frontage setbacks, the proposed reduced setbacks combined with a dominant upper floor were considered to be fatal to the application. The application has notably increased setbacks at all levels, and with the upper floor increased from 5 metres to 12.76 metres.

11.17 Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy extends upon the provision

contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use), relating to increased housing diversity areas, incremental housing change areas, minimal housing change areas, residential renewal areas and neighbourhood character. It provides design guidance on how new residential development should achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that positively respond to neighbourhood character.

11.18 Relevant objectives in Clause 22.11-2 Residential Development Policy include:

• To promote a managed approach to housing change, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate increased housing diversity, incremental housing change, residential renewal or minimal housing change, as identified within the MSS.

• To encourage new residential development to achieve architectural and urban

design outcomes that positively respond to neighbourhood character having particular regard to that identified in the Kingston Neighbourhood Character Guidelines – August 2007.

• To promote on-site car parking which is adequate to meet the anticipated needs

of future residents. • To ensure that landscaping and trees remain a major element in the appearance

and character of the municipality’s residential environments. • To limit the amount and impact of increased stormwater runoff on local drainage

systems. • To ensure that the siting and design of new residential development takes

account of interfaces with sensitive and strategic land uses.

11.19 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. This is discussed in the Clause 55 assessment, later within this report.

12.0 CLAUSE 55 (RESCODE ASSESSMENT) 12.1 The proposal has been assessed against the standards of Clause 55 (ResCode) of

the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to Appendix A). Overall, it is noted that the application achieves a high level of compliance with the ResCode provisions, with only minor variations sought. Five (5) of the thirty-three (33) ResCode standards are sought to be varied.

12.2 The following assessment considers the relevant standards and objectives of ResCode where they require further discussion to that provided in the attached Appendix, particularly those standards where concessions are sought.

Clause 55.02 – Neighbourhood Character & Infrastructure Standard B1 – Neighbourhood Character

12.3 The objective of this Clause 55.02-1 is ‘to ensure that the design respects the existing neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site and surrounding area’. Standard B1 of ResCode suggests that the proposed design should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

12.4 The surrounding area is characterised by a mix of single storey and double storey housing. Examples of multi-dwelling and infill development are common, with an older style apartment development that is two storeys at No. 26 Garfield Street abutting the subject site and adjacent to that development on the corner of Garfield Street and May Street is a three storey apartment development. Further north-west along Garfield Street can be found examples of newer housing stock that is double storey and attached in form. The area is experiencing change and has been noted by members of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal as being an area that is “evolving” and in “transition”.

12.5 The extent of infill and multi-dwelling development that has already occurred is an

indication of the site’s proximity to Southland Principal Activity Centre and the Cheltenham Major Activity Centre, along with transport infrastructure in the form of extensive bus routes and the Cheltenham Train Station. The proposal is therefore considered to be consistent with the existing and apparent evolving character of the area where it is acknowledged that more change will occur in line with existing state and local policies which encourage medium density development in this location.

Clause 55.03 – Site Layout and Building Massing Standard B7 – Building Height

12.6 The objective of Clause 55.03-2 is ‘to ensure that the height of the buildings respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character’. The total building height proposed is 9.1 metres, exceeding this Standard by 0.1 metres. The variance required is considered relatively minor, noting that local policy supports development up to three storeys, consistent with the proposal.

Clause 55.04 – Amenity Impacts Standard B23 – Internal Views

12.7 The objective of Clause 55.04-8 is ‘to limit views into the secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within a development’. Screening treatments to balconies oriented to Garfield Street have not been indicated, with views (particularly from first floor balconies) of ground floor private open spaces not meeting this standard. A condition is recommended to rectify this – with horizontal screening preventing downward views whilst enabling views to the street. It is also noted that internal screening between balconies is nominated at 1.8 metres, this is recommended to be reduced to the standard 1.7 metres to minimise loss of light into these areas.

Standard B22 – Overlooking

12.8 The objective of Clause 55.04-6 is ‘to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows’. Windows and balconies have been treated to prevent unreasonable overlooking through the treatment of obscure glazing and screening, however the screening proposed to the south-east side of balconies of apartments 27 and 35 does not extend the full length of each of those balcony sides. Views to private open space and habitable room windows are still likely to be enabled, a condition is therefore recommended to extend the screening to balconies for the full length of the south-east side of each respective balcony.

12.9 Apartment 23 which could have some limited views to the rear yard of No. 1182 Nepean Highway has screening proposed to a height of 1.6 metres. Whilst this standard ordinarily requires a height of 1.7 metres it would appear that views are already limited by outbuildings on the site. The proposed screening is considered sufficient to ensure unreasonable views will not be possible.

Clause 55.05 – On-site Amenity & Facilities Standard B27 – Daylight to New Windows

12.10 The objective of Clause 55.05-3 is ‘to allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows’. A notable number of bedrooms are proposed in a saddleback or battle axe arrangement – with most at ground and first floors having built form overhanging these windows. This arrangement is generally accepted in apartment style buildings, however the design needs to ensure that adequate daylight will be achieved through appropriate window widths, minimising the distance between windows and the primary area of the habitable room and reducing built form around the window.

12.11 The depths of the corridor where study nooks are proposed are quite long – for some

approximately 3.5 metres. This will significantly impact on the extent of daylight that will reach the main areas of bedrooms. The width the windows which are 1.5 metres is considered adequate, a lesser width would not be accepted. It is possible to remove overhanging built form to many of these windows where balconies are able to be reduced without impacting on the minimum required private open spaces required for each apartment. A condition is recommended to remove overhanging built form from as many of these windows as possible, improving the overall internal amenity achieved as well as impacting on the environmental sustainability of the development.

Standard B28 – Private Open Space

12.12 The objective of Clause 55.05-4 is ‘to provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents’. A variation to the requirement of this Standard is sought, where one apartment at ground floor would be provided with 30 square metres of private open space instead of 40 square metres. The variation to the requirement is considered satisfactory, where it is generally accepted that apartments can be provided with lesser areas of private open space (which are also more likely to be commensurate with the size of the dwelling). Generally the development provides balconies and ground floor private open spaces which exceed the requirements of this Standard in terms of overall areas and minimum dimensions.

Clause 55.06 – Detailed Design Standard B32 - Front Fences

12.13 The objective of Clause 55.06-2 is ‘to encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character’. The proposal will entail front fencing of 1.5 metres height, exceeding the maximum 1.2 metres required. The previous Tribunal decision relating to this site provided comment on the previous proposal which also entailed the same front fencing height, and determined that this is an acceptable balance between providing some seclusion to ground floor private open spaces and integrating the development with the street.

Standard B34 – Site Services

12.14 The relevant objective of Clause 55.06-4 is ‘to ensure that site services can be installed and easily maintained’. A Waste Management Plan was not submitted with the proposal. A condition is recommended to ensure that waste can be appropriately managed, and accommodated within the basement. A condition is also recommended to provide apartments with external clothes drying facilities to reduce reliance on dryers.

13.0 CLAUSE 52.06 – CAR PARKING

13.1 Planning Scheme Amendment VC90 amended the Kingston Planning Scheme on 5

June 2012, deleting Standard B16 – Car Parking Provision of Clause 55 and requiring all residential development to be assessed under a revised Clause 52.06 – Car Parking. Amendments to Clause 52.06 have included enhanced design standards for car parking, including requirements for the design of car spaces and basement ramps.

13.2 The proposed provision of thirty-six (36) resident parking spaces and seven (7) visitor spaces meets the requirements of Clause 52.06. The design of the basement layout is considered satisfactory, with the car space and accessway dimensions satisfying the design standards of Clause 52.06-8.

13.3 While not required by the Planning Scheme for a residential building less than four

storeys, the proposal also incorporates bicycle parking. Full details of racks or storage arrangements that are proposed for bicycle parking is not detailed on plans, however a condition is recommended to rectify this.

13.4 The proposed basement ramp has been assessed by Council’s Traffic Engineers and deemed satisfactory. A sight splay appears to have been provided to one side of the basement ramp, its dimensions do not meet the minimum specified at Clause 52.06-8, however this can be rectified by a permit condition.

13.5 A standard condition regarding car parking and access construction is recommended to ensure that appropriate line-marking of car spaces and the two way traffic flow on the ramp is provided, along with wheel stops to the front of car spaces.

13.6 It is acknowledged that residents have advised Council that existing traffic conditions in the area are hampered by the layout of local streets restricting flow of traffic and access to and from Nepean Highway. Council’s Traffic Engineer has queried the degree of convenient access to Nepean Highway that will be afforded to future residents. Unfortunately these issues extend beyond the scope of this particular application and require a precinct scale response on the part of Council and VicRoads. Whilst the proposal would result in an increase in traffic in the area, this is not considered a substantive reason to refuse the application.

14.0 RESPONSE TO THE PREVIOUS VICTORIAN AND CIVIL ADMINISTRATIVE

TRIBUNAL DECISION RELATING TO THE SITE

14.1 It is considered that the proposal has taken into account the determination made by the Tribunal with regard to the previous application on the site for a similar three storey apartment building. The Tribunal acknowledged that a three storey apartment building is suitable for the site, that the application did not result in unreasonable off-site amenity impacts, adequate car parking would be provided and traffic generated by the proposal would not be unreasonable. The key issues which were fatal to the application related to inadequate street setbacks and a dominant upper floor.

14.2 The previous proposal entailed the following street setbacks: Ground floor: 4.8 metres to the front wall of the building First floor: 5 metres with balconies setback 3 metres from the street Second floor: same as first floor - 5 metres with balconies setback 3 metres from the street. The current proposal now entails the following street setbacks: Ground floor: 8.59 metres to the front wall of the building First floor: 8.85 metre street setback, with balconies setback 7 metres from the street Second floor: 12.76 metres, increasing to 13.87 metres, with balconies setback 10.6 metres.

14.3 It is considered that the proposal has lessened the dominance of the upper floor, whilst also providing increased setbacks to the ground and first floors which will enable landscaping within the front setback, including canopy trees. Whilst local policy contained within Clause 22.01 – Cheltenham Business Centre Policy contemplates reduced street setbacks in this precinct, any design must still be responsive to its street context – this was a key message of the Tribunal’s decision. The reduced setbacks, across the substantial width of the site, and an upper floor which was not recessed was considered to be an unreasonably visually intrusive building within the streetscape. The current application has not sought to reduce the

street setback and has provided a transition in height from the first floor to the upper floor – which will be noticeable when viewed from the street. The proposal entails simple design detail which results in a ‘cleaner’ and lighter weight finish which overall would result in a less dominant building. The establishment of landscaping to the front of the site will also soften the building – through the introduction of canopy trees etc, any meaningful landscaping would have been significantly limited in the previous proposal due to the intrusion of balconies into the front setback.

14.4 In comparison to another recent approval in the area at No. 36-40 Jean Street, Cheltenham, the proposal would have a more recessed upper floor. The application at No. 36-40 Jean Street for a three storey apartment with basement car park was determined by the Tribunal on 22 August 2012 as suitable. This site is subject to the same policy context as the subject site, in that it is also located in Area J identified in the Cheltenham Business Centre Policy. That development, as approved by the Tribunal did not have a discernible transition between the first floor and second floor. The following setbacks were approved: Ground floor: 10.1 metres to front wall First floor: 10.1 metres to front wall Second floor: 10.5 metres to front wall

14.5 The current application seeks to propose a more noticeable transition between the first and second floors, where the second floor is able to be read differently from the floor below. Its acknowledged that the applicant has made changes to the format to try to address the Tribunal’s concerns, however further conditions to design detail are recommended in line with Planning Officer feedback that has been provided to the applicant throughout the application (and pre-application) process. These changes are required to further differentiate the upper floor from the floors below and require the reduction or deletion of particular design elements which, whilst integrated into the overall architectural expression of the building, do not assist in providing a more recessive design response.

14.6 The current proposal has also continued to limit its off-site amenity impacts, meeting

overshadowing requirements and, subject to conditions will not unreasonably overlook adjoining properties. Car parking provision also continues to satisfy parking requirements (now contained within Clause 52.06 compared to the previous Standard B16 of ResCode). Traffic generated by the proposal will also now be reduced by a small extent due to the reduction in total apartments from forty to thirty-five.

15.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS 15.1 The objector concerns have largely been addressed in the attached Appendix A and,

where necessary, further elaborated on in the assessment above. 15.2 The following objector concerns, however, remain outstanding:

• Devaluation of property • Loss of views • The apartments will be rented out and occupied by tenants

15.3 These are not planning matters and cannot be considered in the assessment of this application.

16.0 CONCLUSION: 16.1 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the Site, subject to

conditions, as evidenced by:

• The compatibility of the design and siting with the surrounding area; • The mitigation of off-site amenity impacts; and • A suitable level of compliance with all relevant policies, including Clause 55 of the

Kingston Planning Scheme

APPENDIX A – CLAUSE 55 RESCODE ASSESSMENT Standard of the Kingston Planning Scheme Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings (Clause 55 and Schedule to the Residential 1 Zone)

Title and Objective Complies with Standard?

Requirement and Proposed

B1 Neighbourhood Character Design respects existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character. Development responds to features of the site and surrounding area.

Yes See Section 12 of this report.

B2 Residential Policy Residential development is consistent with housing policies in the SPPF, LPPF including the MSS and local planning policies. Support medium densities in areas to take advantage of public transport and community infrastructure and services.

Yes The application is consistent with local and state planning policies which seek to promote urban consolidation in areas that have ready access to community and transport infrastructure. The site is located within the Cheltenham Business Centre Policy area where medium density housing is encouraged, and where up to three storey apartment style housing can be considered.

B3 Dwelling Diversity Encourages a range of dwelling sizes and types in developments of ten or more dwellings.

Yes

The development will primarily contain a mix of one and two apartments and 1 three bedroom apartment, meeting this objective. The overall style of dwellings will also meet a broader need for a greater mix of housing stock in addition to the predominant detached housing which exists in the area.

B4 Infrastructure Provides appropriate utility services and infrastructure without overloading the capacity.

Yes The site has access to adequate road and drainage infrastructure. The development will need to make application to the appropriate suppliers for water, sewerage, electricity, gas and phone services. Council’s Engineers advised of conditions to be included to ensure adequate drainage of the site and limiting offsite drainage impacts including the use of water sensitive urban design principles. A Council owned stormwater drainage pipe dissects the site (not within an easement), which is required to be diverted, this has been addressed via conditions.



B5 Integration with the Street Integrate the layout of development with the street

Yes On each floor habitable room windows are oriented to the street providing an active façade. It is proposed to construct a 1.5 metre high timber picket fence which will restrict views between the public and private realm at the ground level, however this has previously been considered by the Tribunal as appropriate.

B6 Street Setback The setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site.

Yes Required: 8.45 metres Proposed: 8.5 metres It is noted that plans show the setback of the adjoining dwelling at No. 36 Garfield Street as being 6.1 metres – however this is to the verandah of the dwelling, rather than its front wall. The setback of the front wall would appear to be approx. 8 metres. Plans also show the ground floor setback noted as being 8.85 metres, however when measured, it is 8.5 metres. This discrepancy is relatively minor. First floor balconies will encroach into the street setback 1.8 metres, with these setback at 7.05 metres from the street. These setbacks will still allow an adequate area in the front setback for the planting of canopy trees. The setback of the second storey varies between 12.76 metres and 13.87 metres, providing a visible transition in height from the built form below.

B7 Building Height Building height should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

No Maximum: 9 metres Proposed: 9.1 metres See Section 12 of this report.

B8 Site Coverage Site coverage should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

Yes Maximum: 60% Proposed: 60% The standard is satisfied.



B9 Permeability Reduce the impact of stormwater run-off on the drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration.

Yes At least: 20% Proposed: 21.3% The Standard is met. Coloured perspectives show hard surfaces to ground level private open spaces, whilst these may only be indicative a condition can be included to ensure that any paving is permeable.

B10 Energy Efficiency Achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings. Ensure orientation and layout reduces fossil fuel energy use and makes appropriate use of daylight and solar energy.

Yes The orientation of the site limits opportunities to provide north facing windows to apartments, however adequate opportunities for daylight access have been provided, subject to conditions regarding bedroom windows with overhanging built form – see discussion under Standard B27. Window moulding around north-west facing windows will assist in providing passive solar shading throughout the year. The energy efficiency of adjoining dwellings should not be unreasonably impacted by the proposal.

B11 Open Space Integrate layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development.

N/A No communal open space proposed.

B12 Safety Layout to provide safety and security for residents and property.

Yes Adequate surveillance opportunities from the development to the street will be provided. All of the private open spaces except are shown to be enclosed by fencing. A security gate is proposed within the basement, separating the resident parking area and visitors parking area. A 1 metre pedestrian path up the ramp is proposed for visitors utilising the basement. A condition is recommended to ensure that kerbing is provided to the path to separate it from the vehicle access. A condition is recommended to provide lighting to all communal areas, with lighting to be baffled where required to reduce light spill to adjoining properties.



B13 Landscaping To provide appropriate landscaping. To encourage: • Development that respects the landscape

character of the neighbourhood.

• Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.

• The retention of mature vegetation on the site.

Yes, subject to conditions

A condition is recommended to provide a landscape plan. Council’s Vegetation Management Officer has recommended the planting of a minimum of 5 canopy trees within the front setback.

B14 Access Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient vehicle access to and from the development. Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood character.

Yes One crossover is proposed towards the site’s south-eastern side boundary, forming 10% of the site’s frontage, satisfying the standard. The reinstatement of three existing crossovers to the front of No’s 28, 30 and 32 Garfield Street will add on-street parking spaces to the front of the site. The design of the basement will enable all vehicles to leave the site in a forward direction.

B15 Parking Location Provide resident and visitor vehicles with convenient parking. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments.

Yes All parking will be located in the basement with access to the ground and upper floors via a lift and stairs. A bedroom window of apartment 1 will be setback 1 metre from the basement ramp and will have a sill height of 1.7 metres, meeting the requirements of this Standard.

B16 – no longer exists following Planning Scheme Amendment VC90 approved on 5 June 2012. B17 Side and Rear Setbacks Ensure the height and setback respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

Yes All ground floor setbacks exceed 1 metre meeting this Standard. At the first floor a minimum side setback to the north-western boundary is proposed. This setback exceeds the required setback of 1.75 metres for a wall height of 6.1 metres. At the second floor the minimum proposed side setback to the north-western boundary of 6.16 metres is proposed, with balconies encroaching. The wall height on



this elevation is 9 metres, requiring a setback of 4.14 metres, with this being exceeded. The height of rendered balcony balustrades at 7 metres requires a setback of 2 metres, with balconies exceeding this requirement being setback at 3.8 metres. The second floor is setback 5 metres from the rear boundary, exceeding the required 3.84 metres for a wall height of 8.75 metres.

B18 Walls on Boundaries Ensure the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

Yes No walls on boundaries proposed.

B19 Daylight to Existing Windows Allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows.

Yes All existing windows are provided with substantial setbacks.

B20 North Facing Windows Allow adequate solar access to existing north-facing habitable room windows.

Yes Existing north facing windows at No. 36 Garfield Street which are setback 1.5 metres from the shared boundary will be provided with light courts which satisfy this standard. The first floor is required to be setback a minimum of 2.62 metres, with the proposed setback of 3 metres satisfying the standard. Second floor balconies with a height of 7.3 metres are required to be setback a minimum of 3.38 metres, with the proposed 4.6 metre setback meeting the standard. Second floor wall heights of 9.1 metres require a setback of 5.18 metres, with the proposed 7 metres exceeding this requirement.



B21 Overshadowing Open Space Ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space.

Yes The proposal has demonstrated that overshadowing cast to adjoining properties will satisfy the requirements of this standard. At 1pm overshadowing will occur to No. 36 Garfield Street, extending through the afternoon, however at 3pm the extent of overshadowing will still satisfy this standard – more than 40 square metres of the backyard will continue to receive at least 5 hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm.

B22 Overlooking Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows.

No Windows and balconies have been treated to prevent unreasonable overlooking through the treatment of obscure glazing and screening, a condition is recommended to extend screening to balconies of apartments 27 and 35. Apartment 23 which could have some limited views to the rear yard of No. 1182 Nepean Highway has screening proposed to a height of 1.6 metres. Whilst this standard ordinarily requires a height of 1.7 metres it would appear that views are already limited by outbuildings on the site. The proposed screening is considered sufficient to ensure unreasonable views will not be possible. See Section 12 of this report.

B23 Internal Views Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within the same development.

No Screening treatments between balconies have been nominated as 1.8 metres exceeding requirements. Screening to balconies oriented to the street has not been provided and views of ground floor private open spaces will be possible. See Section 12 of this report.



B24 Noise Impacts Protect residents from external noise and contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings.

Yes Any noise created as a result of this proposal can be directly attributed to typical residential noises associated with typical residential land use. It is not anticipated that the proposal will result in increased noise levels internally or externally.

B25 Accessibility Consider people with limited mobility in the design of developments.

Yes The main pedestrian entrance will be accessed via a wide path, providing appropriate wheel chair access to the building. A lift is proposed to access all levels of the building and it is noted that hallway widths will accommodate wheelchair access.

B26 Dwelling Entry Provide a sense of identity to each dwelling/residential building.

Yes The main entry of the building is highly visible from the street and provides an adequate sense of identification for the building.

B27 Daylight to New Windows Allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows.

No A number of windows that are proposed to be arranged in a saddleback design will have built form overhanging, impacting on daylight achieved to these bedrooms. See Section 12 of this report.

B28 Private Open Space Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate private open space.

No Required: 40m2 for each dwelling with one part of the private open space to consist of secluded POS at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with a minimum area of 25m2, a minimum dimension of 3m and convenient access from a living room, OR A balcony of 8 square metres with a minimum width of 1.6 metres and convenient access from a living room, OR A roof-top area of 10m2 with a minimum width of 2m and convenient access from a living room. See Section 12 of this report.



B29 Solar Access to Open Space Allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings/buildings.

Yes Adequate solar access will be achieved to private open spaces.

B30 Storage Provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling.

Yes

Storage areas are nominated in the basement, they would appear to exceed minimum requirements.

B31 Design Detail Encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes The proposal will incorporate building materials which are commonly found throughout the area. Whilst proposing a contemporary architectural design, this is considered to be appropriate for an area which has been earmarked for medium density housing – indicating that the area will be subject to further development and likely to entail architectural design that is of its time.

B32 Front Fences Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Note: The Schedule to the Residential 1 Zone includes a variation to this standard

No See Section 12 of this report.

B33 Common Property Ensure car parking, access areas and other communal open space is practical, attractive and easily maintained. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.

Yes Common property would be formed by all shared areas such as hallways and the basement. These areas are easily identifiable and capable of future management without difficulty.

B34 Site Services Ensure site services and facilities can be installed and easily maintained and are accessible, adequate and attractive. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.

No A Waste Management Plan was not submitted with the application. A condition is recommended to ensure that waste can be appropriately managed. See Section 12 of this report.

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

BELLE CRESCENT

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

WA

RREN

RO

AD

5

31

1A100

31

7

14/ 114

102

7/ 114

104

8/ 114

9/ 114115

10/ 114

11/ 114

12/ 114

13/ 114

6A/ 114

5

106

108

110

0 25.00 50.00

meters

MapXtreme 2008 ® SDK Developer License, © 2009 Pitney Bowes Sof tware Inc .

No. 106 (Lot 48 on PS 026847) Warren Road Mordialloc – Planning Permit Application

No. KP-206/2012 Executive Summary for Planning Committee Meeting APPLICATION No: KP-206/2012 LAND: No. 106 (Lot 48 on PS 026847) Warren Road

Mordialloc PLANNING OFFICER: Guillermo Henning PROPOSAL: Develop the land for the construction of Two (2)

Dwellings PERMIT TRIGGER: Construct two or more dwellings on a lot EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS: Single storey dwelling APPLICANT: Finley Roberts Design Pty Ltd ZONE / OVERLAYS: Residential 3 Zone RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA Incremental Housing Change OBJECTIONS One (1)

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 1.1 The application seeks to develop the land for the construction of Two (2) double-storey

Dwellings. Each dwelling incorporates a separate driveway and crossover accessed from Warren Road, with a minimum of 40m2 of secluded private open space to the rear.

2.0 SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDS

2.1 The following map illustrates the subject site in its surrounding context.

2.2 The site is regular in shape and is located on the east side of Warren Road,

Mordialloc. The subject land features a frontage width of 16.15 metres, a maximum side depth of 38.65 metres, resulting in a site area of 617m2. It currently contains a single storey, brick veneer, dwelling and associated outbuildings. The topography of the subject site features a gradual fall of approximately 1400mm from the west (front) at Warren Road to the site’s east (rear) property boundary. The property is devoid of any significant vegetation.

2.3 The surrounding area typically comprises of a combination of single dwellings on

single allotments and more recent examples of medium density housing, including the recent approval of two (2), double-storey dwellings on the adjoining property to the north at No. 108 Warren Road.

2.4 The subject site is located within reasonable proximity to the Parkdale Railway

Station and the neighbourhood activity centre of Parkdale (approximately 1.5km to the west) and the Thrift Park Shopping Centre (approximately 600 metres to the south-west). The surrounding residential area is well serviced by public transport, primary and secondary schools, community facilities and public reserves.


(a) Street Setback In accordance with requirements under this Standard, the proposed development

should have a minimum setback of 8.05 metres, based on the average front setbacks of the two adjoining properties. The proposed minimum front setback of 8.0 metres is marginally less than the minimum required, therefore a variation of this requirement is considered appropriate in this case.

(b) Front Fences The height of the proposed front fence along the site’s Warren Road frontage 1.7m exceeds the maximum specified under the Schedule to the Zone (being 1.2 metres as the street is not identified as a Road Zone Category 1). It is considered that a variation to this Standard is considered reasonable in this instance, given that Warren Road carries a significant amount of residential traffic as it connects Lower Dandenong Road to the north and White Street to the south. Council officers also note that there are numerous examples of high front fencing along Warren Road, including the adjoining property to the south at No. 104 Warren Road. (c) Average Lot Size

The subject site is identified within Area 4 of the Kingston Neighbourhood Character Study (May 2003). As part of this study, the average lot size within this area was calculated to be 347.45m2. The proposal achieves an average lot size of 308.61m2 per dwelling.

It is considered that a variation to this requirement is warranted in this instance as the development is generally consistent with the pattern of new housing in the area and the smaller than “average” size of the subject site. Further, the proposal is considered to be consistent with all relevant State and Local planning policies applicable to new housing development under the Scheme.

4.0 OBJECTOR CONCERNS 4.1 One (1) objection was received to the application. A summary of the concern and

response to each ground is provided below:

(a) Overshadowing Concern has been raised by No. 104 Warren Road to the south (side) regarding the extent of overshadowing likely to be generated by the proposal and the potential impact on their solar roof panels. It is noted that the proposed development would satisfy the requirements under Standard B21 (Overshadowing) of Clause 55, in accordance with the amended plans received by Council on the 28th May, 2012, and the diagrams submitted demonstrate that the solar roof panels would not be affected. Therefore, it is accepted that the overshadowing caused by the proposal would not cause unreasonable detriment to this adjoining property.

5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 Based on a thorough assessment of the application against the relevant provisions of


RECOMMENDATION That Council determine to support the proposal and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit to Develop the land for the construction of Two (2) Dwellings at No. 106 (Lot 48 on PS 026847) Warren Road Mordialloc, subject to 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 the 28th May, 2012, 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:



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 orientation of each elevation plan correctly noted;

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

d. the provision of a full colour palette, finishes and building materials schedule for all external elevations and driveways of the development;

e. the provision of at least 2000 litre water tank clearly nominated for dwellings with water re-use for toilet flushing;

f. the location of any external heating and/or cooling units associated with the proposed dwellings;

g. The existing wide vehicle crossing is to be reduced to a width of 3 metres; and

h. Vehicle crossings and internal driveways are to be in alignment.


3. 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.

Drainage and Water Sensitive Urban Design

4. 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.

5. 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.).


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

Parking and Traffic Management

8. Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, 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.

e. Clearly signposted/marked as resident, employee, disabled or visitor parking.

f. Line-marked to indicate each car space and all access lanes and, if necessary, the direction in which vehicles are to travel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

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

Infrastructure and Road Works

9. Any redundant vehicular crossing must be removed and the nature strip, kerb and channel, and footpath must be reinstated to the Responsible Authority’s standard specifications and

10. Any relocation of pits/power poles or other services affected by this development

must be relocated to the satisfaction of the relevant servicing authority and the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the owner/developer.

11. Property boundary and footpath levels are not to be altered to the satisfaction of the

Responsible Authority. 12. All reinstatements and vehicle crossings are to be constructed to the satisfaction of

the relevant authority 13. There is to be a 200mm offset installed between the footpath and property boundary

when carrying out reinstatements General amenity conditions

14. All externally-located heating and cooling units, exhaust fans and the like must not be located adjacent to bedroom windows on adjoining properties and must be concealed from the street, unless with the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.

15. Service units, including air conditioning/heating units, where incorporated, must not

be located where they will be highly visible from any public area to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and if located on the roof of a building, suitable screening and baffling must be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

16. All piping, 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.

Completion of Works

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

18. 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. Thereafter, the landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

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

Time Limits

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




Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the

necessary Building 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.

Note: Environment Protection Authority (EPA) Victoria set out the requirements pertaining to site construction hours and permissible noise levels.

Note: Council’s Rates Department is responsible for determining and assigning property address details, which include dwelling/unit/apartment and street numbers and/or street names. The onus is on the Permit Applicant/Land Owner to contact Council’s Rates Department to determine dwelling/unit/apartment and street numbers, and street name details for the approved development. Any reference to dwelling numbers on endorsed plans is indicative and should not be relied upon for dwelling/unit/apartment and street numbers and/or street name purposes.

Note: It is noted the development includes fence to be built over the easement. Separate consent from Council and the relevant service authority is required to build over the easement and will need to be obtained prior to the issue of a Building Permit.

OR In the event that the Council wishes to oppose the Officer’s recommendation to support the application, it can do so on the following grounds:

1. The proposal fails to comply with Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character given that it does not appear to respond to the existing or preferred neighbourhood character of the surrounding area.

2. The proposal fails to comply with the average lot size nominated within Area 4 of Kingston Neighbourhood Character Study 2003.

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT APPLICANT Mr A Reher & Ms J Lucas ADDRESS OF LAND No. 106 Warren Road, Mordialloc 3195 Plan of Subdivision Reference Lot 48 on Plan of Subdivision No. 026847 PROPOSAL Two (2) Dwellings PLANNING OFFICER Guillermo Henning REFERENCE NO. KP-260/2012 ZONE Residential 3 Zone (R3Z) OVERLAYS None OBJECTIONS One (1) CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED

28th May, 2012


No

1.0 RELEVANT LAND HISTORY 1.1 Council records indicate that there is no relevant planning history relating to this site. 2.0 SITE PARTICULARS 2.1 The site is regular in shape and is located on the east side of Warren Road,

Mordialloc. The subject land features a frontage width of 16.15 metres, a maximum side depth of 38.65 metres, resulting in a site area of 617m2. The topography of the subject site features a gradual fall of approximately 1400mm from the west (front) at Warren Road to the site’s east (rear) property boundary. The property is devoid of any significant vegetation.

2.2 It currently contains a single storey, brick veneer dwelling with a detached double car garage. The existing dwelling on the land enjoys a front setback of approximately 9.0 metres to Warren Road and is accessed via a single crossover located adjacent to the site’s street frontage. A small street tree exists within the adjoining road reserve. A horizontal timber clad fence currently extends along the site’s Warren Road frontage.

2.3 A 1.83 metre wide easement is located adjacent to the site’s east (rear) property

boundary. There appears to be no restrictions listed on the Certificate of Title. 3.0 SURROUNDING ENVIRONS 3.1 The surrounding area typically comprises of a combination of single dwellings on

single allotments and more recent examples of medium density housing, including the recent approval of two (2), double-storey dwellings on the adjoining property to the north at No. 108 Warren Road.

3.2 The architectural style and built form of existing residential development in the surrounding area is varied, however, the majority of dwellings feature front setbacks

of at least 7.0 metres with reasonable side building setbacks. Most existing dwellings are of single-storey or double-storey construction. There is no predominant fencing style within the surrounding neighbourhood. However, there are numerous examples of high front fencing along Warren Road.

3.2 The subject site is located within reasonable proximity to the Parkdale Railway Station and the neighbourhood activity centre of Parkdale (approximately 1.5km to the west) and the Thrift Park Shopping Centre (approximately 600 metres to the south-west). The surrounding residential area is well serviced by public transport, primary and secondary schools, community facilities and public reserves.

3.3 Land directly abutting the subject site and opposite is described as follows:

East (Rear): No. 114 Warren Road – A medium density housing development occupies this land and is physically separated by a common driveway from the subject site.

West (Front): Road and Don Tatnell Leisure Centre (Opposite) – This land is zoned Public Park & Recreation Zone (PPRZ). North (Side): No. 108 Warren Road – A single-storey, weatherboard clad dwelling with a associated outbuildings occupy this site and is setback approximately 7.59 metres from the site’s street frontage. Planning Permit KP-11/229 was issued on the 29th November, 2011 for the development of the land for the construction of two (2) dwellings. The development as approved under this planning permit has not commenced. South (Side): No. 104 Warren Road – A single-storey, brick veneer dwelling exists on this site and is setback approximately 8.51 metres from the site’s Warren Road frontage.

4. PROPOSAL 4.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing dwelling and associated outbuilding on the land

and construct two (2), double-storey, attached (“duplex”) dwellings on this site.

4.2 Dwelling 1 would comprise of four (4) bedrooms, an open plan kitchen, dining area, living room, an upstairs sitting room, two (2) powder rooms, bathroom and a “euro” laundry. It is noted that the master bedroom would be provided with an en-suite bathroom and a walk-in-robe. A total private open space area of 81.54m2 is proposed, with a minimum secluded private open space area of 61.54m2 to the rear (east). An attached double car garage with provision for a tandem car parking space within the front setback is proposed for this dwelling and would be accessible from Warren Road via the construction of a new 3.0 metre wide crossover at the site’s street frontage.

4.3 Dwelling 2 would comprise of five (5) bedrooms including a study, an open plan kitchen, dining area, living room, an upstairs sitting room, two (2) powder rooms, bathroom and a laundry. It is noted that the master bedroom would be provided with an en-suite bathroom and a walk-in-robe. A total private open space area of 86.12m2 is proposed, with a minimum secluded private open space area of 66.12m2 to the rear

(east). An attached single car garage with provision for a tandem car parking space within the front setback is proposed for this dwelling and would be accessible from Warren Road via the existing single crossover located adjacent to the site’s street frontage.

4.4 External building materials for the proposed dwellings would comprise of a combination of face brickwork and rendered brickwork at the ground floor level and weatherboard cladding at the upper floor level with Colorbond roof cladding. No specific colours have been nominated for the proposed external wall materials in this instance. A 1.79 metre high horizontal timber clad fence would be constructed along the site’s Warren Road frontage.

4.5 No significant vegetation would be removed from the subject site as a part of this application.

4.6 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 50% and a permeability of 35.21%. 5.0 PLANNING PERMIT PROVISIONS


planning permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55 of the Scheme. The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone includes a variation to a number of standards within Clause 55. A planning permit is also required to construct a front fence within 3.0 metres of a street frontage which exceeds the maximum specified under Clause 55.06-2 (Front Fences) of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

Overlays

5.2 N/A.

Particular Provisions 5.1 Car Parking: Planning Scheme Amendment VC90, introduced into the Kingston

Planning Scheme on 5 June 2012 contains the following residential car parking rates at Clause 52.06:

- 1 space to each 1 or 2 bedroom dwelling; - 2 spaces to each 3 or more bedroom dwelling; and - 1 visitor space for every 5 dwellings.

As the required number of car parking spaces are provided on the site, a planning permit is not required for a reduced car parking rate pursuant to Clause 52.06-3.

5.2 Clause 55 - Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings – (Refer to

Appendix A for the Planning Officer’s full assessment against this report).

General Provisions

5.3 The Decision Guidelines of Clause 65 of the Kingston Planning Scheme are relevant to this application and require consideration to be given to a variety of matters including planning scheme policies, the purpose of the zone, orderly planning and the impact on amenity.



6.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.05 Residential Land Use Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy

6.3 Other


21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF). The land is located within Area No. 25 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines.




owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. One (1) objection to the proposal was received.

7.2 The main grounds of objection to the proposal relate to the potential overshadowing

of the proposed development on the adjoining property to the south (side) at No. 104 Warren Road, Mordialloc.

8.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 8.1 A preliminary conference meeting was held at Council’s Cheltenham office on the 3rd

October, 2012, with the Applicant, Objector and Planning Officer in attendance. No Ward Councillors were present at this meeting.

8.2 The main concern of overshadowing raised by the Objector from the adjoining property at No. 104 Warren Road was discussed at length. However, no resolution was reached between any of the parties at this meeting.

9.0 SECTION 50/50A/57A – AMENDMENT TO PLANS 9.1 Amended plans were received by Council on the 28th May, 2012, in response to a

number of concerns raised under Council’s Section 54 letter dated the 30th April, 2012. It is these plans that were formally advertised and now constitute the considered plans for the application.

10.0 REFERRALS 10.1 The application was referred to the following internal departments:

• Council’s Development Engineer – raised no objection to the application, subject to conditions included on any permit issued for the proposed development relating to the provision of a rainwater tank, stormwater management and waste water discharge.


subject to conditions included on any permit issued relating to the requirements for the provision of a landscape plan and associated planting schedule in conjunction with the proposed development.

• Council’s Roads & Drains Department – raised no objection to the application,

subject to conditions included on any permit issued requiring a maximum 3.0 metre wide crossover for Dwelling 1 and the retention of an on-street car parking space between the two crossovers.

10.2 The application was not required to be referred to any external authorities, pursuant

to Clause 66.02 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. 11.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:



11.2 The settlement policies at Clause 11 seek to ensure a sufficient supply of land is available for all forms of land use in Victoria. Of particular relevance to housing, Clause 11 promotes housing diversity and urban consolidation objectives in the established urban realm. Clause 11.02-1 states that Planning Authorities should plan to accommodate projected population growth over at least a 15 year period, taking account of opportunities for redevelopment and intensification of existing urban areas as well consideration being had for environmental aspects, sustainable development and the costs associated with providing infrastructure. This clause states:

Planning for urban growth, should consider: o Opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment and intensification

of existing urban areas; o Neighbourhood character and landscape considerations; o The limits of land capability and natural hazards and environmental


11.3 Clause 11.01-2 places particular emphasis on providing increased densities of

housing in and around activity centres or sites that have good access to a range of services, facilities and transport options.





11.7 The policies contained within Clause 16.01-4 encourage the provision of range of

housing types to meet the increasingly diverse needs of the community. Emphasis is placed on development of well-designed medium density housing with respect to neighbourhood character. Further, this Clause aims to make better use of the existing infrastructure and provide more energy efficient housing.


Clause 15 of the State Planning Policy Framework. Of particular significance, Clause 15.01 encourages development to achieve high quality architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to neighbourhood character, minimises detrimental amenity impacts and achieves safety for future residents, and the community, through good design. The provisions of Clause 15.02 promote energy and resource efficiency through improved building design, urban consolidation and promotion of sustainable transport.




11.11 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.

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

include: 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..

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.

11.13 Council’s Local Planning Policy at Clause 21.05 essentially reinforces State Planning

Policy relevant to housing, stressing the need to encourage urban consolidation in appropriate locations and to accommodate projected population increases.

11.14 Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use), relating to increased housing diversity areas, incremental housing change areas, minimal housing change areas, residential renewal areas and neighbourhood character. It provides design guidance on how new residential development should achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that positively respond to neighbourhood character.


To promote a managed approach to housing change, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate increased housing diversity, incremental housing change, residential renewal or minimal housing change, as identified within the MSS.

To encourage new residential development to achieve architectural and urban

design outcomes that positively respond to neighbourhood character having particular regard to that identified in the Kingston Neighbourhood Character Guidelines – August 2007.

To promote on-site car parking which is adequate to meet the anticipated needs of future residents.

To ensure that landscaping and trees remain a major element in the

appearance and character of the municipality’s residential environments.

To limit the amount and impact of increased stormwater runoff on local drainage systems.

To ensure that the siting and design of new residential development takes


11.16 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. This is discussed in the Clause 55 assessment, later within this report.


the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to Appendix A). Overall, it is noted that the application achieves a reasonable level of compliance with the ResCode provisions, with only minor variations sought. Three (3) of the thirty-three (33) ResCode standards are sought to be varied, with the remaining thirty (30) standards satisfied by the proposal.

12.2 The following assessment considers the relevant standards and objectives of

ResCode where they require further discussion to that provided in the attached Appendix A.

Standard B1 – Neighbourhood Character

12.3 The objective of this Clause 55.02-1 is ‘to ensure that the design respects the existing neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site and surrounding area’. Standard B1 of ResCode suggests that the proposed design should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

12.4 The subject site is located within a predominately residential area where medium

density housing is becoming prevalent, due to the area being within reasonable proximity to the Parkdale Railway Station, the “major activity centre” of Mordialloc, the Warren Village Shopping Centre, schools and other public facilities, etc. The land is also identified within Profile Area No. 25 of Council’s Neighbourhood Character Guidelines (2003) and demonstrates a general consistency with one (1) “major” built form characteristic has been identified within this profile area, being: Other building features (windows on corners and porches).

It is considered that the proposal generally accords with the above, as each dwelling would be provided with a front porch element.

12.5 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.

12.6 Under the Guidelines, particular reference is made to new side-by-side or “duplex”

dwellings and suggests that the design of such dwellings should have regard to neighbourhood character. Specifically, “it is critical that duplex dwellings have a visual connection and address the street and, further, that they do not present merely as garaging and front doors only. Staggered front building lines and variation in design and materials will all contribute an improved final outcome”.

12.7 It is considered that the proposed development does not raise any issues of non-

compliance with these guidelines. This is demonstrated through the varied front building setbacks, the use of different external building materials and the front walls of each garage would be set behind the front entry area of each dwelling.

12.8 Although the front elevation appears to be large on the considered plans, the

proposal incorporates setbacks (i.e. balconies) at upper level that will result in a reduced bulk once built, more consistent with the presentation of other dwellings in the street.

Standard B2 – Residential Policy

12.9 The Residential policy objective seeks to ensure that any proposed development

accords with the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework. An assessment against Kingston’s MSS and Residential Development Policy has been provided at section 11.2 of this Report, with the proposal found to be satisfactory.

12.10 Further to the assessment at section 11.2, as the Site is located within a Residential 3

Zone, Clause 22.11 seeks to manage development pressures by instituting a requirement to achieve averaged lot sizes within Incremental Housing Change Areas.

12.11 To achieve this, Council’s Strategic Planning Department undertook a study across

the municipality in 2003 (Kingston Neighbourhood Character Study) 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.

12.12 The subject site is identified within Area 4 of this study. The average lot size within

this area has been calculated to be 694.9m2, which results in a suggested development density of 1 dwelling per 347.45m2. As the site has an overall site area of 617.22m2, the development density would be calculated at 1 dwelling per 308.6m2.

12.13 Although the proposal does not meet this strategy, it is considered that the

development proposes an appropriate number of dwellings on this site as demonstrated by its overall general compliance with ResCode and the Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone requirements. Further, the proposal is deemed appropriate as there is a number of existing medium density housing developments located within close proximity to the subject site which is indicative of smaller residential allotments in the surrounding area. Given that the subject site is smaller than most “typical”

allotments in the locality, Council officers consider that the marginal increase in housing density within this section of Warren Road is considered reasonable in this instance.

12.14 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. Standard B6 – Street Setback

12.15 The objective of this Standard is “to ensure the setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site”.

12.16 In accordance with requirements under this Standard, the proposed development

should have a minimum setback of 8.05 metres, based on the average front setbacks of the two adjoining properties. The proposed minimum front setback of 8.0 metres is marginally less than the minimum required, however, the proposed setback is considered to be appropriate for the following reasons: Although the proposed front setback does not meet the technical

requirements of this Standard, it is considered that the development provides a reasonable transition between the adjoining properties and meets the overriding objective of this Clause.

The proposed front setback of the new dwellings would allow for the most efficient use of the subject site.

There is no prevailing setback rhythm within this section of Warren Road. The setbacks have been designed to be staggered to minimise any perception

of building bulk when viewed from the street and adjoining properties. The front setback is large enough to accommodate substantial landscaping

including the provision of canopy trees. Accordingly, a minor variation to this Standard is considered reasonable in this instance. Standard B32 – Front Fences

12.17 The objective of this Standard is “to encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character”.

12.18 The height of the proposed front fence along the site’s Warren Road frontage

exceeds the maximum specified under the Schedule to the Zone (being 1.2 metres as the street is not identified as a Road Zone Category 1). It is noted that the application includes the construction of a 1.7 metre high horizontal timber slat fence along this street frontage in association with the proposed development.

12.19 It is considered that a variation to this Standard is considered reasonable in this

instance, given that Warren Road carries a significant amount of residential traffic as it connects Lower Dandenong Road to the north and White Street to the south. Council officers also note that there are numerous examples of high front fencing along Warren Road, including the adjoining property to the south at No. 104 Warren Road.

12.20 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 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS 13.1 One (1) objection was received to the proposal, with the main concern relating to

overshadowing.

13.2 Overshadowing

Concern has been raised by the Objector from No. 104 Warren Road to the south (side) regarding the extent of overshadowing likely to be generated by the proposal and the potential impact on their roof solar panels. It is noted that the proposed development would satisfy the minimum requirements under Standard B21 (Overshadowing) of Clause 55, in accordance with the amended plans received by Council on the 28th May, 2012. Whilst the Objector’s property is located on the south side of the subject site, shadow diagrams submitted with the application clearly show that the principal secluded private open space area associated with the existing dwelling would not be affected by any additional shadows generated by the proposed development. Standard B10 (Energy efficiency) of Clause 55 seeks to ensure that new buildings are sited and designed to ensure that the energy efficiency of existing dwellings on adjoining lots is not unreasonably reduced. Examination of the submitted shadow diagrams reveals that the solar panels on the roof of the adjoining dwelling will not be affected by the proposed development during the Equinox. The proposal is therefore not considered unreasonable in this regard. Accordingly, the proposed dwellings should not unduly affect the amenity of the Objector’s property in this instance.

14 CONCLUSION: 14.1 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the Site, subject to



Kingston Planning Scheme.

APPENDIX A – RESCODE ASSESSMENT Standard of the Kingston Planning Scheme Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings (Clause 55 and Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone).




Yes Complies. The proposed development is considered to be generally site responsive and consistent with the evolving character of the area. The proposal is also generally consistent with the major characteristic identified under Profile Area No. 25 of Council’s Neighbourhood Character Guidelines (2003).


No Does not comply – variation required. The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with all relevant sections of the SPPF, LPPF (including Council’s MSS) and local planning policies, namely Council’s Residential Development Policy under Clause 22.11 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, with the exception of the average lot size calculated for Area 4. See Section 12 of this report for further discussion.


N/A Two dwellings proposed


Yes Complies. It is recommended that suitable condition(s) be included in any permit issued to address infrastructure considerations. A 1.83 metre wide easement is



located at the rear (east) of the subject site.


Yes Complies. Each of the proposed dwellings would be orientated towards Warren Road.


No Required: 8.05 metres Proposed: 8.0 metres Does not comply – variation required. See discussion under Section 12 of this report for further details.


Yes Maximum: 9.0 metres Proposed: 8.72 metres Complies.

B8 Site Coverage Site coverage should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

Yes Maximum: 50% Proposed: 50% Complies.


Yes At least: 20% Proposed: 35.21% Complies.


Yes Complies. The subject land features an east/west orientation with excellent solar access opportunities to the north (side).


N/A No public open space adjacent to the development


Yes Complies.



• Development that maintains and

Yes Complies. No significant vegetation would be removed from the subject site. A condition of any permit issued for the proposed



enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.


development should require the provision of a landscape plan and associated planting schedule, to be prepared by a suitably qualified professional.

B14 Access Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient vehicle access to and from the development. Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood character.

Yes Complies. A new single crossover would be constructed for Dwelling 1 whilst the existing crossover would be retained and utilised for Dwelling 2.

B15 Parking Location Provide resident and visitor vehicles with convenient parking. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments.

Yes Complies.


Yes Ground Floor North (side): 1.25 metres. South (side): 1.15 metres. East (rear): 6.42 metres. Complies.

First Floor North (side): 2.0 metres. South (side): 2.5 metres. East (rear): 9.66 metres. Complies.




Yes Maximum: 10 metres plus 25% of the remaining length on any property boundary. Proposed: Maximum 6.46 metres wall length on the site’s north (side) property boundary with a maximum average wall height of 3.0 metres above natural ground level. . Complies.


Yes Complies.


Yes Complies.


Yes Complies. The amount of additional shadowing likely to be generated by the proposed dwellings onto the existing properties to the falls within the maximum allowed under this Standard. Given the orientation of the subject site, the level of overshadowing generated by the proposal should not be excessive.


Yes Complies. All first floor level habitable room windows would be screened or fitted with obscured glass to a minimum height of 1700mm above the first floor finished floor level of each proposed dwelling.


Yes Complies. It is unlikely that any internal overlooking would be generated by the proposal.




Yes Complies. A condition of any permit issued for the proposal should require details of the location of any external heating and/or cooling units.


Yes Complies.


Yes Complies. The entry area for each dwelling would ensure that it would be easily identifiable from Warren Road.


Yes Complies. Each new habitable room window would be provided with at least 1.0 metre clearance to the sky.



B28 Private Open Space Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate private open space.

Yes Required: An area of 40m2, with one part of the POS to consist of secluded POS at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with a minimum area of 40m2, a minimum dimension of 5m and convenient access from a living room. If a dwelling has more than 2 bedrooms an additional ground level POS area of 20m2 with a minimum width of 3m is required to be provided for each additional bedroom, with a maximum of 80m2 of POS required for the dwelling. Proposed: Dwelling 1 would be provided with a total POS area of 81.54m2 whilst Dwelling 2 would feature a total POS area of 86.12m2. Each secluded private open space area would be provided with a minimum dimension exceeding 5.0 metres. Complies.


Yes Complies. The minimum setback of the southern-most boundary of each POS area for the dwellings is satisfied given the generous dimension of each area.


Yes Complies. A minimum 6m3

area is nominated for storage associated with each proposed dwelling.




Yes Complies. The proposed development is consistent with the evolving nature of the surrounding residential area. The design and siting of the proposal ensures that the development should not adversely affect the amenity of the surrounding properties.

B32 Front Fences Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Note: The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone includes a variation to this standard.

No Maximum: 1.2 metres. Proposed: 1.79 metres. Does not comply. See discussion under Section 12 of this report for further details.


N/A No common property proposed.


Yes A mail box, water tank and outdoor clothes line is nominated for each proposed dwelling.

41 Clay Street Moorabbin (Lot 10 on PS023894) – Planning Permit Application No. KP-489/2012 Executive Summary for Planning Committee APPLICATION No: KP-489/2012 LAND: 41 Clay Street Moorabbin (Lot 10 on PS023894) PLANNING OFFICER: Jemima Royall PROPOSAL: Develop the Land for the Construction of One (1)

Dwelling to the rear of an existing dwelling PERMIT TRIGGER: Construct two or more dwellings on a lot EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS: Single storey dwelling APPLICANT: Blueprint Pty Ltd ZONE / OVERLAYS: Residential 3 Zone RESIDENTIAL POLICY AREA Incremental Housing Change OBJECTIONS Four (4)

1.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL 1.1 The application seeks to develop the land for the construction of one (1) dwelling to the

rear of an existing dwelling. Each dwelling incorporates a separate driveway and crossover accessed from Margaret Street, with at least 40m2 of secluded private open space to the rear.

2.0 SUBJECT SITE AND SURROUNDS 2.1 The following map illustrates the subject site in its surrounding context.

2.2 The site is generally rectangular in shape located on a corner. The site has a frontage to Clay Street of 14 metres, a side depth of 39 metres fronting Margaret Street, resulting in a site area of 715m2. It currently contains a single storey, brick veneer,

dwelling and associated outbuildings. The existing dwelling on the land enjoys a 7.8m front setback to Clay Street.

2.3 The surrounding area generally comprises of residential developments with a mix of single and dual occupancies.


(a) Neighbourhood character The proposed development has been assessed against Council’s Neighbourhood Character Guidelines and is considered to be in keeping with the area given its compliance with Clause 55 and a number features displayed within the proposal including a recessed garage, no front fencing with the front setback to be heavily landscaped. Neighbourhood character was also raised as a concern from a number of objectors with specific concern regarding the double storey nature of the proposal.

3.2 The subject site is identified within Area 2 of the Kingston Neighbourhood Character

Study (May 2003). As part of this study, the average lot size within this area was calculated to be 613.1m2 equating to 306.55m2 per dwelling. The proposal achieves an average lot size of 357.5m2 per dwelling.

4.0 OBJECTOR CONCERNS 4.1 Four (4) objections were received to the application. A summary of the concerns and

response to each ground is provided below: (a) Neighbourhood Character

Concern was raised regarding the appropriateness of a double storey dwelling within a predominantly single story neighbourhood. It is considered that the proposed rear dwelling is an acceptable double storey due to its corner location thus limiting the potential for overlooking. In addition, the design and orientation of the dwelling will result in minimal overshadowing to adjoining properties.

(b) Density/Overdevelopment

A number of the objectors had concerns regarding the need for a double storey dwelling and how this indicates overdevelopment of the site and thus an unacceptable density to the area. The proposed dual occupancy is located within an area with a number of existing dual and multi-occupancy developments. In addition, it is considered that as the proposed development achieves almost 100% compliance with the

requirements contained within the Kingston Planning Scheme that the proposal is not overdevelopment of the site.

(c) Walls on boundaries The resident to the west raised concerns regarding the impact the wall on the boundary may have on their property. The proposed wall on the western boundary is considered acceptable given its compliance with Standard B18 and will not result in an unacceptable level of overshadowing. It is also noted that the wall will face a driveway and garage.

(b) Palm tree removal A number of objectors felt that such a large tree should be retained. The proposal includes the removal of a large palm tree to the rear of the existing dwelling. The application has been referred to Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who has advised that the removal is acceptable due to the relatively young and average health of the tree subject to appropriate replacement planting.

5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 Based on a thorough assessment of the application against the relevant provisions of


RECOMMENDATION That Council determine to support the proposal and issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit to Develop the Land for the Construction of One (1) Dwelling to the rear of an existing dwelling at No. 41 Clay Street Moorabbin (Lot 10 on PS023894), subject to 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 6th September, 2012, but modified to show:

a. the provision of an improved landscape plan and associated planting schedule for the site showing the proposed location, species type, mature height and width, pot sizes and number of species be planted on the site, with such plans to be prepared by a suitably qualified landscape professional and incorporating:



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) medium (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 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 (illustrated on an A4 or A3 sheet), for all external elevations and driveways of the development;

d. the provision of a minimum 2000 litre rainwater tank clearly nominated for the new dwelling with water re-use for toilet flushing;

e. a notation on the floor plan stating: “the indented road (old Right Of Way) is to be removed and kerb and channel and vehicle crossing to be reinstated to the satisfaction of the Council’s Roads and Drains Department”.

f. a notation on the floor/site plan stating: “Vehicle crossings must constructed at a 90 degree alignment with the kerb on Clay Street and all internal driveways must align with the existing / proposed vehicle crossing”.


3. Prior to the occupation of Dwelling 2 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.

4. 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.

5. 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.).


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

8. Property boundary and footpath levels must not be altered without the prior written consent form the Council’s Roads and Drains Department.

9. The replacement of all footpaths, including offsets, must be constructed the satisfaction of Council’s Roads and Drains Department.

10. All reinstatements and vehicle crossings must be constructed to the satisfaction of the relevant authority.

11. Vehicle crossings and other reinstatements must be constructed to council’s industrial strength specifications.

12. All redundant vehicle crossings must be removed (including redundant portions of vehicle crossings) to the satisfaction of Council’s Roads and Drains Department.

13. All front and side fences must be contained wholly within the title property boundaries of the subject land.

14. Prior to the occupation of Dwelling 2 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.

15. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

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




Note: It is noted that the development includes a garage to be built over an easement. Separate consent from Council and the relevant service authority is required to build over the easement and will need to be obtained prior to the issue of a building permit.

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


OR In the event that the Council wishes to oppose the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application, it can do so on the following grounds:

1. The proposal is inconsistent with the purpose and objectives of Clause 55.01-1 Neighbourhood Character and Site Description of the Kingston Planning Scheme

2. The proposal does not comply with Clause 55.05-6 Storage of the Kingston Planning Scheme.

3. The proposed dwelling is inconsistent with the existing single storey character of the surrounding area.

PLANNING OFFICER REPORT

1.0 RELEVANT LAND HISTORY 1.1 Council records indicate that there is no relevant planning history relating to this site. 2.0 SITE PARTICULARS 2.1 The site is generally rectangular in shape and is located on a corner. The site has a

frontage to Clay Street of 14 metres, a side depth of 39 metres fronting Margaret Street, resulting in a site area of 715m2. It currently contains a single storey, brick veneer, dwelling and associated outbuildings. The existing dwelling on the land enjoys a 7.8m front setback to Clay Street.

2.2 The land is generally flat and is predominately void of any significant vegetation;

however, a large palm is located to the rear of the existing dwelling. 2.3 The land is encumbered by a 1.83m wide drainage and sewage easement 6.7m east

of the western property boundary. There appears to be no restrictions listed on the Certificate of Title.

3.0 SURROUNDING ENVIRONS 4.1 The surrounding area generally comprises of residential developments with a mix of

single and dual occupancies. 4.2 Land directly abutting the subject site and opposite is described as follows:

North (43A and 43B Clay Street): Two (2) single storey, brick dwellings with a side-by-side configuration. Each dwelling is accessed via separate single width crossovers located on the north and south property boundaries. The dwellings include a 7.5m front setback to Clay Street.

APPLICANT Blueprint Pty Ltd ADDRESS OF LAND 41 Clay Street Moorabbin PLAN OF SUBDIVISION REFERENCE

Lot 10 on PS023894

PROPOSAL Develop the Land for the Construction of One (1) Dwelling to the rear of an existing dwelling

PLANNING OFFICER Jemima Royall REFERENCE NO. KP-489/2012 ZONE Clause 32.06 – Residential 3 Zone OVERLAYS Nil OBJECTIONS Four (4) CONSIDERED PLAN REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED

6th September, 2012


No

East (opposite – 42 Clay Street): A single storey, brick dwelling with a single vehicle crossover located to the south of the Clay Street property boundary. The dwelling includes a 9m front setback to Clay Street. South (opposite – 39 Clay Street): A single storey, brick dwelling with a single vehicle crossover located to the south of the Clay Street property boundary. The dwelling includes a 7.5m front setback from Clay Street. West (9A and 9B Margaret Street): Two (2) single storey, brick dwellings with a side-by-side configuration. Each dwelling is accessed via separate single width crossovers located on the east and west property boundaries. The dwellings include a minimum 6.5m front setback to Margaret Street.

4.0 PROPOSAL 4.1 It is proposed to retain the existing dwelling, demolish all existing outbuildings on the

land and construct one (1) dwelling to the rear of the existing fronting Margaret Street.

4.2 Dwelling 1 (existing) comprises: Single storey brick veneer dwelling comprising of three (3) bedrooms, kitchen, living, meals and family rooms with one (1) bathroom and laundry. A new carport is to be constructed to the rear (west) of the dwelling with access from a new single width crossover with tandem car parking space. The dwelling has been provided with a total of 248.9m2 of Private Open Space (POS) of which 40m2 is Secluded Private Open Space (SPOS) located to the north-west of the dwelling. The existing front and side fences are to remain.

4.3 Dwelling 2 (proposed) comprises:

Double storey brick veneer dwelling with the ground floor comprising of a lounge room, open plan kitchen/meals room, study and laundry. The first floor is separated into two (2) components with the east element containing the master bedroom and ensuite with two (2) bedrooms and bathroom located to the west. The dwelling contains a single garage with tandem car parking space accessed via the existing vehicle crossover from Margaret Street. The dwelling has been provided with a total of 68.58m2 of POS of which 40m2 is SPOS located to the north of the dwelling. No front fence is proposed for Dwelling 2.

4.4 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 42.54% and a permeability of 43.42%. 5.0 PLANNING PERMIT PROVISIONS


planning permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55 of the Scheme. The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone includes a variation to a number of standards within Clause 55.

Overlay 5.2 The site is not subject to any overlays.

Particular Provisions 5.3 Car Parking: Pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a planning

permit is required to reduce or waive the car parking requirements associated with a dwelling. The proposal satisfies the car parking requirement and a reduction is not sought.

5.4 Clause 55 - Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings – (Refer to Appendix A for the Planning Officer’s full assessment against this report).

General Provisions

5.5 The Decision Guidelines of Clause 65 of the Kingston Planning Scheme are relevant

to this application and require consideration to be given to a variety of matters including planning scheme policies, the purpose of the zone, orderly planning and the impact on amenity.



6.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) Clause 21.05 Residential Land Use Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy

6.3 Other


21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF). The land is located within Area 1 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines.




owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Four (4) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:

• Neighbourhood character; • Density; • Overdevelopment; • Walls on boundaries; and • Palm tree removal.

8.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE 8.1 A preliminary conference was held on 6th December, 2012 with the relevant Planning

Officer, Ward Councillor, the Permit Applicant and three (3) objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.

8.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and

the objections still stand. 9.0 REFERRALS 9.1 The application was referred to the following internal departments:

• Council’s Development Engineer – raised no objection to the application, subject to conditions included on any permit issued relating to the correct drainage to and from the site and noting the requirement for separate approval to construct over the easement.


subject to conditions included on any permit issued relating to the preparation of a landscaping plan for endorsement.

• Council’s Roads and Drains Officer – raised no objection to the application,

subject to conditions included on any permit issued relating to the correct construction/reinstatement of the crossovers and the protection of Council’s assets.

9.2 The application was not referred to any external departments. 10.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:



10.2 The settlement policies at Clause 11 seek to ensure a sufficient supply of land is

available for all forms of land use in Victoria. Of particular relevance to housing, Clause 11 promotes housing diversity and urban consolidation objectives in the established urban realm. Clause 11.02-1 states that Planning Authorities should plan

to accommodate projected population growth over at least a 15 year period, taking account of opportunities for redevelopment and intensification of existing urban areas as well consideration being had for environmental aspects, sustainable development and the costs associated with providing infrastructure. This clause states:

• Planning for urban growth, should consider:

o Opportunities for the consolidation, redevelopment and intensification of existing urban areas;

o Neighbourhood character and landscape considerations; o The limits of land capability and natural hazards and environmental


10.3 Clause 11.01-2 places particular emphasis on providing increased densities of

housing in and around activity centres or sites that have good access to a range of services, facilities and transport options.

10.4 Clause 13 (Environmental Risks) aims to ensure that planning adopts a best practice

environmental management and risk management approach which aims to avoid or minimise environmental degradation and hazards. Further, planning should identify and manage the potential for the environment, and environmental changes, to impact upon the economic, environmental or social well-being of society.

10.5 Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) aims to ensure all new land use and

development appropriately responds to its landscape, valued built form and cultural context, and protect places and sites with significant heritage, architectural, aesthetic, scientific and cultural value.





10.9 The policies contained within Clause 16.01-4 encourage the provision of range of

housing types to meet the increasingly diverse needs of the community. Emphasis is placed on development of well-designed medium density housing with respect to neighbourhood character. Further, this Clause aims to make better use of the existing infrastructure and provide more energy efficient housing.


Clause 15 of the State Planning Policy Framework. Of particular significance, Clause 15.01 encourages development to achieve high quality architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to neighbourhood character,

minimises detrimental amenity impacts and achieves safety for future residents, and the community, through good design. The provisions of Clause 15.02 promote energy and resource efficiency through improved building design, urban consolidation and promotion of sustainable transport.




10.12 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.

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

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

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

• To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.

• To recognise and response to special housing needs within the community.

10.14 Council’s Local Planning Policy at Clause 21.05 essentially reinforces State Planning Policy relevant to housing, stressing the need to encourage urban consolidation in appropriate locations and to accommodate projected population increases.

10.15 Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy extends upon the provision

contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use), relating to increased housing diversity areas, incremental housing change areas, minimal housing change areas, residential renewal areas and neighbourhood character. It provides design guidance on how new residential development should achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that positively respond to neighbourhood character.


• To promote a managed approach to housing change, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate increased housing diversity, incremental housing change, residential renewal or minimal housing change, as identified within the MSS.

• To encourage new residential development to achieve architectural and

urban design outcomes that positively respond to neighbourhood character having particular regard to that identified in the Kingston Neighbourhood Character Guidelines – August 2007.

• To promote on-site car parking which is adequate to meet the anticipated

needs of future residents. • To ensure that landscaping and trees remain a major element in the

appearance and character of the municipality’s residential environments. • To limit the amount and impact of increased stormwater runoff on local

drainage systems. • To ensure that the siting and design of new residential development takes


10.17 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. This is discussed in the Clause 55 assessment, later within this report.


the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to Appendix A). Overall, it is noted that the application achieves a high level of compliance with the ResCode provisions, with no variations sought. All thirty-four (34) of the ResCode standards are satisfied or can be satisfied by the proposal.

11.2 The following assessment considers the relevant standards and objectives of

ResCode where they require further discussion to that provided in the attached Appendix, particularly those standards where concessions are sought.

Clause 55.02-1 – Neighbourhood Character & Infrastructure Standard B1 – Neighbourhood Character

11.3 The objective of this Clause 55.02-1 is ‘to ensure that the design respects the existing

neighbourhood character and responds to the features of the site and surrounding area’. Standard B1 of ResCode suggests that the proposed design should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

11.4 The subject site is located within a predominantly residential area where single

storey, brick veneer dwellings are prevalent with a small number of double storey developments in the surrounding area. The site is located within Neighbourhood Character Area No.1 where two (2) of the listed characteristics have been nominated as “major” to the area:

• Building Placement; and • Front boundary and garden.

The proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the identified character of the area. The proposed dwelling has been provided with a recessed garage, no front fencing with landscaping proposed within the front setback and its proposed location is generally in keeping with the nominated building placement. Standard B2 – Residential Policy

11.5 The Residential policy objective seeks to ensure that any proposed development accords with the relevant State and Local Planning Policy Framework. An assessment against Kingston’s MSS and Residential Development Policy has been provided at section 10 of this Report, with the proposal found to be compliant with the relevant policies.

11.6 Further to the assessment at section 11.2, as the Site is located within a Residential 3 Zone, Clause 22.11 seeks to manage development pressures by instituting a requirement to achieve averaged lot sizes within Incremental Housing Change Areas.

11.7 To achieve this, Council’s Strategic Planning Department undertook a study across

the municipality in 2003 (Kingston Neighbourhood Character Study) 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.

11.8 The subject site is identified within Area 2 of this Study. The average lot size within this area has been calculated to be 613.10m2, which results in a suggested development density of 1 dwelling per 306.55m2. It is therefore considered that this proposal would meet this strategy as the subject site has an area of 715.9m2.

11.9 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.

12.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS

12.1 The objector concerns have largely been addressed in the attached Appendix A and,

where necessary, further elaborated on in the assessment above.

12.2 The following objector concerns, however, remain outstanding:

• Neighbourhood Character/Double Storey A number of the objections raised concerns with the double storey nature of the proposed development. While it is noted that the surrounding area is dominated by single storey developments that does not mean that a double storey development is inappropriate. It is considered that the proposed rear dwelling is an acceptable double storey due to its corner location thus limiting the potential for overlooking. In addition, the design and orientation of the dwelling will result in minimal overshadowing to adjoining properties. The large setbacks and the split element of the first floor has resulted in an innovative design which will result in a reduced visual bulk of the dwelling.

• Density

Concern has been raised by a number of objectors regarding the appropriateness of a second dwelling on the site. The proposed development of the second dwelling within an area where dual and multiple occupancies are emerging is not considered unacceptable. It is noted that through discussions at the Preliminary Conference, there appears to have been some confusion regarding what density relates too. It seems that while the majority of the objections relate to density, the double storey component of the proposal is the concern, not the number of dwellings.

• Overdevelopment

A number of the objectors felt that the requirement for the dwelling to be double storey is an indication of overdevelopment. It is considered that given the proposals 100% compliance with ResCode and the Kingston Planning Scheme including overlooking, overshadowing, site coverage and permeability that the proposed development is not overdevelopment of the site.

• Walls on boundaries

An objector raised concerns relating to the impact of the wall to be built on the western property boundary. The objector felt that the length of the wall and its protrusion from the neighbouring dwelling setback will overshadow and impose on the liveability of their dwelling. While it is noted that a length of 6.3m will protrude beyond that of the adjoining dwelling setback the proposed wall complies with the Walls on Boundaries standard (B18) in both length and height. The wall will face a driveway and garage and is considered that the bulk of the wall is minimal and will have minimal impact on the neighbouring property.

• Palm Tree

A number of objectors have raised concern with the proposed removal of the existing large palm to the rear of the existing dwelling. The application has been referred to Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who raised no concern with the removal of this tree given the relatively low age and quality of the tree subject to appropriate replacement planting.

13.0 CONCLUSION: 13.1 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the Site, subject to



Kingston Planning Scheme

APPENDIX A – RESCODE ASSESSMENT Standard of the Kingston Planning Scheme Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings (Clause 55 and Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone)




Yes See section 11.3 of the report.


Yes See section 11.5 of the report.


N/A Two (2) dwellings proposed.


Yes It is not expected that the proposed dwelling will place a load on the existing infrastructure beyond its current capacity.


Yes The proposed dwelling provides for a clear dwelling entrance and also provided with ample passive surveillance to and from the dwelling though the use of both ground and first floor windows.


Yes Required: 7.5m (Clay Street) and 3m (Margaret Street) Proposed: 7.8m (Clay Street- existing) and 3m (Margaret Street) Complies.


Yes Maximum: 9 metres Proposed: 6.9 metres Complies.



B8 Site Coverage Site coverage should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site. Note: The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone includes a variation to this standard

Yes Maximum: 50% Proposed: 42.54% Complies.


Yes At least: 20% Proposed: 43.42% Complies.


Yes Each dwelling has been orientated to be able to maximise a north outlook. Each dwelling has been provided with the primary areas of Secluded Private Open Space located to the north as well as a northern orientation for the main living areas.


N/A The site is not adjoining to any areas of public or communal open space.


Yes Each dwelling has been provided with a clear dwelling entrance with pedestrian access separate to vehicles using the site.



• Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.


Yes The application was referred to Council’s Vegetation Management Officer for comment. It is recommended that a landscape plan be required by way of a condition of any permit issued.

B14 Access Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient vehicle access to and from the development. Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood

Yes Each dwelling has been provided with a separate vehicle access with one (1) new crossover proposed.



character. B15 Parking Location Provide resident and visitor vehicles with convenient parking. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments.

Yes Each dwelling has been provided with car parking spaces conveniently located to the respective dwellings.


Yes Ground Floor North: 1m minimum GF setback allowing 3.6m height – 2.7m max height proposed. South: 3m minimum GF setback allowing 7.9m height – 3m max height proposed. West: 1m minimum GF setback allowing a 3.6m height – 3m max height proposed. First Floor North: 1.87m minimum FF setback allowing 6.5m height – 5.5m max height proposed. South: 3.4m minimum FF setback allowing 8.3m height – 5.5m max height proposed. West: 2m minimum FF setback allowing 6.9m height – 5.5m max height proposed. Complies.


Yes Maximum: 11.7m on west boundary averaging 3m in height. Proposed: 9.06m on west boundary with a maximum height of 3m. Complies.




Yes All existing habitable room windows have access to adequate daylight in accordance with the requirements of Standard B19.


Yes No north facing windows will be impacted by the proposal.


Yes All adjoining areas of Secluded Private Open Space retain a minimum of 5 hours of solar access between the hours of 9am-3pm.


Yes All first floor windows with the potential to overlook neighbouring properties will be screen according to the requirements of Standard B22.


Yes There is little to no potential for overlooking within the development.


Yes It is considered that the proposed development will not generate any noise other than that normally associated with that of a dwelling.


Yes Dwelling 1 is a single storey dwelling allowing for access by persons with limited mobility.


Yes Each dwelling has been provided with a visible dwelling entrance through the use of porches and separate and clear pedestrian entrances.


Yes All new windows have adequate access to daylight in accordance with Standard B27.



B28 Private Open Space Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate private open space. Note: The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone includes a variation to this standard

Yes Required: An area of 40m2, with one part of the POS to consist of secluded POS at the side or rear of the dwelling or residential building with a minimum area of 40m2, a minimum dimension of 5m and convenient access from a living room. If a dwelling has more than 2 bedrooms an additional ground level POS area of 20m2 with a minimum width of 3m is required to be provided for each additional bedroom, with a maximum of 80m2 of POS required for the dwelling. Proposed: 248.9m2 (40m2 SPOS) for Dwelling 1 and 68.58m2 (40m2 SPOS) for Dwelling 2 Complies.


Yes The northern orientation of the primary areas of Secluded Private Open Space ensure adequate solar access.


Can comply

The required areas of external storage have not been shown on the plans. A condition to supply this will be recommended.




Yes As discussed in Section 11.3 of the report, the proposed development is considered to respect the existing character of the area. It is also noted that the proposed development has provided for adequate first floor articulation, pitched rooves, single, recessed garages/carports and clear dwelling entrances. It is noted that through the separation of the first floor elements for Dwelling 2 an innovative and unique design has been achieved with no impact on the proposal compliance with the requirements of Clause 55.

B32 Front Fences Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Note: The Schedule to the Residential 3 Zone includes a variation to this standard

Yes Maximum: 1.2m Proposed: the existing 1.5m front and 1.8m side fences are to be retained for Dwelling 1 with no front fencing proposed for Dwelling 2. Complies.


N/A Although no subdivision of the site is proposed, the layout of the two (2) dwellings indicates that no areas of common property will be required.


Yes Given the separate layout of each dwelling it is not considered that any future issues should arise regarding the installation and provision of site services.

Trim: 13/2331 1

Planning Committee

30 January 2013 Agenda Item No: AMENDMENT C121 – MOORABBIN ACTIVITY CENTRE ZONE Contact Officer: Rosa Zouzoulas, Team Leader Strategic Planning

Purpose of Report The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the exhibition outcomes for Amendment C121 and to seek adoption of the amendment by Council.

Disclosure of Officer / Contractor Direct or Indirect Interest No Council officers and/or Contractors who have provided advice in relation to this report have declared a Conflict of Interest regarding the matter under consideration.

Recommendation Officers recommend that Council resolve: 1. To pursue the resolution of outstanding issues raised through Planning Scheme

Amendment C121 with the City of Bayside, VicRoads and VicTrack, and 2. To adopt Planning Scheme Amendment C121 and submit the Amendment to the Minister

for Planning for Approval. or 3. That should Council be unable to resolve the outstanding issues with the City of Bayside,

VicRoads and/or VicTrack request is made to the Minister for Planning to appoint a Panel to consider submissions received.

1. Executive Summary Amendment C121 to the Kingston Planning Scheme implements the Moorabbin Structure Plan into the planning scheme. The planning scheme amendment process requires Council to exhibit the amendment and then request a Panel to be appointed if submissions are received that cannot be resolved. Seven submissions were received for Amendment C121. Four submissions do not object or support the amendment. Three submissions support the amendment subject to suggested changes. This report summarises and discusses the submissions.

This report proposes that subject to resolving issues raised by the submitters Council adopt Amendment C121 (with some changes) and forward it to the Minister for Planning for approval. If parties to the amendment cannot achieve a negotiated outcome it is proposed that Council resolve to write to the Minister for Planning to appoint a Panel to consider the submissions received. In resolving issues Council needs to be mindful that negotiated outcomes impacting on land in the area covered by the Amendment should not be undertaken without considering the impact on parties who have not made submissions to the Amendment.

2. Background Amendment C121 to the Kingston Planning Scheme was prepared by the City of Kingston in May 2012. The amendment implements the Moorabbin Activity Centre Structure Plan into the Kingston Planning Scheme. The amendment seeks to rezone the Moorabbin Activity Centre to the Activity Centre Zone, Schedule 3 (ACZ3). This replaces the existing Design and Development Overlay Schedule 19 (DDO19) which provides

Trim: 13/2331 2

interim planning controls for Moorabbin and is due to expire on 30 April, 2013. Changes are also proposed to the Municipal Strategic Statement. The amendment applies to all land in the Moorabbin Activity Centre, as shown in Appendix 1. The amendment was authorised by the Department of Planning and Community Development (DPCD) to allow its exhibition to occur on 2 October 2012.

3. Discussion 3.1. Council Plan Alignment

Planned Outcome 2- A Sustainable Environment: • Strategy 2.1.2- Review of local planning and processes

Preparing an amendment is consistent with the Council Plan as it relates to reviewing local policies as a consequence of the adoption of the Moorabbin Activity Centre Structure Plan.

3.2. Consultation/Internal Review

Amendment C121 was placed on public exhibition between 1 November and 14 December, 2012. Consultation was widespread and notices appeared in the Moorabbin Kingston Leader and Government Gazette. Letters were sent to 2306 owners and occupiers and information was available at libraries, customer service centres, on the City of Kingston website and the DPCD website. Given the location of the Moorabbin Activity Centre on the municipal boundary direct notification also involved writing to nearby residents of the City of Glen Eira and Bayside. Seven submissions were received. Four of the submissions expressed either no opposition or support for the amendment while 3 stated that they supported the intent of the amendment and suggested changes to some aspects of it.

3.3. Operation and Strategic Issues

Issues raised in submissions Three submissions support the amendment subject to changes the three submissions are:

3.3.1. VicRoads

The VicRoads submission has no objection to the proposed Amendment. It requests that Council consider an additional dot point be included in Clause 21.06 under further work as follows: The objectives and strategies set out in the reference documents to

Clause 21.06 represent Council’s vision. Council to liaise with VicRoads to obtain approval for proposals within these reference documents where these proposals directly affect declared arterial roads.

Trim: 13/2331 3

Officers consider that the suggestion of VicRoads to be reasonable although suggest that this dot point be reworded as follows:

Work in partnership with VicRoads to prepare a strategy plan to

implement the actions of the reference document, Moorabbin Structure Plan, and obtain approval for proposals within the reference document where these proposals directly affect declared arterial roads.

Officers are currently liaising with VicRoads to confirm acceptance of the above. Should VicRoads accept the modified dot point, officers recommend that Amendment C121 be changed.

3.3.2. VicTrack

VicTrack is highly supportive of the amendment and highly commend Council on progressing the implementation of the Moorabbin Structure Plan by introducing new and comprehensive planning controls. At present the schedule to the Activity Centre Zone has a sentence which reads ‘Substantially increasing the provision of commuter and short-term parking in the centre by utilising the airspace above the station’. VicTrack have requested that the word ‘substantially’ is removed as the costs of decking over the rail corridor are not yet known. The intent of the structure plan and the Activity Centre Zone schedule remain clear in relation to the desire to provide more commuter parking and therefore the deletion of the word ‘substantially’ is not considered to significantly impact on the outcome sought through Amendment C121. Council has commenced work with Vic Track to further explore how the airspace over the rail corridor can be used in the future and this will provide a means through which this opportunity can be further explored.

3.3.3. Bayside City Council

Bayside City Council have acknowledged the significant level of work undertaken by Kingston to develop the Moorabbin Structure Plan and subsequent Planning Scheme Amendment C121. In considering the proposed amendment Bayside City Council have suggested that further consideration be given to improving the interface between Precinct 1 and 5 of the Moorabbin Activity Centre Framework Plan. The property owners and occupiers contained within Bayside City Council immediately abutting Precinct 1 and 5 were directly notified of the Amendment by Kingston and no property owners made opposing submissions. Precinct 1 of the proposed ACZ3 identifies heights of up to 7 storeys (23 metres) opposite the Bayside municipal boundary where existing building heights tend to be of a 1-2 storey scale. Bayside City Council have indicated they will be seeking to carefully manage the residential interface to the west of the Bayside part of the Centre as part of their Structure Planning process for the Hampton East activity centre. Council Officers have commenced discussing this issue with Officers from Bayside City Council and have sought to reinforce that for reasons which include the width of the Nepean Highway Road reservation, the extent of protected heritage buildings in Precinct 1 the implications of the proposed Amendment on the City of Bayside are unlikely to be of significance. .

Trim: 13/2331 4

The City of Bayside submission also identifies opportunity to further strengthen the provisions of proposed ACZ3 for precinct 5 to provide for increased visual impact and possible noise attenuation of new development abutting the railway line and indirectly abutting Henrietta Street. Discussions are also occurring to try to identify an acceptable resolution through modifications to the exhibited Amendment at Sections 5.1-2 and 5.1-4 of the ACZ3. Officers consider that additional provisions within Section 5.1 of the proposed ACZ3 for precinct 5 of the Moorabbin Activity Centre to be a reasonable outcome subject to ensuring that land owners who own land in this precinct are not disadvantaged by the changes and/or are given the opportunity to further comment..

3.4. Options

Section 23 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires that Council consider the submissions received and must change the amendment in the manner requested or refer the submission to a panel appointed by the Minister for Planning or abandon the amendment. 3.4.1 Option 1

Change the amendment as recommended in the submissions received and proceed to adopt it in a modified form.

3.4.2 Option 2

Adopt the Amendment without changes and ask the Minister to appoint a Panel to consider the submissions. A panel is an independent body of expert(s) and its main role is to review the submissions and provide advice to Council and the Minister for Planning about the amendment and submissions.

3.4.3 Option 3

Abandon the amendment. Council Officers recommend Option 1, subject to receiving confirmation of the negotiated modifications from Bayside City Council and VicRoads. As indicated Officers will need to ensure that the nature of the changes proposed do not unreasonably burden private land owners who have not made submissions to the Amendment as exhibited.

4. Conclusion

Officers recommend that a negotiated outcome be pursued with VicRoads and Bayside City Council and that reasonable changes be made to the Amendment in accordance with submissions. Subject to this occurring the Amendment should then be forwarded to the Minister for Planning for approval. Should a negotiated outcome not be achieved between the City of Kingston and submitters then a request should be made to the Minister for Planning to appoint a Panel to consider submissions in accordance with Section 23 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

4.1. Environmental Implications

The proposed Activity Centre Zone includes guidelines and objectives for new development to be environmentally sustainable, including Water Sensitive Urban Design principles and Ecologically Sustainable Design measures.

4.2. Social Implications

The proposed Activity Centre Zone seeks to promote Moorabbin as a Centre with mixed use development and the creation of social meeting spaces to contribute to a vibrant community life and increased social interaction.

Trim: 13/2331 5

4.3. Resource Implications By adopting the amendment it is anticipated that approval from the Minister will simplify the planning scheme provisions and introduce greater clarity for the vision of the Moorabbin Activity Centre as expressed through the Moorabbin Structure Plan. This will in turn reduce resource implications to Council when responding to planning enquiries and assessing development and land use proposals.

4.4. Legal / Risk Implications

Without introducing the Activity Centre Zone provisions into the Kingston Planning Scheme Council has a reduced ability to influence the land use and design and built form of future development within the Moorabbin Activity Centre. The risk of development inconsistent with the Moorabbin Structure Plan may eventuate. The interim controls which have been applied to the Moorabbin Activity Centre through Schedule 19 to the Design and Development Overlay are due to expire on 30th April, 2013 and as such it is important to continue to progress this Planning Scheme Amendment.

5. Appendices 5.1. Appendix 1 – Moorabbin Activity Centre area 5.2. Appendix 2 – Activity Centre Zone - Schedule 3 (ACZ3)

Author/s: Rosa Zouzoulas, Team Leader Strategic Planning Reviewed and Approved By: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability

planning committee meeting - city of kingston€¦ · planning committee meeting notice is given...

Documents