report to development assessments committee item no. 2.1

Mornington Peninsula Shire Council 1

REPORT TO Development Assessments Committee ITEM NO. 2.1.1

MEETING DATE Monday, 18 March, 2013

SUBJECT Application for Planning Permit P11/1899 – 51 Beleura Hill Road, Mornington

PREPARED BY Nicholas Harrison, Senior Statutory Planner

AUTHORISED BY Manager – Statutory Planning

ATTACHMENT(S) YES

Application No. P11/1899 Proposal Development of three double storey dwellings on the land and

associated works. Melway Reference 106 B6 Zoning Residential 1 Zone Applicant Modularc Date Received 20 October, 2011 SUMMARY Proposal Development of three double storey dwellings on the land and associated works. Zone/Overlays Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) (Clause 32.01);

Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 1 (DDO1) – Township Design

(Clause 43.02); and

Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule 1 (VPO1) – Township Vegetation (Clause 42.02).

Permit Triggers R1Z: — A permit is required for the development of more than one dwelling

on a lot.

DDO1 – Township Design:

— A permit is required for the development of more than one dwelling on a lot.

Section 173 Agreement

Section 173 Agreement AH775804A applies to the land and requires that: “ The Owner must:

3.1 Ensure that all vehicular access to any lot is only provided from the Common Property;

3.2 Prior to the occupation of a dwelling on any lot, construct a single

lane, sealed shared driveway that gives access to all lots through the Common Property from Beleura Hill Road (Driveway). The Driveway: 3.2.1 Must be 3.5 metres in width; 3.2.2 Must be constructed within the Common Property, 3.2.3 Must be of a curvilinear design; and 3.2.4 May include a 0.5 metre wide permeable area either side of

the driveway;

3.3 Not construct any fence within the Common Property except for a fence located on the boundary of the Common Property and any lot;”

Development Assessments Committee Meeting – Monday, 18 March, 2013 Application for Planning Permit P11/1899 – 51 Beleura Hill Road, Mornington ITEM NO. 2.1.1


SUMMARY (CONT’D) Section 173 Agreement (Cont’d)

“ 3.4 Landscape the area of Common Property that is not occupied by the Driveway; and

3.5 Manage and maintain the Driveway at the owner’s cost. The cost

associated with managing and maintaining the Driveway is to be shared evenly between each lot;

all to the satisfaction of Council.”

Advertising Notice of the application was given by the erection of a sign on the land and by letters to surrounding owners and occupiers.

Objections 11 Objections have been received by Council. Key Issues Impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties;

Overdevelopment;

Shared viewlines;

Neighbourhood character; Access and parking; and

Potential future planning scheme amendment.

Recommendation That Council issue a notice of decision for the application subject to the conditions contained in this report.

BACKGROUND Planning Permit P09/2634 issued on 17 July, 2010 allows for the subject lot to be subdivided into two lots as a second stage of the subdivision. OFFICER DIRECT OR INDIRECT INTEREST No person involved in the preparation of this report has a direct or indirect interest requiring disclosure.



PROPERTY FEATURES AND DESCRIPTION The Subject Land Aerial photograph of the subject land and adjoining properties:

The subject lot is located on the eastern side of Beleura Hill Road and was created by a subdivision of the land which was completed in 2011. The subdivision created three lots with one lot on either side of a central common property area and the third lot at the rear of the site. The subject lot is setback 33 metres from Beleura Hill Road and has an area of 1,104 square metres, a depth of 27.6 metres and a width of 39.9 metres. The site is currently vacant with the dwelling that previously occupied the land having been demolished. Access to the site is via a driveway which runs along the common property to Beleura Hill Road. The land slopes down from the north east to the south west with a fall of 3.4 metres. Neighbourhood Character A locality plan is included in Attachment 1 to this report.

↑↑ NN

SSuubbjjeecctt LLaanndd



PROPERTY FEATURES AND DESCRIPTION (CONT’D) Neighbourhood Character (Cont’d) Aerial photograph showing the subject site and surrounding area:

Beleura Hill Road runs along the top of the western slopes of Beleura Hill. Beleura Hill Road is zoned Road Zone, Category 2 and provides local access from the Nepean Highway to the Esplanade. The road has one lane in each direction with on street parking provided for on both sides of the road. There is a footpath provided on the western side of the road. The subject site is located half way between the Nepean Highway and the Esplanade.

SSuubbjjeecctt LLaanndd



PROPERTY FEATURES AND DESCRIPTION (CONT’D) Neighbourhood Character (Cont’d) The lots fronting Beleura Hill Road were generally between 800 and 1,200 square metres although a significant number of these lots have been further subdivided into smaller lots or developed with more than one dwelling. Over the years a large number of dwellings have been demolished and the land used for multi-dwelling developments or replaced with much larger new dwellings. There is a wide variety of dwelling styles on the street originating from the 1950s to the present day. The size of dwellings also varies widely from very large two and three level dwellings to modest single storey units. Many dwellings have retained established gardens, with a mixture or native and indigenous species often with large canopy trees. Street setbacks vary with multi-dwelling developments and newer dwellings generally being setback closer to the street frontage. Adjoining Properties To the north of the subject site there are three single storey dwellings with common access from Beleura Hill Road. These dwellings were constructed in the late 1990s. The common driveway runs along the boundary with the subject site with a landscaping strip between the driveway and the boundary. The garage wall of unit 3 is also located along the boundary with the subject site and an area of secluded open space with a width of 3 metres along the rear boundary. To the east there are two residential lots which front onto Butler Avenue. Each of these lots contains a two storey dwelling located between 7 and 9 metres from the boundary with the subject site and both dwellings have decks and windows which obtain views over the subject site. Both properties also have established vegetation along the common boundary. The property to the south at 53 Beleura Hill Road is a residential development, consisting of four double storey dwellings, that was completed in 2008. Two of these dwellings and the end of the common property driveway area share a boundary with the subject site. The dwelling at 2/53 Beleura Hill Road shares a 1.5 metre long common boundary with the subject site which is adjacent to the secluded private open space of this dwelling. The dwelling at 4/53 Beleura Hill Road has a garage adjacent to the boundary, a ground floor living room wall setback 1 metre from the boundary and secluded private open space between the dwelling and the rear boundary. The upper storey is setback between 2.3 and 5.8 metres from the boundary. To the east of the subject site there are two vacant residential lots with an area of 574 square metres each fronting Beleura Hill Road and the common property driveway which services the two vacant lots and the subject site.



PROPOSAL Detailed plans of the proposal are contained in Attachment 2. The proposal is to develop three double storey dwellings on the land. Each dwelling will have three bedrooms and a double garage. The dwellings will be in a modern style with flat rooves. The dwellings will share a common accessway from the existing common property driveway leading from Beleura Hill Road to the western boundary of the site.

Below is a summary of the main features of the development.

Type Description Variation to the Planning

Scheme Requirements? Existing Site Area 1104 square metres Site Coverage 44.5% No, meets Clause 55,

Standard B8 Permeable Area: 33.5% No, meets Clause 55,

Standard B9 Roof Materials No Wall Materials Painted Shadowclad

Brick veneer Rendered brick Rendered polystyrene

No

Roof Colour Not indicated No Wall Colours Dulux New Fawn and

Napkin White Face brick veneer

No

Maximum Building and Wall Heights

Dwelling 1: 5.8 metres Dwelling 2: 5.8 metres Dwelling 3: 6.5 metres

Yes, DDO1 general building height requirement 6 metres and wall height requirement of 5.5 metres

Front Setback 33.4 metres No Earthworks 1.5 metres of excavation Yes, DDO1 general requirement

1 metre Private Open Space Dwelling 1: 134 square metres

Dwelling 2: 110 square metres Dwelling 3: 109 square metres

No, Meets Clause 55, Standard B28

Vegetation Clearance No permit required PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS The site is subject to the following zone and overlay provisions: 32.01 Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) 43.02 Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 1 – Township Design (DDO1) 42.02 Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule 1 – Township Vegetation (VPO1)



PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS (CONT’D) The relevant planning provisions include:

State Planning Policy Framework 12.01: A more compact city 12.05: A great place to be

Local Planning Policy Framework 21.06: Strategic framework and the Peninsula’s settlement pattern 21.07-2: Local Area Character 22.13: Township environment

Other 55: More than one dwelling on a lot 65: Decision Guidelines

A summary of the relevant planning controls is included in Attachment 4 to this report. NOTIFICATION AND REFERRALS Notification Notification of the application was undertaken in the form of letters to the adjoining properties and a sign displayed at the front of the site. To date 11 objections have been received. The key concerns identified in the objections include the following: Impact upon the amenity of adjoining properties;

Overdevelopment;

Shared viewlines;

Neighbourhood character; Access and parking; and Conflict with a potential future planning scheme amendment. Copies of the objections received have been attached as Confidential Attachment 3. Internal Referrals Development Engineer Council’s Development Engineer had no objections or concerns regarding the proposal subject to conditions regarding drainage and access. State Planning Policy Framework 15.01-2: Urban Design Principles The development responds to its context in terms of urban character, cultural heritage, natural features, surrounding landscape and climate as per the Clause 55 assessments below.



NOTIFICATION AND REFERRALS (CONT’D) State Planning Policy Framework (Cont’d) 15.01-5: Cultural Identity and Neighbourhood Character The application has been assessed against the neighbourhood character requirements of Clause 55 as per the detailed assessment below. 15.03-2: Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Although the development of three dwellings on a lot is classified as a high impact activity within the above Framework, the land has not been identified as having cultural heritage significance, and accordingly the submission of a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) is not required. 16.01-2: Location of Residential Development The proposal adequately facilitates sustainable development that takes full advantage of existing settlement patterns, and investment in transport and communication, water and sewerage and social facilities. Local Planning Policy Framework Clause 21.07-2: Local Area Character The proposal dwellings respect the style of housing within the locality. The proposal is reflective of the existing and preferred siting, scale and building configuration of the evolving built form evident in the locality of multi-dwelling sites at the front and rear of the original lots. The proposal respects the coastal context of the immediate environs through the implementation of appropriate setbacks, building configuration and design. The proposal is consistent in scale with other double storey dwellings within the immediate local context. The proposal is site responsive and will not unreasonably impact on the amenity of the surrounding neighbourhood character. It is suggested a condition on the permit requiring a detailed landscape plan be submitted to compensate for vegetation removal on the subject site and to further enhance the integration of the development within the broader neighbourhood. Clause 22.13: Township Environment Appropriate stormwater treatment measures to protect waterways and ground water resources from polluting discharges is to be addressed via appropriate planning permit conditions as required by Council’s Development Engineer.



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT Neighbourhood Character The subject land is located within close walking distance of public transport, the Mornington major activity centre, Beleura Hill Road activity centre and other services and facilities where urban consolidation is generally encouraged. The DDO1 that applies to the land does not seek to prevent the development of more than one dwelling on a lot. There are also no other provisions in the planning scheme or neighbourhood character overlays that would identify this as one where minimal or no change is expected. The impact any new development will have upon the neighbourhood character of an area must be considered with this background in mind. The proposed development will be consistent with the neighbourhood character of the area as: The proposed development would have no greater impact on the streetscape character of

Beleura Hill Road than two larger dwellings built on the land in accordance with the DDO1 general requirements;

The proposed development will be largely screened from when the lots adjacent to Beleura Hill

Road are developed in the future;

The proposed dwellings are in keeping with the style of other recently constructed dwellings in the area and other modern dwellings in the area constructed since the 1950s;

The dwellings each have areas of private open space more than 2.5 times the minimum area

required under Clause 55 to allow for larger areas of landscaping and the planting of canopy trees;

The proposed development could have less of an impact upon the dwellings to the north and

south than a larger single dwelling that can be constructed on the two already approved lots without a planning permit;

The overall site coverage and density of development is similar to the recently constructed

dwellings on the land to the south and other recently constructed and approved developments in the area;

The design of the dwellings and setbacks from the boundaries will not unreasonably impose

upon the backyard character of the adjoining properties as:

— Dwelling 1 will be located adjacent to the common driveway of the dwellings located to the north;

— The upper levels of dwellings 1 and 3 are setback 11.6 and 15.1 metres from the eastern

boundary respectively;

— The upper level of dwelling 2 is setback between 3.6 and 7.9 metres from the eastern boundary. At its closest point to the boundary the upper storey wall will only have a height of 5 metres and will be setback more than 2.5 times the distance required under the Clause 55 setback from boundaries standard;

— The ground floor level of dwelling 2 will be setback between 2.1 and 4.5 metres from the

eastern boundary. The proposed dwellings will be setback more than 6.5 metres from 50% of the length of the eastern boundary allowing for significant areas of landscaping and the planting of canopy trees along the boundary;



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) Neighbourhood Character (Cont’d)

— The ground floor of the proposed dwelling 3 will be setback 1.3 metres from the southern boundary and will be adjacent to the garage wall of the dwelling located on the land to the south, which is located on the boundary and a living room wall setback 1 metre from the boundary; and

— The upper level of dwelling 3 is largely located adjacent to the garage wall of the

dwelling to the south and the upper storey wall which only has two very small highlight windows. The upper level is setback 1.5 times further than the minimum setback requirement under Clause 55 and further from the boundary than the upper storey wall of the adjoining dwelling.

Amenity Impacts The proposed dwellings comply with all of the relevant standard and objectives of Clause 55 relating to the amenity of adjoining properties. In relation to the dwellings located to the north: The proposed buildings are located adjacent to the common driveway and will exceed the

minimum setback requirements contained in Clause 55; The secluded private open space of the rear dwelling to the north will be located next to the

proposed secluded private open space of dwelling 1; There will be no overshadowing of the property to the north; There is one window and a balcony that will overlook the property to the north:

— Overlooking from the window will meet the overlooking standard in Clause 55 as only

the common driveway is located within 9 metres of the window and this is not considered secluded private open space; and

— The balcony will overlook the driveway and one window on the other side of the driveway. The extent of overlooking will not meet the overlooking standard contained in Clause 55, however it is considered that it meets the overlooking objective as:

o The window is located 8.5 metres from the balcony which is only 0.5 metres less

than the standard requirement;

o The window that will be overlooked is already open to the common driveway area; and

o The balcony is relatively small and is not located adjacent to the main living areas which are downstairs.



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) Amenity Impacts (Cont’d) In relation to the dwellings located to the south: The proposed buildings will exceed the minimum setback requirements contained in Clause 55;

The upper storey of the proposed development will be adjacent to the garage wall on the

boundary of the dwelling to the south and the common property driveway;

The secluded private open space of the dwelling to the south will be located adjacent to the secluded private open space of the proposed development;

The proposed dwellings will not overlook any of the windows or secluded private open space of

the dwelling located to the south within 9 metres; and

The proposal will meet the Clause 55 overshadowing standard and will not cause any unreasonable overshadowing off the open space of the dwelling to the south.

In relation to the dwellings located to the east: The proposed buildings will substantially exceed the minimum setback requirements contained

in Clause 55;

All of the upper storey windows facing the eastern boundary are highlight windows with sill heights of 1.8 metres to prevent overlooking; and

The proposal will meet the Clause 55 overshadowing standard and will not overshadow the

properties to the east between 9.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. on 22 September. Traffic and Parking Each of the dwellings in the proposed development will have a double garage in accordance with the requirements of Clause 55, Standard B14. This Standard also requires that one visitor car parking space be provided for every five dwellings. Each of the dwellings will have space for a visitor to park in front of each of the garages which would satisfy this requirement if it is applied. There is also a marked on-street parking lane in front of the subject site with unrestricted parking available for approximately four cars. The two lots in front of the subject site will only have access from this common driveway and will not have separate access to Beleura Hill Road. A crossover and common driveway was constructed as a part of the subdivision of the land. This crossover and accessway were constructed in accordance with Council’s engineering standards. The application indicates that this driveway would be widened to 5 metres for its entire length. Councils’ Engineering Unit has advised that this would not be necessary. The existing curved accessway also allows for additional landscaping and has less of an impact upon the character of the street than a widened driveway and crossover.



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) Traffic and Parking (Cont’d) The common property area to be created between the three new dwellings largely consists of hard surfacing. The extent of hard surfacing could be reduced while still allowing for vehicles to exit the site in a forward direction and it is recommended that a condition of permit require that the plans be amended to allow for this. Shared Viewlines The impact to a neighbour’s views is an issue which is often raised in this area where many properties enjoy expansive views over Port Phillip Bay and the Mornington Township and these views are an important part of the landscape character and amenity of the area. In Healy v Surf Coast SC (2005) VCAT 990 (26 May, 2005) the Tribunal refined and re-stated the guiding principles formulated by the Tribunal over a very lengthy period in relation to views. These principles are: “ (a) There is no legal right to a view;

(b) Views form part of the existing amenity of a property and their loss is a relevant

consideration to take into account;

(c) The availability of views must be considered in the light of what constitutes a reasonable sharing of those views;

(d) In addressing the concept of ‘reasonableness’, it is relevant to consider:

(i) The importance of the view to be lost within the overall panorama available; and

(ii) Whether those objecting have taken all appropriate steps to optimise development

of their own properties.

(e) Added emphasis will be placed on principles (b) and (c) above if the issue of views is specifically addressed in the planning scheme.”

These principles have been applied to numerous cases since Healy including Wilson v Mornington Peninsula SC (2006) VCAT 1806 (4 September, 2006) at 18 Twakurra Street, Rye where the Tribunal found that: “ There is no doubt that views are part of the amenity of dwellings in this area and it is significant

when applying case law that shared viewlines are sought to be protected by the design objectives in DDO4 ‘where reasonable and practical’. The provisions of the Planning Scheme give significant emphasis to the importance of views to the amenity of private residences.

The primary test is whether there is a reasonable sharing of views rather than a starting point being there should be no loss of view or no loss of views to features or landmarks from private properties. That recognises that although a dwelling may be afforded a view over an adjacent land parcel, there is nothing in policy that confers a right to the whole of the view in perpetuity.”

In this case there the two adjoining dwellings to the east obtain views across the subject site that may be affected by the proposed development.



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) Shared Viewlines (Cont’d) One of the design objectives of DDO1 is to protect shared viewlines where reasonable and practical. It is important to note that permission has already been granted to subdivide the subject site into two lots, each with an area in excess of 500 square metres. A permit would not be required for the development of a dwelling on either of these lots if it met the DDO1 general wall height requirement of 5.5 metres or building height requirement of 6 metres. The proposed dwellings 1 and 2 meet the standard building height requirement and exceed the standard wall height requirement by only 0.3 metres. Dwelling 3 exceeds the standard wall height requirement by 1 metre and the standard building height requirement by 0.5 metres. The following dwellings have views across the site that may be impacted by the proposed development. 14 Butler Avenue This dwelling enjoys views to Port Phillip Bay across the subject site, between gaps in the vegetation and dwellings across Beleura Hill Road, from an upper level deck and living room windows. The height poles that were erected on the land indicate that these views will not be impacted by the proposed development due to the slope of the land and the modest heights of the proposed dwellings. 12 Butler Avenue This dwelling also enjoys a view to Port Phillip Bay across the subject site, between gaps in the vegetation and dwellings across Beleura Hill Road, from an upper level deck and windows. This dwelling also obtains distant views to the south west and the dwelling is generally orientated towards these views. Based on the height poles that were erected on the land it is estimated that the highest part of dwelling 3 would have to be reduced in height by 0.5 metres to allow some bay views to be retained across the roof of the proposed building. It is considered that this would be achievable as the excavation required for this dwelling is less than that required for dwellings 1 and 2 due to the slope of the land. This amendment to the plans would also mean that dwelling 3 would meet the DDO1 general building height requirement of 6 metres. Based on the above the proposed dwelling will result in a reasonable sharing of viewlines in accordance with the objectives of DDO1. Potential Future Planning Scheme Amendments Council is currently undertaking a Neighbourhood Character Study of the Beleura Hill area. A draft report will not be released for consideration by Council until the mid-year. The study may lead to the preparation of a planning scheme amendment to address any shortcomings identified in the current planning scheme controls.



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D) Potential Future Planning Scheme Amendments (Cont’d) Council cannot consider a Neighbourhood Character Study unless it has been adopted by Council or incorporate into the planning scheme. Council also cannot consider potential future planning scheme amendments. The current application must therefore be considered on its merits against the current requirements of the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme. Previous VCAT Decision In Urban Solutions v Mornington Peninsula SC (2012) VCAT 1219 (14 August, 2012) the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (the Tribunal) upheld the decision by Council to refuse an application (P10/1648) for the development of four dwellings at 2-4 Morven Street in Mornington. This site is also located on the western slopes of Beleura Hill and is 220 metres from the subject site. In that decision the Tribunal compared the application at 2-4 Morven Street to a five dwelling development at 60 Beleura Hill Road (Vallesi & Anor v Mornington Peninsula SC & Ors (2011) VCAT 590 (6 April, 2011) which was approved by the Tribunal and has recently been completed. The Tribunal found that: “ 29. Beleura Hill Road is a major collector road with a wide carriageway and a regular bus

service. It lies almost at the top of the hill and the site in question is on the west side of the road thus substantially separated from development to the east. The site (60 Beleura Hill Road) is relatively flat and vegetation limited so that the development context is quite different to that of 2-4 Morven Street. Although a high density development in local terms, the development, which is well advanced, displays positive features of separation at upper levels and individual mono-pitched roofs, which, when taken together assist in reducing the overall built form impact.”

The subject site and the proposed development have more in common with the recently completed development at 60 Beleura Hill Road rather than at 2-4 Morven Street. The development at 60 Beleura Hill Road that was approved by the Tribunal consisted of five double storey dwellings with an overall dwelling density and site coverage similar to the current application. The Tribunal in that case found that the development of double storey dwellings in the area was supported by current planning policy for the following reasons: “ ● Whilst the site is not within an activity centre where higher density development is

encouraged, in areas such as this, developments such as this are not prohibited. I am persuaded by the permit applicant that this site is well located within walking distance to a neighbourhood group of shops, has good access to public transport and within a short distance to the Mornington Activity Centre and foreshore;

Despite being three bedrooms, what is proposed are not large family homes. They are

modest in size. Three bedrooms are also adaptable in providing housing for families, couples, older persons or single persons sharing;

The site is located within reasonable proximity and accessibility to major focal points;”



CONSIDERATION AND ASSESSMENT (CONT’D)

Previous VCAT Decision (Cont’d)

“ ● The site is serviced by existing infrastructure;

The site is located within reasonable distance of the Mornington and Beleura Hill Road Activity Centres and foreshore;

The site is served by public transport;

The proposed dwellings are able to be adaptable to cater for different housing types; and

The site will assist in catering for the projected population on the Mornington

Peninsula.” The subject site is relatively flat with limited vegetation and the proposed development also displays positive features of separation at the upper levels and individual roofs compared to the proposed development at 2-4 Morven Street. The subject site is located behind two vacant lots fronting Beleura Hill Road and will gain access from an already approved and constructed accessway. It is not subject to the steep slopes and difficult access that made the development of 2-4 Morven Street difficult. The extent of excavation required and overall height of the dwellings is significantly less, with greater separation between the proposed dwellings. SUMMARY Upon assessing the application it has been determined that the proposed development and associated vegetation removal is an appropriate response to the context of the site and is consistent with the objectives and requirements of the Planning Scheme as: The proposal will not have a significant impact upon the neighbourhood character of the area; The subject site is located in an area close to services where State and local planning policies

encourage further urban consolidation; The proposal will not result in a significant increase in traffic to the area, an adequate number of

car parking spaces has been provided and the existing shared accessway and crossover will provide for safe access to the site; and

Subject to the recommended conditions discussed in this report the proposal will:

— Meet all of the objectives of Clause 55; — Satisfy the design objectives of DDO1; — Not have an unreasonable impact upon the amenity of surrounding dwellings; and

— Not impede upon a significant majority of existing shared viewlines from adjoining

dwellings.



RECOMMENDATION

That the Council being a responsible authority under the Mornington Peninsula Planning Scheme and the Planning and Environment Act 1987, having considered all objections received to date, hereby decides that Planning Application P11/1899 for the development of three double storey dwellings on the land and associated works at 51 Beleura Hill Road, Mornington, be approved and a notice of decision to grant permit issued subject to the following conditions:

1. Before the development starts, or any trees or vegetation removed, amended plans

(three copies) shall be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale, with dimensions, and be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application but modified to show:

A. The height of dwelling 3 must not exceed 68.9 Australian Height Datum

(AHD).

B. The height of dwelling 2 must not exceed 69.2 AHD.

C. The maximum depth of excavation must not exceed 1.3 metres.

D. The layout of the driveway within the existing common property area must match the layout of the driveway approved under Planning Permit P09/2634.

E. The extent of hard surfacing within the proposed common property area must

be reduced while still allowing for cars parking in front of the garages to exit the site in a forward direction.

F. A landscape plan prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person or

firm to show:

i. The areas set aside for landscaping.

ii. A schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground cover, which will include the location and size at maturity of all plants, the botanical names of such plants and the location of all areas to be covered by grass, lawn or other surface material as specified.

iii. The planting of trees that will grow to a mature height of between 5 and

6 metres between the dwellings and the rear boundaries to assist in screening the dwelling from views external to the site.

iv. A majority of plantings must be of a species indigenous to the locality.

Layout not to be Altered

2. The layout of the site and the size, design and location of the buildings and works

permitted must always accord with the endorsed plan and must not be altered or modified without the further written consent of the Responsible Authority.



RECOMMENDATION (CONT’D)

Landscaping

3. Before the initial occupation of the development approved by this permit, landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be completed and then maintained in a healthy condition, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Any dead or diseased trees or shrubs must be replaced as soon as possible. The area set aside for landscaping must be used for no other purpose.

4. All disturbed surfaces on the land resulting from the development must be

revegetated and stabilized to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Engineering

5. Before any works associated with the development starts, detailed construction plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and two copies must be provided. Alternatively, plans in pdf format may be emailed to [email protected]. The plans must show:

A. All areas of the development being drained by means of an underground

drainage system and connected to the existing retention systems previously installed on the allotment.

B. A drainage surcharge route within the development to avoid inundation of any dwellings.

C. Details, including levels of the common driveway within the site.

D. The design of all vehicle movements entering and exiting the property being in

a forward direction.

6. Before the initial occupation of the development, the areas set aside for the parking of vehicles, access lanes and driveways as shown on the endorsed plans must be constructed in accordance with approved construction plans, surfaced with reinforced concrete, asphalt or paving and drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Car spaces, access lanes and driveways must be kept available for these purposes at all times

Amenity

7. Prior to the initial occupation of any dwelling approved, all screening devices and

fencing as shown on the endorsed plans must be installed and maintained thereafter to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Air-conditioning or other plant equipment must be screened and baffled as appropriate to prevent nuisance or annoyance to persons in dwellings nearby and adjoining land.

9. Outdoor lighting must be designed, baffled and located to the satisfaction of the

Responsible Authority to prevent any adverse effect on and so that no direct light falls onto adjoining land.



RECOMMENDATION (CONT’D) Time for Starting and Completion

10. This permit will expire if one of the following applies: A. The development is not commenced within two years from the date of issue of

this permit. B. The development is not completed within four years from the date of this

permit.

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.

report to development assessments committee item no. 2.1

Documents