City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
An Ordinary Meeting of Kingston City Council was held at the Cheltenham Office, 1230 Nepean Highway, Cheltenham, on Monday 28 November 2011.
1. Apologies
2. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meetings Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting 24 October 2011 Minutes of Special Council Meeting 14 November 2011
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 to the CEO prior to the meeting only the type of interest needs to be disclosed prior to the item being considered.]
4. Petitions Traffic Safety – Thames Promenade, Chelsea
5. Presentation of Awards Joe Parker
6. Reports from Village Committees
7. Reports from Delegates Appointed by Council to Various Organisations
8. Question Time
9. Environmental Sustainability Reports N 188 Town Planning Application Decisions – October 2011 Page 11 N 189 KP448/10 – 1035 Nepean Highway Moorabbin Page 19 N 190 KP243/11 – 90 Nepean Highway Mentone Page 43 N 191 KP893/10 – 2 Bank Road / 271–282 Nepean Highway Page 90 N 192 KP79/11 - 8-18 Bendigo Street / 13-17 Wilson Street, Cheltenham Page 116 N 193 KP259/11 – 431 Station Street, Bonbeach Page 162 N 194 KP1143/08 - 1 – 9 Balcombe Road, Mentone - (Amendment to Liquor Licence) Page 193 N 195 Proposed Amendment C121 to the Kingston Planning Scheme – Moorabbin Activity Centre Zone Page 202 N 196 Proposed Amendment C123 to the Kingston Planning Scheme – Parkdale Activity Centre Page 230 N 197 Proposed Amendment C124 to the Kingston Planning Scheme – Mentone Activity Centre Page 236 N 198 Moorabbin Arts Link Page 276 N 199 Urban Growth Boundary Anomalies Submission Page 280 N 200 Lilliput Lane Road Construction Scheme Page 283 N 201 Beach Road Corridor Strategy and No Stopping Trial Page 289 N 202 Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group – Appointment of Community Representatives Page 293 N 203 Capital Works – Approval of Expenditure Page 295
1 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
10. Community Sustainability Reports N 204 Individual Development Grant Applications with Declared Conflict of Interest Page 299
11. Organisational Development & Governance Reports N 205 Quarterly Report to the Council Plan Page 303 N 206 Print Tender Organisation Contract 11/48 Provision of Planned and Ad Hoc Printing Page 307 N 207 Local Government Elections 2012 – Draft Election Plan Page 305 N 208 Assembly of Council Report Page 309 N 209 Expenditure of Ward Funds Schedule Page 311
12. Corporate Services Reports N 210 Investment Policy Report – September 2011 Quarter Page 314
13. Notices of Motion
14. Urgent Business
15. Items in Camera N 211 Australia Day Award Nominations 2012 Page 318
2 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Kingston City Council held at the Cheltenham Office, 1230 Nepean Highway, Cheltenham, on Monday 28 November 2011 which commenced at 7.04pm.
Present: Cr Ron Brownlees (Mayor) Cr Arthur Athanasopoulos Cr Lewis Dundas Cr Dan Moloney Cr Paul Peulich Cr John Ronke Cr Trevor Shewan Cr Steve Staikos Cr Rosemary West OAM
In Attendance: John Nevins, Chief Executive Officer Mauro Bolin, General Manager Community Sustainability Paul Franklin, General Manager Corporate Services Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability Elaine Sowerby, General Manager Organisational Development & Governance Ian Nice, Manager Statutory Planning Phil De Losa, Program Leader Governance Kirsten Leiminger, Media/Communications Officer
1. Apologies None.
2. Confirmation of Minutes of Previous Meetings Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting 24 October 2011 Minutes of Special Council Meeting 14 November 2011
Crs Ronke/Moloney
That the Minutes of Ordinary Council Meeting 24 October 2011 and Minutes of Special Council Meeting 14 November 2011 be confirmed.
Carried
3. Foreshadowed Declaration by Councillors, Officers or Contractors of any Conflict of Interest The CEO John Nevins declared an interest in item N 211 Australia Day Award Nominations 2012, the interest being a connection with one of the nominees but not a pecuniary interest in the item
3 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
4. Petitions
Cr Shewan presented a petition initiated by Mr John Bainbridge of 95 Thames Promenade, Chelsea in relation to traffic safety concerns in Thames Promenade
Crs Shewan/Ronke
That the petition be referred to the Chief Executive Officer for response Carried
5. Presentation of Awards The Mayor presented an award to Joe Parker for his work and contribution to the local community.
Procedural Motion Crs Athanasopoulos/Ronke
That Standing Orders be suspended.
The Motion was Carried.
At this point of the meeting all Councillors acknowledged and congratulated Cr Ron Brownlees on his year as Mayor and reflected on his Mayoral term. The Councillors thanked Cr Brownlees for his efforts as Mayor.
Procedural Motion Crs Ronke/Athanasopoulos
That Standing orders be resumed.
The Motion was Carried.
Procedural Motion Crs Staikos/Athanasopoulos
That Item N 199 – Urban Growth Boundary Anomalies Submission be not considered as an item of business on the agenda.
The Motion was Carried.
4 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6. Reports from Village Committees
PRESENTATION OF VILLAGE COMMITTEE REPORTS
6.1 Mentone/Parkdale Village Committee Chairperson – Claire Houston Report of Meeting held on 2 November 2011
Highlight: None ______
6.2 Mordialloc Village Committee Chairperson – David van Pelt Report of Meeting held on 2 November 2011
Village Committee Motion: The Mordialloc Village Committee requests that Council extend the time for comment on the draft Mordialloc Creek Masterplan until 28 November 2011.
Officer Comment: This option was previously raised with officers by Councillors and has subsequently been actioned.
Officer Recommendation: The Village committee be advised Community Consultation on the Mordialloc Creek Masterplan was extended to 28 November 2011.
Crs West/Dundas
That the Village committee be advised that the Community Consultation on the Mordialloc Creek Masterplan was extended to 28 November 2011 Carried
Highlight: Aidan Mullen’s informative Presentation of the Draft Mordialloc Creek Masterplan ______
6.3 Dingley Heatherton Village Committee Chairperson – Anne Caprackas Report of Meeting held on 2 November 2011
Highlight: Steve Perumal presentation, attendance of Mayor, Cr Ron Brownlees and Cr Paul Peulich and Jason Stubbs. ______
5 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.4 Moorabbin Highett Village Committee Chairperson – Les Heimann Report of Meeting held on 2 November 2011
Village Committee Motion: An investigation be undertaken into traffic management in the precinct bounded by Genoa St, Bulli Street, Wickham Rd and Chesterville Rd.
The investigation should include: 1. Options to reduce or preclude trucks from entering the residential area in and surrounding the precinct, 2. Traffic counts including traffic generators, 3. Parking restrictions and controls in the feeder roads that may be impeding traffic flow, 4. Options to address the intersection of Chesterville, Wickham and Keys Roads to manage the traffic, reduce traffic congestion, improve traffic flow and reduce waiting times, 5. Introduction of a right hand turn lane on Chesterville Road into Wickham Road, 6. Vic Roads forward capital plan for the precinct and its feeder roads.
Officer Comment: The area defined by this request is almost entirely industrial.
1. Council will investigate the potential to restrict truck traffic in Bulli north of Genoa and along Isabella past Rowans Road. 2. Traffic counts will normally be done for this type of investigation. 3. More information is required regarding which feeder roads. 4. All roads at this intersection are Vic Roads controlled. 5. There already is a shared right turn lane on Chesterville Road turning into Wickham 6. There are none.
Officer Recommendation: That this Village Committee request be referred to officers for investigation and response.
Crs Staikos/Peulich
That the Village Committee request be referred to officers for investigation and response. Carried
Highlights: 1. G R Bricker Reserve Update 2. Positive discussion of the Green Wedge Plan ______
6.5 Patterson Lakes/Carrum Village Committee Chairperson – Don Reed Report of Meeting held on 2 November 2011
6 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Village Committee Motion: Committee requests that based on local feedback and the findings of the Council Officer report, Council revisit its decision not to include a café in the redevelopment of the Carrum Surf Lifesaving Club. Committee supports the hosting of the community information session planned for the 6th of December as a means of determining the real level of community support for the café.
Officer Comment: At Council in August 2011, Councillors considered a range of options regarding the rebuilding of the Carrum Life Saving Club. The existing building had been badly damaged during a storm in January 2010 and was shut on the grounds of public safety by the Municipal Building surveyor. Council has worked with Life Saving Victoria (LSV) and the Carrum Surf Life Saving Club to develop proposals for a replacement building and has allocated reserve capital funding towards the project despite Council’s capital budget being fully allocated to other projects. The building has been designed as a replacement Life Saving Club building, based on the adopted design guidelines from LSV. In addition, the building includes community meeting rooms, public toilets and a small kiosk for the selling of refreshments. The building footprint is approximately 2m2 larger than the current building footprint and any further expansion would require approval from the Department of Sustainability & the Environment, who would request that an equivalent amount of floorspace be lost along the foreshore to compensate for any planned increase at Carrum. The building has been designed with future growth potential in mind and a café/restaurant could potentially be included at a point in the future if funding and DSE approval could be secured. The inclusion of a café/restaurant as part of the initial phase of work would be difficult for the following reasons:-
(i) DSE approval is currently being sought for the current building design and would need to be re-run if a major alteration was required. This would add significant delay to the timetable.
(ii) Carrum SLC are operating from inadequate temporary facilities and would be further disadvantaged if an extended delay were introduced to the project.
(iii) The existing budget is limited and further delay may lead to increased costs as building prices potentially increase. It is proposed to seek tenders in January 2012
(iv) Some compensatory reduction in floor-space would need to be identified elsewhere along the foreshore and this could disadvantage other beach users
Officer Recommendation: 1. That the Village Committee be thanked for their contribution.
2. That Council confirm current building design proceed to tender, on the basis that this is the best option available to Council, LSV and CSLC given the limited resources and floorspace available and the need to assist CSLC in continuing to provide their invaluable patrol service to Carrum beach users at the earliest opportunity.
7 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3. That officers be requested to prepare a report on the potential future extension of the proposed Carrum LSC building and the potential viability of a commercial café/restaurant in this location.
4. That the Village Committee be advised that the existing design makes provision for a café to be added on and Council could consider the matter in the future.
Crs Shewan/Ronke
1. That the Village Committee be thanked for their contribution. 2. That Council confirm current building design proceed to tender, on the basis that this is the best option available to Council, LSV and CSLC given the limited resources and floorspace available and the need to assist CSLC in continuing to provide their invaluable patrol service to Carrum beach users at the earliest opportunity. 3. That officers be requested to prepare a report on the potential future extension of the proposed Carrum LSC building and the potential viability of a commercial café/restaurant in this location and supports the hosting of the community information session planned for the 6th December as a means of determining the real level of community support for the cafe. 4. That the Village Committee be advised that the existing design makes provision for a café to be added on and Council could consider the matter in the future. Carried
Highlight: Recommendation regarding the redevelopment of the Carrum Surf Lifesaving Club. ______
6.6 Aspendale /Edithvale/Aspendale Gardens/Waterways Village Committee Chairperson – Ken Carney Report of Meeting held on 3 November 2011
Highlight: None ______
6.7 Cheltenham Village Committee Chairperson – Vic Russo OAM JP Report of Meeting held on 8 November 2011
Highlight: None ______
6.8 Chelsea/Chelsea Heights/Bonbeach Village Committee Chairperson – John Bainbridge Report of Meeting held on 9 November 2011
8 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Village Committee Motion: The committee is opposed to any changes to the DDO1 and DDO7 as outlined on page 82 of the Draft Planning Scheme review.
Officer Comment: The Planning Scheme Review is currently out for consultation.
Officer Recommendation: 1. That these comments be included in the Review of the Planning Scheme.
2. That the Village Committee be advised that Council is not proposing to remove any height controls along the foreshore area.
Cr Ronke/Moloney
1. That these comments be included in the Review of the Planning Scheme. 2. That the Village Committee be advised that Council is not proposing to remove any height controls along the foreshore area. Carried
Village Committee Motion: That a roundabout originally proposed to improve traffic safety along Thames Promenade at the intersection of Baxter Avenue & Thames Promenade as shown in document 09/71599 dated 17 August 2009 be included in update of Thames Promenade.
Officer Comment: Council undertook broad consultation on a range of traffic concepts along Thames Promenade in 2009. The concepts plan placed on display included an option for a roundabout at Baxter Ave (approximate cost $200 000). Feedback from the community and further investigation indicated there was a greater need to improve pedestrian safety near the school and shops (at the eastern end of Thames Pde) and a roundabout at Scotch Pde was suggested. Further feasibility investigations confirmed that a roundabout at Scotch Pde would be difficult to achieve as it would require land acquisition. Further consultation with the school during 2011 (and pedestrian traffic counts at the school crossing & shops) confirmed that pedestrian operated signals & flashing 40km/h signs (approximate cost $200,000) plus a roundabout near the shops represented the highest priority safety need along the full length of Thames Pde. A second round of broad consultation was undertaken during October 2011 based on updated concept plans. The display plans excluded the Baxter Ave roundabout but indicated that it may be considered as a ‘future project subject to further review’. While a roundabout at Baxter Ave would have some benefits in calming traffic approaching the bends and is desirable it does not necessarily represent where we would get the best value in terms of improved safety outcomes. In essence the $200 000 is considered to be better spent on fixing the higher priority issue opposite Chelsea Heights Primary School rather than Baxter Avenue.
9 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Officers also attended a Village Committee meeting this year to explain the proposed traffic works and why the 2009 proposal to install a roundabout at Baxter Avenue was being changed.
Officer Recommendation: 1. That the Village Committee be thanked for their advice. 2. That Council proceed with the safety improvement works opposite Chelsea Heights Primary School, however a roundabout at Baxter Avenue to be retained as a future project subject to further works prioritising and funding reviews.
Crs Shewan/Moloney
1. That the Village Committee be thanked for their advice. 2. That Council proceed with the safety improvement works opposite Chelsea Heights Primary School, however a roundabout at Baxter Avenue to be retained as a priority future project Carried
Highlight: Chelsea Train Station Group - New Arts Project
______
10 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting MInutes 28 November 2011
9. Environmental Sustainability Reports
N 188 Town Planning Application Decisions – October, 2011
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 October, 2011.
A summary of the decisions is as follows:
Type of Decision Number of Decisions Percentage (%) Made Planning Permits 69 85 Notice of Decision 5 6 Refusal to Grant a Permit 3 4 Other - Withdrawn (2) 4 5 - Prohibited (0) - Permit not required 0) - Lapsed (2) Total 81 100
(NB: Percentage figures have been rounded)
Recommendation
That the report be noted.
Crs Peulich/Dundas
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
11 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION Unit 1 6 KP-288/2011 Margaret Street PARKDALE 3/05/2011 3/10/2011 Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) KP-189/2011 45 Bondi Road BONBEACH 24/03/2011 3/10/2011 Dwellings Permit Issued No Notice of KP-298/2011 8 Emma Street CARRUM 10/05/2011 3/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings decision No 26 Munro Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) KP-463/2011 Avenue EDITHVALE 5/07/2011 3/10/2011 Lots Permit Issued No 24 Cobham KP-630/2011 Street CHELTENHAM 18/08/2011 3/10/2011 Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No 422 Station Subdivide The Land Into Twelve KP-615/2011 Street BONBEACH 10/08/2011 3/10/2011(12) Lots Permit Issued No KP-643/2011 2 Hicks Street PARKDALE 26/08/2011 3/10/2011 Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of One (1) Dwelling 50 Wetland PATTERSON In A Land Subject To Inundation KP-539/2011 Drive LAKES 28/07/2011 3/10/2011 Overlay Permit Issued No Use The Land As A Medical Centre (Speech Pathology), With A Reduction Of The Car Parking Notice of KP-302/2011 82 Keys Road CHELTENHAM 11/05/2011 4/10/2011 Requirement Decision No Develop The Land For The Construction Of One (1) Dwelling 36 Riverside PATTERSON In A Land Subject To Inundation KP-562/2011 West LAKES 4/08/2011 4/10/2011 Overlay Permit Issued No 162-176 To Use The Site For Animal KP-165/2011 Kingston Road HEATHERTON 17/03/2011 4/10/2011 Keeping Permit issued No
12 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION 24 Wordsworth CLAYTON Construction Of Four (4) KP-246/2011 Avenue SOUTH 11/04/2011 4/10/2011 Dwellings Permit Issued No 40 Clarinda Subdivide The Land Into Three KP-629/2011 Road CLARINDA 22/08/2011 4/10/2011(3) Lots Permit Issued No 115A Nepean Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) KP-584/2011 Highway ASPENDALE 10/08/2011 4/10/2011 Lots Permit Issued No 8 Marabou Notice of KP-264/2011 Place ASPENDALE 19/04/2011 5/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings decision No Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Grease Trap And A Reduction Of Carparking 384 Nepean Requirement Associated With A KP-360/2011 Highway CHELSEA 1/06/2011 5/10/2011 Restaurant Permit Issued No KP-324/2011 6 Wilson Street CHELTENHAM 16/05/2011 5/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings Lapsed No Staged Subdivision Of The Land Unit 1 13 Into Five (5) Lots And Common KP-357/2011 Bondi Road BONBEACH 26/05/2011 6/10/2011 Property Permit Issued No 304 Station KP-661/2010 Street CHELSEA 20/09/2010 6/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings issuedPermit No 8 Swallow PATTERSON Develop The Land For The KP-215/2011 Court LAKES 8/04/2011 7/10/2011 Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No PATTERSON Develop The Land For The KP-132/2011 2 Clipper Island LAKES 7/03/2011 7/10/2011 Construction Of A Jetty Permit issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Front KP-532/2011 6 Alden Court CHELTENHAM 26/07/2011 7/10/2011 Verandah Permit Issued No 44 Church KP-917/2010 Road CARRUM 23/12/2010 7/10/2011 Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No
13 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION Use And Develop The Land For 70-120 The Construction Of An Office KP-113/2011 Kingston Road HEATHERTON 25/02/2011 7/10/2011 (Temporary) Permit Issued No To Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Dwelling In A 34 Houston Design And Development KP-455/2011 Street MENTONE 4/07/2011 7/10/2011 Overlay - Schedule 4 Permit Issued No KP-837/2010 1 Clare Street PARKDALE 22/11/2010 7/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings Permit issued No 216 Station Subdivide The Land Into Eleven KP-484/2011 Street EDITHVALE 7/07/2011 7/10/2011 (11) Lots Plus Common Property Permit Issued No 15 Palm Beach PATTERSON Develop The Land For The KP-508/2011 Drive LAKES 19/07/2011 10/10/2011 Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No 16 Swallow PATTERSON KP-353/2011 Court LAKES 27/05/2011 10/10/2011 Replace Jetty 86 Permit issued No 10 Coral Island PATTERSON Develop The Land For The KP-388/2011 Court LAKES 7/06/2011 10/10/2011 Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No 16 Seafarer PATTERSON Develop The Land For The KP-604/2011 Court LAKES 18/08/2011 10/10/2011 Construction Of A Jetty Permit Issued No KP-296/2011 2 Bibby Court MOORABBIN 9/05/2011 11/10/2011 Buildings & Works Permit issued No
Childcare Centre - Amend Condition 29 Of Planning Permit No. KP665/2005 To Increase The Number Of Staff Working On 132 Collins The Premises At Any One Time Notice of KP-665/2005/A Street MENTONE 10/02/2011 11/10/2011From Seven (7) To Ten (10). Decision No 18 Deepwater Develop The Land For The KP-565/2011 Drive WATERWAYS 4/08/2011 11/10/2011Construction Of One (1) Dwelling Permit Issued No
14 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION Develop The Land For The Construction Of Two (2) 2 393 Station Dwellings And A Two (2) Lot Notice of KP-807/2010 Street BONBEACH 12/11/2010 11/10/2011Subdivision Decision No 428 Como KP-564/2010 Parade West PARKDALE 19/08/2010 11/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings Permit issued No
To Use The Land For The Sale And Consumption Of Liquor (On- Premises Liquor Licence) And Construction Of Business 224 Como Identification Signage In KP-400/2011 Parade West PARKDALE 15/06/2011 13/10/2011 Association With A Restaurant Permit Issued No 1 19 Graham Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) KP-734/2011 Road CARRUM 27/09/2011 13/10/2011Lots Permit Issued No 98-116 Cavanagh Two-Hundred & Eight (208) KP-498/2010 Street CHELTENHAM 26/07/2010 13/10/2011 Dwellings Permit issued Yes The Subdivision Of The Land KP-344/2011 2 Afton Way ASPENDALE 23/05/2011 14/10/2011 Into Two (2) Lots Permit Issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of One (1) Dwelling 130 Como With An Internal Floor To Ceiling KP-526/2011 Parade West PARKDALE 25/07/2011 14/10/2011 Height Greater Than 3.5 Metres Permit Issued No KP-7/2011 26 Clay Street MOORABBIN 6/01/2011 17/10/2011 Three (3) Dwellings Permit issued No
Use & Development For A Restaurant & Nine (9) Dwellings 98 Gladesville PATTERSON (Apartment Style) Within A Three KP-440/2010 Boulevard LAKES 6/07/2010 17/10/2011 (3) Storey Building Withdrawn No
15 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION 4 Grandview EXTEND A DWELLING ON A KP-912/2010 Grove MOORABBIN 12/201017/ 17/10/2011 LOT LESS THAN 300sqm Refused No Develop The Land For The Construction Of A Dwelling 3 Kimberley Extension In A Design And KP-668/2011 Grove WATERWAYS 5/09/2011 17/10/2011Development Overlay Permit Issued No 1-4 503-505 Change Of Use - 100 Seat KP-242/2009/A Main Street MORDIALLOC 16/07/2010 18/10/2011 Restaurant Permit issued Yes Develop The Land For The Lot 1 Centre OAKLEIGH Refurbishment Of Golf Course In KP-590/2011 Road SOUTH 12/08/2011 18/10/2011 A Special Use Zone. Permit Issued No 53 McKay KP-144/2011 Street MORDIALLOC 7/03/2011 18/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings Permit issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) KP-518/2011 43 Jean Street CHELTENHAM 25/07/2011 19/10/2011 Dwellings Lapsed No 76 Cochranes Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) KP-721/2011 Road MOORABBIN 16/09/2011 20/10/2011Lots Permit Issued No 1 32 MacBeth Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) KP-693/2011 Street BRAESIDE 9/09/2011 20/10/2011 Lots Permit Issued No 10 Bricker Subdivide The Land Into Two (2) KP-730/2011 Street CHELTENHAM 20/09/2011 20/10/2011 Lots Permit Issued No 1172 Nepean KP-63/2011 Highway CHELTENHAM 1/02/2011 20/10/2011 Advertising Sign Permit issued No 2A Elizabeth KP-184/2011 Street MENTONE 21/03/2011 20/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings Permit issued No Shop 25 171- 187 Nepean Change Of Use - Licenced KP-905/2010 Highway MENTONE 15/12/2010 20/10/2011 Restaurant Permit issued No 16 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION Develop The Land For An Extension To Existing Dwelling KP-456/2011 7 Correa Street EDITHVALE 4/07/2011 24/10/2011 On A Lot Less Than 300m. Withdrawn No KP-915/2010 7 Alfred Street HIGHETT 21/12/2010 24/10/2011 Four (4) Dwellings Permit issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of A First Floor 14 Wellwood Balcony Extension To A Dwelling KP-627/2011 Road BONBEACH 19/08/2011 24/10/2011On A Lot Less Than 300m2 Permit Issued No Develop The Land For The Construction Of Three (3) Double 45 Mentone Storey Dwellings And Removal KP-174/2011 Parade MENTONE 18/03/2011 24/10/2011Of An Easement Permit Issued No KP-385/2011 26 Follett Road CHELTENHAM 7/06/2011 24/10/2011 Three (3) Dwellings Permit issued No 2 13-23 Change Of Use - Installation Of KP-442/2011 Japaddy Street MORDIALLOC 28/06/2011 24/10/2011 Spray Booth To Existing Factory Permit Issued No 7 Wellwood KP-486/2010 Road BONBEACH 6/07/2010 25/10/2011 Six (6) Dwellings (As Amended) Permit issued Yes 13 Lochiel KP-101/2011 Avenue EDITHVALE 18/02/2011 26/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellngs Refused No 8 Acacia KP-667/2011 Avenue MENTONE 5/09/2011 26/10/2011 Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No Use And Develop The Land For The Construction Of A 77-87 Warehouse Office And KP-560/2011 Corporate Drive HEATHERTON 3/08/2011 26/10/2011 Assocated Carparking Permit Issued No Develop The Land For The 32 Brownfield Construction Of One (1) Dwelling KP-661/2011 Street PARKDALE 31/08/2011 27/10/2011In A Special Building Overlay Permit Issued No
17 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
Planning Decisions October, 2011 DECISION PROPERTY DATE VCAT APPL. No. ADDRESS SUBURB APPL. DATE DECIDED PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION DECISION 116-118 Develop The Land For The Gladesville PATTERSON Displayof Business Identification KP-708/2011 Boulevard LAKES 14/09/2011 27/10/2011 Signage Permit Issued No 33B Curlew PATTERSON KP-329/2011 Point Drive LAKES 20/05/2011 27/10/2011 Replace Jetty 107 Permit issued No Amend The Condition Of An Existing Planning Permit To 2 Sinclair Construct A 1.8 Metre High Front KP-531/2007/B Avenue EDITHVALE 19/07/2011 27/10/2011 Fence Refused No 236 Clarinda KP-644/2010 Road HEATHERTON 15/09/2010 28/10/2011 rthworksEa & Fill Permit issued Yes Develop The Land For The 66 McLeod Construction Of Two (2) Double KP-428/2011 Road CARRUM 27/06/2011 28/10/2011Storey Dwellings Permit Issued No 35 Wordsworth CLAYTON KP-653/2011 Avenue SOUTH 30/08/2011 28/10/2011 Four (4) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No KP-638/2011 5 Ella Grove CHELSEA 25/08/2011 28/10/2011 Four (4) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No 472 Station KP-30/2011 Street BONBEACH 18/01/2011 28/10/2011 Two (2) Dwellings Permit issued No Develop The Land For The 11 Rayhur CLAYTON Construction Of Two (2) Double- KP-754/2010 Street SOUTH 21/10/2010 28/10/2011 Storey Dwellings. Permit Issued No 5 Jellicoe KP-713/2010 Street CHELTENHAM 8/10/2010 28/10/2011 Five (5) DwellingsPermit issued No 7 Latrobe Subdivide The Land Into Four (4) KP-555/2011/A Street CHELTENHAM 5/10/2011 31/10/2011 Lots Permit Issued No 1 Waratah KP-674/2011 Avenue MORDIALLOC 7/09/2011 31/10/2011 Two (2) Lot Subdivision Permit issued No
18 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 189 KP448/10 1035 Nepean Hwy Moorabbin
APPLICANT SJB Planning Pty Ltd ADDRESS OF LAND 1035 Nepean Highway, MOORABBIN VIC 3189 (Lot 1 on TP841818) PROPOSAL TWENTY EIGHT (28) DWELLINGS PLANNING OFFICER Charles Moffatt REFERENCE NO. KP-448/2010 RELEVANT STATE Clause 11 (Settlement) PLANNING POLICY Clause 15: (Built Environment and Heritage) FRAMEWORK Clause 16: (Housing) RELEVANT LOCAL Clause 21.05: MSS – Residential Land Use PLANNING POLICY Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy FRAMEWORK ZONE R1Z OVERLAYS Nil PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 52.29 – Land Adjacent to a Road Zone Clause 55: Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines RESIDENTIAL POLICY Increased Housing Diversity AREA ABORIGINAL CULTURAL No HERITAGE SENSITIVITY DECISION DATE BY 16/10/2011 STATUTORY DAYS 70 days at 26/10/2011 CONSIDERED PLAN 18/8/2011 REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED
1.0 KEY ISSUES
1.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to: Traffic considerations Neighbourhood character Amenity impact (internal and external) Any areas of non-compliance with ResCode
2.0 PROPOSAL
2.1 It is proposed to construct twenty-eight (28) dwellings within a three (3) storey building with a basement carpark on this site.
2.2 Development summary:
19 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Ground Floor Dwelling Floor Area Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms No. of Car (excluding proposed Parking Spaces garage / provided verandah) 1 66m² 59m² (including a minimum of 1 1 25m2 of secluded private open space) 2 98m² 58m² (including a minimum of 2 1 25m2 of secluded private open space) 3, 4, 9, and 89m² 23m² (including a minimum of 2 1 10 25m2 of secluded private open space) 5 101m² 80m² (including a minimum of 2 1 25m2 of secluded private open space) 6 66m² 37m² (including a minimum of 1 1 25m2 of secluded private open space) 7 66m² 66m² (including a minimum of 1 1 25m2of secluded private open space) 8 101m² 77m² (including a minimum of 2 1 25m2of secluded private open space) 11 98m² 44m² (including a minimum of 2 1 25m2of secluded private open space) 12 48m² 10m² (including a minimum of 1 1 8m2 of secluded private open space)
First Floor Dwelling Floor Area Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms No. of Car (excluding proposed Parking Spaces garage / provided verandah) 1 66m² 10m² (including a minimum of 1 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 2 98m² 10m² (including a minimum of 2 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 3, 4, 9, and 89m² 9m² (including a minimum of 2 1 10 8m2 of secluded private open space)
20 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Dwelling Floor Area Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms No. of Car (excluding proposed Parking Spaces garage / provided verandah) 5 100m² 14m² (including a minimum of 2 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 6 66m² 11m² (including a minimum of 1 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 7 66m² 11m² (including a minimum of 1 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 8 101m² 14m² (including a minimum of 2 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 11 98m² 10m² (including a minimum of 2 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 12 64m² 10m² (including a minimum of 1 1 8m2 of secluded private open space)
Second Floor Dwelling Floor Area Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms No. of Car (excluding proposed Parking Spaces garage / provided verandah) 1 139m² 36m² (including a minimum of 3 2 8m2 of secluded private open space) 2 110m² 21m² (including a minimum of 2 1 8m2 of secluded private open space) 3 149m² 33m² (including a minimum of 3 2 8m2 of secluded private open space) 4 110m² 21m² (including a minimum of 2 1 8m2 of secluded private open space)
2.3 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 60 percent and a permeability percentage of 23.
21 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.4 Development Assessment Table:
Criteria ResCode Requirement Proposed Development Provision Private Open An area of 40m2, with one part of the private open Ground Floor Space space to consist of secluded private open space at Dwellings 1-5, 7-12: complies the side or rear of the dwelling with a minimum area of 25m2, a minimum dimension of 3 metres and Dwelling 6: does not meet standard (refer to convenient access from a living room or a balcony the ResCode discussion section within this of 8 square metres with a minimum width of 1.6 report) metres and convenient access from a living room. First Floor Dwellings 1-12: complies
Second Floor Dwellings 1-4: complies Car Parking One (1) car parking space for one (1) or two (2) All Dwellings: complies bedroom dwelling and two (2) car parking spaces for each three (3) or more bedroom dwelling. Front Setback The average distance of the setbacks of the front Dwelling 1: does not meet standard (refer to walls of the existing buildings on the abutting the ResCode discussion section within this allotments facing the front street or 9 metres, report) whichever is the lesser. Dwelling 2: complies
Dwelling 11: complies
Dwelling 12: does not meet standard (refer to the ResCode discussion section within this report)
Site Coverage Maximum 60% - as per ResCode Site coverage is 60% and therefore complies (refer to the ResCode discussion section within this report)
2.5 The proposed building materials, colours and finishes are summarised in the table below:
Roof: Colorbond – Surfmist or similar Walls: Selected render – Surfmist or similar Garage doors Nil Windows: Aluminium powder coated to match walls Driveways: Concrete – colour to complement pavers Front fencing: Selected render Boundary fences: Existing timber paling
3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS
22 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.1 The subject site comprises a 1872m2 allotment on the eastern side of Nepean Highway, Moorabbin. The site is currently vacant and devoid of any improvements. The site does not contain any significant vegetation. The site is not encumbered by any easements. There appears to be no restrictions listed on the Certificate of Title.
3.2 Vehicle access to the site is currently via a single width crossover located on the southern side of the site’s street frontage.
3.3 The surrounding area typically comprises of detached, single storey, brick and weatherboard dwellings with pitched roofs. Multi-dwelling unit development and dual occupancies are emerging throughout the vicinity of the subject site. Dwellings are sited with varied side setbacks, creating a modulated rhythm to the streetscape. There is no predominant fencing style in the neighbourhood.
South: 1037 Nepean Highway, currently occupied by a single storey brick dwelling with associated outbuilding. Site is on the corner of Nepean Highway and Schofield Street and fronts Nepean Highway.
North: 1033 Nepean Highway, currently occupied by a single storey weatherboard dwelling with street frontage to Nepean Highway. A carport is located along the site’s shared boundary with the subject site. The site contains various outbuildings and some vegetation.
East: 1 Schofield Street, currently occupied by a single storey weatherboard dwelling with street frontage to Schofield Street. The dwelling is located to the front of the site with some vegetation in close proximity to the subject site’s eastern boundary.
West: The site adjoins Nepean Highway, a six-lane Road Zone Category 1 with median island and respective service roads in each direction.
4.0 TITLE DETAILS
4.1 The Permit Applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there is no restrictive covenant on the title.
5.0 PLANNING CONTROLS
5.1 The subject site is located within a Residential 1 Zone and is subject to no Overlays.
5.2 Nepean Highway is identified in a Road Zone Category 1.
6.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
6.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.01, a planning permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot. 6.2 Pursuant to Clause 52.29, a planning permit is required to construct or alter an access to a Road Zone Category 1.
23 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
7.0 RELEVANT HISTORY
7.1 Council records indicate that there is no relevant planning history relating to this site.
8.0 ADVERTISING
8.1 Prior to advertising, the Permit Applicant submitted revised plans on 25th October 2010 that essentially addressed the initial concerns outlined within the Planning Officer’s further information letter. It is these revised plans that formed part of the advertising documentation but have since been amended, following the advertising process, to address some of the concerns raised by objectors.
8.2 As discussed, the proposal was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Thirteen (13) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:
Loss of privacy Building height, bulk and mass Overshadowing Parking and traffic concerns Neighbourhood character / amenity
8.3 The following objections raised are not valid planning considerations: Impact upon solar panels Other civil matters
8.4 The amendments made to the plans following the advertising process include the following:
. Two indents to the basement level to allow for the planting of substantial canopy trees along the site’s northern boundary; . Basement ramp changes made to restrict overland flows from entering the basement; . Changes to the front façade including the reduction in overall height of the central section of the building, along with altered colours and finishes along the ground floor elevation; . Reduction in depth of balconies to Apartments 9 & 10 to improve amenity of private open space to other dwellings; and . Deletion of terrace areas to certain dwellings to reduce the amount of screening, thereby reducing the perceived bulk of the building from neighbouring properties.
8.5 The revised plans submitted after the advertising process constitute those that are now under consideration by Council and, therefore, supersede all earlier plans.
8.6 These amended plans were circulated to all parties who initially objected during the original notification period.
24 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
8.7 Two (2) subsequent objections were received during the ten (10) day period during which comment was sought for the amended plans. No news issues were raised by the objections. None of the original thirteen (13) initial objectors withdrew their objections as a result of the proposal being amended.
9.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
9.1 A preliminary conference was held on 29th March 2011 with the relevant Planning Officer, Ward Councillor(s), the Permit Applicant and nine (9) objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.
9.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand.
10.0 REFERRALS
10.1 The following internal and/or external referral departments were notified:
Council’s Development Engineer Council’s Vegetation Management Officer VicRoads
10.2 The above-mentioned referral authorities had no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being included on any permit issued.
11.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
11.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)
Clause 11 (Settlement) Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) Clause 16 (Housing)
11.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)
Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy)
11.3 Particular Provisions
Clause 52.29 (Land adjacent to a Road Zone) Clause 55 (Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings) – Refer to Appendix A for the Planning Officer’s full assessment against this Clause.
11.4 General Provisions
Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)
25 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
11.5 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document under Clause 21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF)
The land is located within Area 1 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines. The proposal is generally in accordance with the applicable character profile. Any areas of non-compliance are as follows:
The side setbacks proposed to both the north and south of the residential buildings to their relevant side boundaries are 2 metres. The relevant character guidelines suggests between 3-5 metres side setback on one side boundary.
11.7 Design Contextual Housing Guidelines (April 2003 – reference document within Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy)
The Design Contextual Housing Guidelines offer a range of design techniques and suggestions to assist with residential design, which is responsive to local character.
It is considered that the proposed development does not raise any issues of non- compliance with these guidelines.
12.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
12.1 State Planning Policy Framework
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.
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. 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.
12.2 Local Planning Policy Framework
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.
The subject land is identified within an Increased Housing Diversity area.
26 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The intention in these areas is for new medium density housing to comprise of a variety of housing types and layouts that respond to the established, yet evolving, urban character. As these residential areas are already established, the design of any new medium density housing proposal should display sensitivity to the existing residential context and respond to the amenity standards in these areas.
The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include:
Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. Objective 3: To preserve and enhance well landscaped/vegetated environments and protect identified significant vegetation. Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development. Objective 5: To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses. Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.
Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:
Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity notes. Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character. Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood. Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants. Encourage the retention of existing vegetation wherever possible. Improve landscape character by accommodating appropriate landscaping within new residential developments. Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, wast and recycling, and stormwater management.
27 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Promote medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations. Ensure the siting and design of new residential development sensitively responds to interfaces with environmentally sensitive areas, including the foreshore. Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts. Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required, where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure. Require the provision of car parking to satisfy the anticipated demand having regard to average car ownership levels in the area, the environmental capacity of the local street network and the proximity of public transport and nearby on and off street car parking. Ensure that all new medium density housing provides adequate private open space that is appropriately landscaped.
It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates an adequate standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, as well as maintaining an appropriate level of amenity for occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area. It is considered that whilst the development will have an appreciable impact on the existing streetscape character, the proposed development is consistent with the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines and appropriate given the future development direction of the locality whilst remaining consistent within broader local neighbourhood character. Further discussion regarding these items will be outlined later within this report.
12.3 Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy
As outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable Local Planning Policy Framework, which essentially aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations.
Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to:
. Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered.
Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:
28 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours. . Encourage well articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk. . Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows. . Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties. . Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.
Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape.
Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems. Performance measures On-site infiltration should be maximised by: . Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving. . Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system. . Designing to limit the impervious area. . Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.
Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy essentially extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) along with the State Planning Policy Framework provisions found at Clause 11 – Settlement and Clause 16 – Housing, effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.
In summary, the proposal is seen to be strongly consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it delivers on some very specific objectives for the type and form of medium density development expected in areas such as this before the Council. The site’s close proximity to the Moorabbin Activity Centre make it a suitable location for this density of development, with community and transport services easily accessible and available to future residents.
12.4 Zoning Provisions
29 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the purpose of the zone. The use of land for a dwelling in land classified as Residential 1 Zone does not require a permit. The proposal is consistent with a state purpose of the zone, name to provide for residential development at a range of densities with a variety of dwellings to meet the housing needs of all households.
12.5 Overlay Provisions
No overlays apply to the subject site.
13.0 CLAUSE 55 (RESCODE ASSESSMENT)
13.1 The proposal has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to attachment A). It is considered that the development largely satisfies the requirements of ResCode and is a well- designed development. There appear to be the following areas of minor non- compliance, which are discussed below:
Clause 55.02 – Neighbourhood Character & Infrastructure
Standard B1 – Neighbourhood Character 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. Neighbourhood Character Guidelines for this locality recommend all dwellings be set back between 1-3 metres from the side property boundary on one side of the dwelling and between 3-5 metres from the side boundary on the opposite side of the dwelling. The proposal currently seeks to set the residential building back 2 metres from each side boundary. Whilst this is a departure from the guidelines, the variation is considered acceptable as it will not negatively impact upon the character of the area as a result of the variation granted. Clause 55.03 - Site Layout and Building Massing
Standard B6 – Street Setback
In accordance with requirements under this standard, Dwellings 1, 2, 11 & 12, fronting Nepean Highway, should have a minimum setback of 9 metres, based on the relevant Standard being less than the average of the adjoining properties front setbacks. The proposed front setback of 8.5m is less than the required 9m, however, the proposed setback is considered to be appropriate for the following reasons: . It is considered that front setback proposed is consistent with the broader streetscape rhythm and will not cause detriment to the neighbourhood character; . There is no prevailing setback rhythm;
30 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. The setbacks have been designed to be staggered to minimise any perception of building bulk; and . The front setback is large enough to accommodate substantial landscaping including the provision of canopy trees/
Standard B7 – Building Height
The building height objective of Clause 55.03-2 is ‘to ensure that the height of buildings respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character’. Standard B7 of this Clause states that the maximum building height should not exceed the maximum building height should not exceed 9 metres, unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the maximum building height should not exceed 10 metres.
The proposal in its current form seeks to build to a maximum overall building height of 12 metres. It should be noted that only a small portion of the varied roof form reaches this maximum of 12 metres above natural ground level, with the 12 metres being reached due to the slope of the land to the front of the subject site. The land has an incline through the site which results in the residential building reducing its overall height above ground level as it progresses towards its rear.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the maximum height of 12 metres is numerically a significant increase than the 9 metres recommended in this Standard, it is considered that the detailed design of the front façade, where the dwelling reaches its overall maximum height, is well articulated and does not detrimentally impact upon the existing streetscape. The height of the residential building transitions from the neighbouring dwellings to its north and south, appropriately graduating to its overall maximum height, breaking up any perceived visual bulk from the overall height of the building. The visual impact of the building when viewed from the street and adjoining properties is considered to be acceptable with potential amenity impacts on occupants of surrounding properties being minimised wherever possible.
Standard B13 – Landscaping
Landscape plans were referred to Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who recommended that amended plans be requested via Condition 1 of any approval.
Standard B14 – Access
Initial concerns regarding the access to the basement car parking areas as communicated from VicRoads and Council’s internal departments have been addressed in correspondence from the permit applicant dated 19 August, 2011. This correspondence included appropriate details of the proposed access ramp to the basement car park from a suitably qualified traffic engineer with Council satisfied that both VicRoads and internal departmental concerns have now been addressed.
Clause 55.05 – On-site Amenity & Facilities
31 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Standard B29 – Solar Access to Open Space
Dwellings 9 & 10 on both the ground floor and first floor proposed layout have difficulty in achieving technical compliance with this Standard, given the orientation of the subject site and the overall building height. Nonetheless, a reduction in the overall building height would be unlikely to result in technical compliance with this Standard without a significant redesign. In its current form, the proposal meets the objective the Standard with all dwellings receiving some northern aspect and all areas of private open space offering a satisfactory level of amenity to occupants.
14.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS
14.1 Building Height, Visual Bulk and Mass and Impact on Neighbourhood Character
The majority of objections received in relation to the application expressed concern with regards to the overall height of the development, and that the proposal was inconsistent with the predominantly single storey dwellings in close surrounds. Whilst such concerns are understandable, the subject site is an ideal location for a medium density development of this type, with close proximity to the Moorabbin Activity Centre and the services and infrastructure that the activity centre provides.
The overall design of the residential building is to a high level, with facades thoughtfully designed to minimise the impacts of the large structure to a reasonable level in the surrounding residential context.
The site is located within an area earmarked for increased housing diversity and accordingly, a development of this type and scale is not inconsistent with what was envisioned for vacant sites that are characterised in this way. Whilst the submitters may have concerns with the medium to high density of the development that is proposed, the number of dwellings and the detailed design of the proposed residential building are considered acceptable given the relevant planning policies covering the site.
14.2 Impact on Amenity of Surrounding Properties
The owners of 1037 Nepean Hwy expressed major concern with regards to the shadow impact the development will have upon their property and their open space to the rear of their dwelling in particular. Whilst the proposed development will have a measurable impact upon the solar access of their rear private open space, 1037 Nepean Highway will still receive sufficient solar access to ensure the applicable ResCode standard has been met.
Concerns regarding potential overlooking of surrounding properties from the proposed balconies of the residential development were a common theme throughout objections received. In response to the Preliminary Conference held, the permit applicable agreed to adequately screen all windows and balconies that had the potential to overlook
32 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
surrounding properties, with the amended design of the building ensuring that the relevant ResCode standard with regard to overlooking has now been met.
Many objectors expressed concern at the perceived level of visual bulk when viewed from surrounding properties were the development to be approved and constructed. The permit applicant has designed the building in a manner that uses a variety of materials, varies setbacks to the property boundaries and through recessing of upper floors to ensure that visual bulk is minimised. The largest mass of the building is presented to the front of the site to Nepean Highway, which, given its use as a road, is the least sensitive interface of the four. When combined with the landscaping proposed for the development, the level of visual bulk is considered acceptable.
14.3 Noise
Submitted concerns include a high level of noise as a result of twenty–eight (28) dwellings being in close proximity to an area where single dwellings are prominent. The level of noise generated by such a development, once constructed, is not likely to be unreasonable for a residential neighbourhood.
14.4 Traffic
Another common theme amongst the submissions was concern with regard to the amount of traffic the development would generate and associated car parking difficulties as a result of additional vehicles using the surrounding roads. As was referred to earlier in the report, the proposal satisfies the car parking requirements with sufficient off street parking provided for all dwellings with an appropriate quantity of visitor parking provided. The number of trips generated by the additional vehicles is considered acceptable for the surrounding roads.
15.0 CONCLUSION:
15.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.
15.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by:
The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area; The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and, The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy (inclusive of the Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines and the Designing Contextual Housing Guidelines), Residential 1 zoning and the Schedule to the zone, Clause 52.29 – Land Adjacent to a Road Zone, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and
33 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Residential Buildings, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).
15.3 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered reasonable and warrants support.
16.0 RECOMMENDATION:
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit for the development of this site for twenty-eight (28) dwellings and the creation of an access to a road in a Road Zone Category 1 be issued, subject following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on17 August 2011, 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: ii) 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; iii) 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; 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 three (3) suitable medium sized (at maturity) canopy trees within the front setback of the property and one (3) suitable medium (at maturity) trees within the secluded rear open space area. Species chosen must 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; 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.
34 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
b. the basement ramp longitudinal section with grades and apex above the existing invert of the kerb and channel along Nepean Hwy side of the development;
2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. 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. 4. 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. 5. Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted, a Site Management Plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The Site Management Plan must clearly set out measures to prevent amenity loss to surrounding properties during the construction period. The Plan is to include, but limited to, measures to control the emission of dust/sand, rubbish on site, loading/unloading times, construction times, and parking of builder’s vehicles etc. This plan when endorsed must not be varied without the prior approval of the Responsible Authority. It must also be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
6. The levels at site boundaries must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.
7. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater treatment works which must incorporate water sensitive urban design principles (including re-use) to improve discharge quality and a detention system for 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 treatment options.
8. Before the development commences, a drainage plan showing the method of treatment and discharge to the nominated point must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed drainage works, including all existing and proposed features that may have impact on the drainage (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.).
9. Stormwater drainage of the site must be provided so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties.
35 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
10. 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. 11. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 12. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
The development and/or use are not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue.
The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue. In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.
Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit. Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit. Note: Before removing / pruning any vegetation from the site, the applicant or any contractor engaged to remove any vegetation, should consult Council’s Vegetation Management Officer to verify if a Local Laws Permits is required for the removal of such vegetation. OR
In the event that Council wishes to oppose the application, it can do so using the following grounds:
1. The proposal would prevent the orderly and proper planning of the zone.
2. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the amenity of area.
3. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site.
4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape.
5. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.03-2 (Building Height) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed 12m overall height of the residential building does not respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.
36 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.03-1 (Street Setback) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed 18.5m front setback of the residential building does not respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.
7. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.02-1 (Neighbourhood Character) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed side setbacks of the residential building do not respect the rhythm of residential development with the locality or the preferred residential character of the neighbourhood.
8. The proposal represents an inappropriate level of bulk and massing that is inconsistent with the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.
Barry Revill addressed the meeting on behalf of the objectors. Claire Betteridge (SJB Planning) addressed the meeting on behalf of the applicant.
Crs Peulich/Staikos
That Council issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit for the development of this site for twenty eight (28) dwellings and the creation of an access to a road in a road Zone Category 1 on the following grounds.
1. The proposal would prevent the orderly and proper planning of the zone. 2. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the amenity of area. 3. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site. 4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape. 5. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.03-2 (Building Height) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed 12m overall height of the residential building does not respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. 6. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.03-1 (Street Setback) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed 18.5m front setback of the residential building does not respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. 7. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.02-1 (Neighbourhood Character) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed side setbacks of the residential building do not respect the rhythm of residential development with the locality or the preferred residential character of the neighbourhood. 8. The proposal represents an inappropriate level of bulk and massing that is inconsistent with the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.
Carried
37 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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 1 Zone) Complies Requirement and Title and Objective with Proposed Standard? B1 Neighbourhood Character No See report. Design respects existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character. Development responds to features of the site and surrounding area. B2 Residential Policy Yes See report. 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. B3 Dwelling Diversity Yes The residential Encourages a range of dwelling sizes and development proposes to types in developments of ten or more construct twenty-right (28) dwellings. dwellings comprising one, two and three bedroom apartments. A range of dwelling sizes is provided throughout the three levels of the proposed residential development. All ground floor dwellings contain kitchen facilities.
B4 Infrastructure Yes / Can Can be ensured through a Provides appropriate utility services and comply permit condition. infrastructure without overloading the capacity. B5 Integration with the Street Yes The proposed development Integrate the layout of development with the is oriented toward its street street frontage on Nepean Highway with appropriate pedestrian and vehicle links provided. B6 Street Setback No See report. The setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient
38 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Requirement and Title and Objective with Proposed Standard? use of the site. B7 Building Height No Maximum: 9 metres Building height should respect the existing or Proposed: 12 metres preferred neighbourhood character. See report. B8 Site Coverage Yes Maximum: 60% Site coverage should respect the existing or Proposed: 60% preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site. B9 Permeability Yes At least: 20% Reduce the impact of stormwater run-off on Proposed: 23% the drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration. B10 Energy Efficiency Yes Given the orientation of the Achieve and protect energy efficient subject site, all living areas dwellings and residential buildings. and areas of private open Ensure orientation and layout reduces fossil space are located to the fuel energy use and makes appropriate use of north side of the daylight and solar energy. development where practicable. B11 Open Space N/A No public open space is Integrate layout of development with any proposed public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development. B12 Safety Yes All entrances and access Layout to provide safety and security for ways are clearly identifiable residents and property. and provide safe access for residents and vehicles. B13 Landscaping Yes A condition will be placed To provide appropriate landscaping. on any permit issued To encourage: stipulating specific Development that respects the landscape landscaping treatments and character of the neighbourhood. requirements.
Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.
The retention of mature vegetation on the site. B14 Access Yes Vehicular access to the Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient proposed basement level vehicle access to and from the development. meets the relevant standard Ensure the number and design of vehicle with appropriate pedestrian crossovers respects neighbourhood character. access provided to the communal dwelling
39 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Requirement and Title and Objective with Proposed Standard? entrance. B15 Parking Location Yes Resident parking to be Provide resident and visitor vehicles with provided within the convenient parking. proposed basement level Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the with direct access proposed development and the neighbourhood. from the Nepean Highway Protect residents from vehicular noise within service road. developments. B16 Parking Provision Yes Required: 35 Ensure car and bicycle parking meets the Proposed: 35 needs of residents and visitors. Accessways should be practical, attractive and easily maintainable. B17 Side and Rear Setbacks Yes All proposed side and rear Ensure the height and setback respects the setbacks are in accordance existing or preferred neighbourhood character with the requirements of and limits the amenity impacts on existing this standard. dwellings. B18 Walls on Boundaries Yes No walls on boundaries Ensure the location, length and height of a proposed. wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings. B19 Daylight to Existing Windows Yes Sufficient light is provided Allow adequate daylight into existing to existing habitable room habitable room windows. windows of adjoining allotments, comfortably meeting this Standard. B20 North Facing Windows Yes No existing north-facing Allow adequate solar access to existing north- habitable room windows on facing habitable room windows. adjoining allotments are within 3 metres of the neighbouring property boundary. B21 Overshadowing Open Space Yes Overshadowing of existing Ensure buildings do not significantly open space to surrounding overshadow existing secluded private open properties is considered space. acceptable and consistent with this Standard.
40 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Requirement and Title and Objective with Proposed Standard? B22 Overlooking Yes All upper floor windows Limit views into existing secluded private and balconies have been open space and habitable room windows. treated with appropriate measure to ensure compliance with this Standard. B23 Internal Views Yes Internal views within the Limit views into existing secluded private proposed development have open space and habitable room windows of been minimised and can be dwellings and residential buildings within the address through appropriate same development. screening provided to the required upper level balconies. B24 Noise Impacts N/A Protect residents from external noise and contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings. B25 Accessibility Yes Communal entry is Consider people with limited mobility in the provided with an access design of developments. ramp to ensure access for people with limited mobility. B26 Dwelling Entry Yes A clear and defined Provide a sense of identity to each communal entry to the dwelling/residential building. residential building is provided with each dwelling within the building having its own sense of identity and access point. B27 Daylight to New Windows Yes All proposed windows are Allow adequate daylight into new habitable considered satisfactory room windows. B28 Private Open Space Yes See report. Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate private open space. B29 Solar Access to Open Space No See report. Allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings/buildings. B30 Storage Yes 6m3 Provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling.
41 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Requirement and Title and Objective with Proposed Standard? B31 Design Detail Yes See report. Encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. B32 Front Fences N/A Maximum: 2m Encourage front fence design that respects the Proposed: 1.7m existing or preferred neighbourhood character. B33 Common Property Yes Common property has been Ensure car parking, access areas and other limited to access ways for communal open space is practical, attractive pedestrians and vehicles, and easily maintained. avoiding future Avoid future management difficulties in management and ownership common ownership areas. difficulties. B34 Site Services Yes All required services and Ensure site services and facilities can be facilities can be provided to installed and easily maintained and are each dwelling. accessible, adequate and attractive. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.
42 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 190 KP243/11 – 90 Nepean Hwy, Mentone
APPLICANT Pace Development Group Pty Ltd ADDRESS OF LAND No. 90 Nepean Highway, Mentone VIC 3194 (Land in Plan of Consolidation No. 3550633H, Lot 1 on TP252995 and Lot 1 on TP164319K) PROPOSAL Use and develop the land for the construction of sixty four (64) dwellings and a shop, with a reduction of the car parking requirement of Clause 52.06 and waiver of the loading requirements of Clause 52.07 of the Kingston Planning Scheme PLANNING OFFICER Tanya Sokolowski REFERENCE NO. KP243/2011 RELEVANT STATE Clause 11: Settlement PLANNING POLICY Clause 13: Environmental Risk FRAMEWORK Clause 15: Built Environment and Heritage Clause 16: Housing Clause 17: Economic Development Clause 18: Transport Clause 19: Infrastructure RELEVANT LOCAL Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium PLANNING POLICY Clause 21.04: Vision FRAMEWORK Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use Clause 21.06: Retail & Commercial Land Use Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy ZONE Clause 32.01 – Residential 1 Zone Clause 34.01 – Business 1 Zone OVERLAYS Clause 44.05 – Special Building Overlay PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 52.06 – Car Parking Clause 52.07 – Loading & Unloading of Vehicles Clause 52.34 – Bicycle Facilities Clause 52.35 – Urban Context Report & Design Response for Residential Development of Four Storeys or More Clause 52.36 – Integrated Public Transport Planning GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines RESIDENTIAL POLICY Increased Housing Diversity AREA DECISION DATE BY 14 September 2011 STATUTORY DAYS 100 days at 24 October 2011 CONSIDERED PLAN 21 June 2011 REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED
1.0 KEY ISSUES
43 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
1.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to:
Neighbourhood character Overdevelopment Car parking and traffic Overshadowing Overlooking Building height Visual bulk
2.0 PROPOSAL
2.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing commercial tenancy on the land fronting Nepean Highway and remove the existing private car park to the rear accessed via Collins Street to allow for the construction of a five (5) storey development within two (2) separate buildings dissected by an existing right of way. One building would be located towards the eastern section of the site (currently occupied by a TAB betting agency) and the other building to the western section of the site (currently developed and used for a private car park associated with the TAB outlet).
2.2 It is noted that the application form and written documentation has incorrectly referenced sixty-five (65) dwellings, plans reflect sixty-four (64) dwellings.
2.3 The proposed development would comprise:
Sixty-four (64) dwellings, to be constructed over five (5) storeys, comprising twelve (12) one bedroom apartments, fifty-one (51) two bedroom apartments and one (1) three bedroom apartment; An 83 square metre shop at the ground floor level accessed from Nepean Highway; An upper basement with twenty-eight (28) car spaces, storage areas, ten (10) visitor bicycle spaces and additional wall mounts for resident bicycle storage, a plant room, one lift and one stairwell. The basement car parking is accessed via a ramp from Collins Street; A lower basement with forty (40) car spaces, storage areas, one lift and one stairwell; Each dwelling would be provided with a 7 cubic metre storage area within the proposed basement car parking area, allowing for bicycle storage; A ground level car space for Dwelling 9 on the ground floor, accessed from the right of way; Bin chutes are provided at each floor for general waste and recycling, with two (2) ground floor refuse collection points – one to each building.
2.4 A total of 69 car spaces are proposed, over three levels – lower and upper basement and one car space at ground level.
44 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.5 The proposed development has a maximum building height of 15.72 metres above natural ground level. The proposal has an overall site coverage (at ground floor) of 55 percent and a permeability percentage of 3.7%.
2.6 It is proposed to widen sections of the existing right of way, by allocating land from the subject site. This would increase the width of the right of way from 3 metres to between 4.8 metres and 5.5 metres.
2.7 Two (2) business identification signs would be provided to the retail premises, each with an area of 0.8 square metres, one of which would be internally illuminated. One is proposed to the new canopy face, and an illuminated signage box to the underside of the canopy. The total area of signs and the illuminated sign do not require a planning permit.
2.8 The development on the eastern portion of the site is proposed to be setback the following minimum dimensions from the site’s property boundaries:
North (front) North-East (front) West (side) South-west South-East Boundary to Collins Boundary to Boundary (rear) Boundary (rear) Street Nepean Hwy to right of way Boundary Ground Level: 3 metres 0 metres 2 metres 1.4 metres 0 metres First Floor 3 metres (balconies 0 metres 2.12 metres 1.4 metres 0 metres Level: encroaching to 1.5 (balconies metres) encroaching to 0 metres)
Second Floor 3.3 metres (balconies 0 metres 2.12 metres 1.4 metres 0 metres Level: encroaching to 1.5 (balconies metres) encroaching to 0 metres) Third & 3 metres (balconies 0 metres 2.12 metres 1.4 metres 0 metres Fourth Floor encroaching to 1.5 (balconies Levels: metres) encroaching to 0 metres)
2.9 The development on the western portion of the site is proposed to be setback the following minimum dimensions from the site’s property boundaries:
North (front) East and north- West (side) South (rear) Boundary to Collins east (side) Boundary Boundary Street Boundary to right of way
45 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Ground Level: 5.2 metres 2 metres 3 metres 3.68 metres First Floor 3.15 metres 0 metres to 3 4.67 metres 3.6 metres Level: structural pillars, (balconies (balconies increasing to 1 encroaching to 3 encroaching to metre to the wall metres) 1.94 metres) adjacent to those pillars
Second Floor 3.2 metres 0 metres 4.67 metres 3.6 metres Level: (balconies (balconies encroaching to 3 encroaching to metres) 1.89 metres) Third & 24.2 metres 2 metres 4.67 metres 3.8 metres Fourth Floor (balconies Levels: encroaching to 1.89 metres)
2.10 The proposed building materials, colours and finishes are summarised in the table below:
Roof: Colorbond cladding “surf mist” Wall Materials: Combination: painted precast concrete panels, block work, alucobond cladding in bronze and champagne colours, metal cladding and hardies cladding. Various colours and finishes proposed. Garage doors N/A Windows: Aluminium powder-coated or natural anodised Driveways: Basement ramp and access areas – not specified Front fencing: 1.5 metre high front fence along sections of the site’s Collins Street frontage within 3.0 metres of the street. Boundary fences: Not specified.
2.11 The proposed building is of a contemporary style, with a flat roof, and incorporates both horizontal and vertical design details. A mixture of materials and finishes is proposed, utilising concrete panels and various types of cladding. Colours chosen within the design are generally light, with some contrasting feature design elements to the front façade.
3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS
3.1 The subject site is located on the south-west corner of Nepean Highway and Collins Street, Mentone. The land is irregular in shape and features a total site area of 2167 square metres.
3.2 The topography of the subject land is relatively flat and devoid of significant vegetation. A right-of-way (carriageway easement) dissects the site in a north/south direction extending from Collins Street to Balcombe Road.
46 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.3 The subject land is currently occupied by a single storey TAB betting agency which is located at the north-east corner of the site with a direct interface with Nepean Highway. The balance of the property is developed for a privately owned car park for the use of customers of the TAB betting agency, with approximately fifty (50) car spaces. The site currently has extensive hard surface coverage. A relatively narrow landscape strip extending along the western side boundary of the car park and to the north (front) of the TAB building appear to be the only areas of impervious surface.
3.4 Vehicle access to the site is currently via a double width crossover located on the north side of the site’s Collins Street frontage. A rain garden within the nature strip to the front of the site on Collins Street, is sited to the east of the crossover and right of way entry. Two (2) electricity poles are also located to the front of the site on Collins Street.
3.5 On-street car parking is available within the service road of Nepean Highway which currently services the existing commercial properties along this commercial strip on Nepean Highway. Four (4) car parking spaces are located opposite the subject site on the north side of Collins Street. A one lane traffic control point just west of the site has unrestricted parking on both sides of the street and unrestricted car parking continues along the north side of the Street further along to the west of the site. Beyond the traffic calming one-lane section of the road, No Standing parking restrictions apply to the south side of Collins Street between 10am and 6pm.
3.6 Abutting the site to the west is a single storey dual occupancy development, with dwellings in a tandem arrangement and private open spaces located to the rear of each dwelling. A driveway extends along the shared boundary with the subject site.
3.7 Abutting the site to the south-east is a single storey commercial premises, with the buildings on the land covering most of the site. Abutting the site to the south is a right of way, beyond that are commercial properties which are predominantly single storey, most of which have service yards and parking areas accessible from the right of way.
3.8 The surrounding area is comprised of commercial tenancies to the east, south-east and south of the subject site and established residential development to the north (opposite side of Collins Street), and west (side). Dwellings within Collins Street are predominantly single storey, with some double storeys present, and multi-dwelling developments can be found at No’s 122, 130 and 134 which each comprise three (3) dwellings. In the broader area, a medium density mixed use development is currently under construction at No. 76-78 Balcombe Road, approximately 290 metres west of the subject site. At No. 33-35 Childers Street, a four storey building containing forty one (41) apartments was approved in 2010. This site is also located outside the Mentone Activity Centre and is approximately 155 metres south-east of the subject site.
3.9 The subject site is located outside of the Mentone Activity Centre, however, it is located approximately 330 metres east of the Mentone Railway Station and
47 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
approximately 400 metres east of the Mentone shopping, school and civic precinct, located within the Mentone Major Activity Centre
3.10 An aerial photograph of the subject site and surrounds is provided below:
Subject Site Melway Ref: 87 A6, B6, A5 & B5
Source: IntraMaps
4.0 TITLE DETAILS
4.1 The permit applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there are no restrictive covenants or Section 173 Agreement on the title.
5.0 PLANNING CONTROLS
5.1 The portion of the site located to the west side of the right of way is located within a Residential 1 Zone (R1Z), and the portion to the east of the right of way is located within a Business 1 Zone. The entirety of the site is subject to a Special Building Overlay (SBO).
48 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.2 Nepean Highway is located within a Road Zone Category 1.
6.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
6.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.01-04 (Residential 1 Zone) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a planning permit is required to construct two (2) or more dwellings on a lot.
6.2 Pursuant to Clause 34.01-04 (Business 1 Zone) of the Scheme, a planning permit is required to construct a building or construct and carry out works. A permit is also required to use the land for a dwelling where a ground level frontage exceeds 2 metres.
6.3 Pursuant to Clause 44.05 (Special Building Overlay), a planning permit is required to construct a building or construct and carry out works.
6.4 Pursuant to Clause 52.06 (Car Parking), a planning permit is required for a reduction in the required number of car parking spaces for the dwellings.
6.5 Pursuant to Clause 52.07 (Loading and Unloading of Vehicles), a planning permit is required for a waiver of loading requirements.
7.0 RELEVANT HISTORY
7.1 A search of Council records reveals that a number of planning permits have been issued to the site.
KP97/233 was issued on 5 June 1997 to construct buildings and works (extensions to the existing building) and to erect advertising signs. KP00/927 was issued on 3 July 2001 for buildings and works for the purpose of constructing a canopy, with reduced car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Planning Scheme. KS28/04 was issued a statement of compliance on 14 April 2004.
8.0 ADVERTISING
8.1 Prior to advertising, the permit applicant submitted revised plans on 21 June 2011 that addressed some of the minor concerns outlined within Council’s further information letter. It is these revised plans that formed part of the advertising documentation and are now those that are under consideration by Council.
8.2 As discussed, the proposal was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining two (2) notices on site for fourteen (14) days. Twenty three (23) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:
49 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Neighbourhood character Overdevelopment Car parking and traffic Overshadowing Overlooking Building height Visual bulk
9.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
9.1 A preliminary conference was held at Council’s Cheltenham Office on 25 August 2011, with the planning officer, ward councillor, the permit applicant and objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length, however no resolution was reached.
10.0 REFERRALS
10.1 The following internal and external referral departments were notified:
Department of Transport (DOT) advised of no objection to the proposal and did not provide any conditions to be included on any permit issued. Melbourne Water advised of consent to the issue of a permit, with the inclusion of conditions regarding minimum levels to be provided in the development to prevent any flooding. Council’s Development Engineer advised of no objection subject to the inclusion of conditions including a comprehensive drainage strategy with incorporation of water sensitive urban design principles and conditions relating to works on the existing Right of Way. Council’s Roads & Drains Department advised of no objection subject to conditions to be provided regarding any reinstatements of crossovers or footpaths to be to Council’s satisfaction and no alteration of property boundary or footpath levels. Council’s Strategic Planning Department (Urban Designer) advised of no objection subject to further consideration of design elements, including the presentation of the corner element to Nepean Highway and possible reduction in height of the western building. Council’s Traffic Engineering Department who advised of no objection subject to conditions relating to the basement layout. Council’s Sustainable Development Officer who advised of no objection but provided advice on how to achieve better energy efficiency within the proposed development. Council’s Waste Management Co-ordinator who provide comments regarding the submitted Waste Management Plan and advised that Council would not object to private collection from the site. Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who advised of no objection to the proposal, subject to the inclusion of conditions requiring a Landscape Plan.
50 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
10.2 VicRoads were not a referral authority, however were notified pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to enable them to provide comments if they wished to do so. Comments have not been received at the time of this reports preparation.
11.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
11.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)
Clause 11: Settlement Clause 13: Environmental Risks Clause 15: Built Environment and Heritage Clause 16: Housing Clause 17: Economic Development Clause 18: Transport Clause 19: Infrastructure
11.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)
Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use Clause 21.06: Retail and Commercial Land Use Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy
11.3 Zoning
Clause 34.01: Business 1 Zone Clause 32.01: Residential 1 Zone
11.4 Overlay
Clause 44.05: Special Building Overlay
11.5 Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06: Car Parking Clause 52.07: Loading & Unloading of Vehicles Clause 52.34: Bicycle Parking Clause 52.35: Urban Design Context Report and Design Response For Residential Development Of Four Or More Storeys Clause 52.36: Integrated Public Transport Planning
Note: While providing a useful guide to assessing the pertinent residential issues for the application, the provisions of Clause 55 (ResCode) do not apply, as the application is for a development of four (4) or more storeys. Accordingly, the
51 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
development must be assessed against the objectives and strategies of Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage).
11.6 General Provisions
Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)
11.7 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document within Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use)
The subject site is located within area No. 18 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines in which no major or critical characteristics are identified. These guidelines only apply to the portion of the site which is zoned residential and is currently developed for a private carpark. The existing conditions are therefore a departure from the residential character of area No. 18. The proposed development will entail some characteristics that reflect the broader residential character of the area, including a modulated building footprint and a wider setback to one side boundary (generally where driveways are located).
11.7 Design Contextual Housing Guidelines (April 2003 – reference document within Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy)
The Design Contextual Housing Guidelines offer a range of design techniques and suggestions to assist with residential design, which is responsive to local character.
The Guidelines tend to focus on the design of multi-unit developments, and are not very informative in the consideration of larger scale apartment buildings of this nature. For this reason, an assessment against the suggestions contained within the Guidelines has not been provided for this proposal.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
11.8 State Planning Policy Framework
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.
Clause 11 (Settlement) seeks to ensure that a sufficient supply of land is available for housing, employment, recreation and open space, commercial and community facilities and infrastructure.
Clause 13 (Environmental Risks) aims to ensure that planning adopts a best practice environmental management and risk management approach which aims to avoid or
52 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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. Specifically Clause 13.02-1 – Floodplain Management requires consideration of any use or development’s potential impact on flooding, and to avoid intensifying flooding in areas that are identified as being within a floodplain.
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.
Clause 16 (Housing) encourages the provision of housing diversity (including affordable housing), that has access to services and be planned for long term sustainability. It also seeks to ensure the efficient provision of supporting infrastructure.
Clause 17 (Economic Development) is geared towards providing a strong and innovative economy. Clause 17.01-1 (Business) encourages development which meets the community’s needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides a net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities.
Clause 18 (Transport) encourages the development of an integrated and sustainable transport system that provides access to social and economic opportunities, facilitates economic prosperity, contributes to environmental sustainability, coordinates reliable movements of people and goods, and is safe.
Clause 19 (Infrastructure) aims to ensure that the development of social and physical infrastructure is provided in a way that is efficient, equitable, accessible and timely.
It is submitted that the proposed development generally 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 (for the majority of the site which is located within a Residential 1 Zone). The development itself achieves an acceptable design outcome for the site and its immediate abuttals (subject to conditions), whilst enjoying convenient and direct access to community facilities and the like, including public transport nodes. It is further acknowledged that the proposed scale of development is appropriate within the context of the site.
11.9 Local Planning Policy Framework
The Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) contains Council’s strategic direction, the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS), which is an extension of the direction established by the SPPF, and the local policies that implement the LPPF.
53 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Within Clause 21 (MSS) of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the following six (6) attributes are submitted as being the most relevant to the consideration of the proposal:
. Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium . Clause 21.04: Vision . Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use . Clause 21.06: Retail and Commercial Land Use . Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy
After reviewing the relevant strategic directions that emerge from the abovementioned Clauses, the following can be summarised:
. Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for The New Millennium identifies the need for the Municipality to provide suitable housing stock that meets future housing demands and to sustain an appropriate mix of supporting urban infrastructure. It is further stated that recent pressures for new development, consolidation and medium density housing has resulted in change to the amenity and character of local areas. It is acknowledged that careful management will be required in order to integrate urban consolidation objectives with an understanding of specific character issues applicable to certain neighbourhoods.
. Clause 21.04-3: Strategic framework plan (Clause 21.04 Vision), provides for the strategic direction for future land use planning and development within the City of Kingston. This Policy includes a Strategic Land Use Framework Plan, which identifies the location of where specific land use outcomes are anticipated, supported and promoted.
. The major strategic directions identified on the overall Framework Plan include:
o Locations for promotion of medium and higher density housing opportunities i.e. areas designated for increased density housing opportunities and activity centres.
. 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.
. Pertinent to the consideration of this application, the policy goes on to state that “The vision for Kingston’s residential areas outlined in the Kingston Residential Strategy - September 2000 is: to promote and facilitate both increased local housing diversity to meet the changing housing needs of the community and increased liveability within an integrated planning framework. The MSS seeks to promote medium density housing in locations better suited to accommodating housing change and to moderate the rate and type of housing change in other locations”.
54 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The subject land is identified within an Increased Housing Diversity area.
The intention in these areas is for new medium density housing to comprise of a variety of housing types and layouts that respond to the established, yet evolving, urban character. As these residential areas are already established, the design of any new medium density housing proposal should display sensitivity to the existing residential context and respond to the amenity standards in these areas.
The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include:
Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. Objective 3: To preserve and enhance well landscaped/vegetated environments and protect identified significant vegetation. Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development. Objective 5: To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses. Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.
Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:
Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity notes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character. Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood. Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants. Encourage the retention of existing vegetation wherever possible. Improve landscape character by accommodating appropriate landscaping within new residential developments.
55 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, waste and recycling, and stormwater management. Promote medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations. Ensure the siting and design of new residential development sensitively responds to interfaces with environmentally sensitive areas, including the foreshore. Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts. Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required, where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure. Require the provision of car parking to satisfy the anticipated demand having regard to average car ownership levels in the area, the environmental capacity of the local street network and the proximity of public transport and nearby on and off street car parking. Ensure that all new medium density housing provides adequate private open space that is appropriately landscaped.
It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates an adequate standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, as well as for occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area. It is considered that the proposal would result in a landmark development for Mentone and its overall built form should contribute to the broader local neighbourhood character. Further discussion regarding these items will be outlined later within this report.
. Clause 21.06: Retail and Commercial Land Use is broken into six (6) key objectives. Relevant to this application is Objective 6 of this Clause, which seeks:
To encourage smaller local centres which are not identified in the Kingston Activity Centre Hierarchy to provide for a limited mix of uses which are complementary to local function of that centre.
Whilst the proposal has not specified an end user for the proposed Retail Premises, given the relatively low scale commercial setting in which the subject site is situated, this is a good opportunity for any new retail use to contribute to the current mix of shops and businesses on Nepean Highway and Balcombe Road.
. Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy - as outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable Local Planning Policy
56 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Framework, which essentially aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations.
Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to:
. Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered. . In areas where building placement makes a major contribution to neighbourhood character, design new development to reinforce the established rhythm of buildings in the street and retain the existing single dwelling character of the streetscape. . Design duplex and side-by-side development to have a visual interconnection with the street rather than presenting merely as garages and front doors only. Staggered front building lines and variation in designs and materials should be used to avoid poor urban design impacts upon streetscapes.
Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Encourage the two storey component of new medium density housing to be located towards the front of a site. . Ensure that two storey dwellings are designed to respond to the character of the local neighbourhood. Where the local neighbourhood is characterised by single storey development and this characteristic makes a major or critical contribution to neighbourhood character, new two storey development should incorporate rooms within the roof form of attic style dwellings, and should set the second storey building envelope back from the ground level envelope. . Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours. . Encourage well-articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk. . Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows. . Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties. . Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.
Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape. Performance measures . Locating garages or carports at the rear of dwellings fronting a street wherever possible.
57 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Ensuring that where garages are located in the street elevation, they are set back a greater distance than the front wall of the building. . Ensuring that garages and carports are sited so that a tandem car parking space can be provided in front of the garage or carport. . Incorporating garages and carports within the main roof line of the dwelling.
Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems. Performance measures On-site infiltration should be maximised by: . Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving. . Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system. . Designing to limit the impervious area. . Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.
Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy essentially extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) along with the State Planning Policy Framework provisions found at Clause 14.02-2 – Settlement and Clause 16.02 – Medium Density Housing, effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.
In summary, the proposal is seen to be strongly consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it delivers on some very specific objectives for the type and form of medium density development expected in areas such as this before the Council.
11.10 Zoning Provisions
It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the purposes of both the Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) and Business 1 Zone (B1Z).
11.11 Overlay Provisions
The subject site is affected by a Special Building Overlay (SBO). Accordingly, the application is required to be referred to the relevant floodplain authority under the requirements of the overlay and under the provision of Section 55 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987. It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the following overlay requirements: . Melbourne Water has offered consent to the proposed development, subject to the inclusion of conditions on any permit issued relating to the provision of adequate site and floor levels to mitigate any flooding on the site.
58 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
11.12 Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06: Car Parking The purposes of this provision are:
To ensure that car parking facilities are provided in accordance with: - The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. - Any parking precinct plan. To provide the opportunity to use parking precinct plans in appropriate locations. To promote the efficient use of car spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities. To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car spaces having regard to the activities on the land and the nature of the locality. To ensure that the design of car parking areas: - Does not adversely affect the amenity of the locality, in particular the amenity of pedestrians and other road users. - Achieves a high standard of urban design. - Creates a safe environment for users, particularly at night. - Enables easy and efficient use. - Protects the role and function of nearby roads. - Facilitates the use of public transport and the movement and delivery of goods.
Clause 52.06-1 notes that a new use must not commence or the floor area of an existing use must not be increased until the required car spaces have been provided on the land.
The required spaces are identified in the table to Clause 52.06-5. Where a use is not identified in the table, car parking is to be provided to Council’s satisfaction.
The table at Clause 52.06-5 notes that a:
Dwelling, other than Caretaker’s house if at least 2 on a lot, requires 2 car parking spaces to each dwelling. A shop requires 8 parking spaces per 100 square metres of leasable floor area. Clause 52.06 allows a permit to be granted to vary the statutory parking requirements having regard to the following decision guidelines:
Any relevant parking precinct plan. The availability of car parking in the locality. The availability of public transport in the locality. Any reduction in car parking demand due to the sharing of car spaces by multiple uses, either because of variation of car parking demand over time or
59 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
because of efficiencies gained from the consolidation of shared car parking spaces. Any car parking deficiency or surplus associated with the existing use of the land. Any credit which should be allowed for a car parking demand deemed to have been provided in association with a use which existed before the change of parking requirement. Local traffic management. Local amenity including pedestrian amenity. An empirical assessment of car parking demand. Any other relevant consideration.
The proposal generates a requirement to provide 128 residential car spaces and 6.64 (7) car spaces for the shop – a total of 135 car spaces. It is proposed to provide a total of 68 car parking spaces, and therefore a permit is required for the reduced amount.
Clause 52.07: Loading & Unloading of Vehicles
The primary purpose of this Clause is ‘to set aside land for loading and unloading commercial vehicles to prevent loss of amenity and adverse effect on traffic flow and road safety’.
Clause 52.07 allows a permit to be granted to reduce or waive the requirements if either:
The land area is insufficient; or Adequate provision is made for loading and unloading vehicles to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. The proposal seeks a waiver of this requirement.
Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities
The purpose of this Clause is:
To encourage cycling as a mode of transport. To provide secure, accessible and convenient bicycle parking spaces and associated shower and change facilities.
Clause 52.34-1 states that a new use must not commence or the floor area of an existing use must not be increased until the required bicycle facilities and associated signage has been provided on the land.
Under Clause 52.34-2 states that a permit may be granted to vary, reduce or waive the requirements of Clause 52.34-3 and Clause 52.34-4. An application is exempt
60 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
from the notice and decision requirements and appeal rights of some sections of the Act.
Clause 52.34-3 requires in developments of four (4) or more storeys that one (1) residents bicycle space per five (5) dwellings, and one (1) visitor bicycle space per ten (10) dwellings be provided.
Under the requirements of this section of the Scheme, a total of 21 on-site bicycle parking spaces are required with 13 spaces required for the residential component and 7 spaces for residential visitors. No additional requirement for bicycle parking spaces is generated as the proposed shop is less than 600 square metres in floor area.
The total number of bicycle spaces has not been provided on plans, however it would appear that there is sufficient area within the basement parking areas to meet this requirement.
Clause 52.35: Urban Design Context Report and Design Response for Residential Development Of Four Or More Storeys
The purpose of that Clause is;
To ensure that an urban context report is prepared before a residential development of four or more storeys is designed and that the design responds to the existing urban context and preferred future development of the area.
A satisfactory urban context report and design response was prepared prior to advertising of the development, in accordance with the requirements of the Clause.
Clause 52.36: Integrated Public Transport Planning
A number of objectives are included at that Clause, which includes:
To ensure development supports public transport usage. To ensure that easily accessible public transport networks, which are appropriate to the scale of the development, and high quality public transport infrastructure are provided as part of new development. To ensure that development incorporates safe, attractive and convenient pedestrian access to public transport stops. To ensure that development does not adversely affect the efficient, equitable and accessible operation of public transport. An application for a residential development which comprises 60 or more dwellings requires the application to be referred in accordance with Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to the Director of Public Transport. The Department of Transport has advised it does not object to the proposal and did not require any conditions to be included on any permit issued.
Clause 65: Decision Guidelines
61 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
For this application the requirements of Clause 65.01 for the approval of an application or plan is of relevance. This Clause outlines the requirements that the responsible authority must consider when determining the application.
12.0 ASSESSMENT
12.1 Use
The proposed shop at ground floor is considered to be appropriate with regard to this portion of the subject site being located within a Business 1 Zone. The use is likely to assist in complementing the existing small scale nature of commercial development in proximity of the site. The shop is proposed to be oriented to Nepean Highway, continuing the built form of commercial development that extends along Nepean Highway between Balcombe Road and Collins Street which is considered an appropriate response.
A permit is also required to use the land for the purpose of a dwelling within a Business 1 Zone, where the frontages of dwellings exceed 2 metres. The building proposed to the eastern portion of the site will entail two ground level dwellings, where these frontages exceed 2 metres. The proposed dwellings are considered appropriate in the context of the site, with these dwellings oriented to Collins Street. With the exception of the eastern portion of the subject site, the remainder of Collins Street is located within a Residential 1 Zone, the proposed residential uses are therefore considered consistent and sympathetic to the streetscape.
12.2 Development
Pursuant to Clause 34.01-4 and Clause 44.05, a permit is required to construct a building or construct or carry out works.
The design principles contained at Clause 15.01-2 (Built Environment and Heritage) are applicable to this development for both the commercial and residential components. Clause 55 is not applicable to the assessment of the proposed dwellings, due to the height of the building.
The Design Guidelines for Higher Density Residential Development (Department of Sustainability and Environment, 2004), which is a reference document at Clause 15 of the SPPF, is considered to provide a more comprehensive guide in the assessment of the design and built form of residential development of four (4) or more storeys. As such, discussion of the proposal against each of the applicable design elements is provided below.
Element 1 – Urban Context
Encourages buildings that respond creatively to their existing context and to the aspirations for the future development of the area and encourages creative designs that are based on a clear understanding of the urban context and neighbourhood character.
62 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
To ensure proposed buildings respond creatively to their existing context, an Urban Context Report is required to accompany an application of four (4) or more storeys, which provides a detailed response to the character of the area and identifies the opportunities and constraints for the site. The application is accompanied by an Urban Context Report which has appropriately identified planning scheme objectives and requirements in relation to the subject site, along with information which has assessed the existing character of the locality and the site’s opportunities and constraints. The submitted Urban Context Report is considered satisfactory.
It is considered that the proposed development has appropriately taken into account the strategic context of the site, satisfying requirements of these Guidelines as well as those contained within Clause 15.01-2 of the Planning Scheme. The portion of the site which is located to the west of the right of way is located within a Residential 1 Zone, identified within local policy at Clause 21.05 as being designated for ‘increased housing diversity’. In these areas, higher density development is contemplated and encouraged, which may entail apartment style development of four or more storeys. It is acknowledged that the existing residential character in Collins Street is predominantly single storey in nature, with some double storeys scattered throughout, however the presence of multi-dwelling development in the street is indicative of a character which is evolving in response to local policies and existing infrastructure. The commercial development to the east and south of the subject site comprises a built form which naturally differs from residential development, usually entailing a greater extent of site coverage, more double storey forms and different lot pattern. A number of other developments within Collins Street, such as the Mentone Bowls Club, the TAB betting agency and car park on the subject site and an industrial development to the western end of Collins Street also provide variances to the residential nature of the streetscape.
The site’s abuttals and proximity to commercial properties to its east and south provide less sensitive interfaces for a higher density residential development, lessening potential off-site amenity impacts. Residential development to the site’s western boundary presents a constraint and requires greater setbacks at the upper levels, which have for the most part been achieved (or can be subject to conditions), resulting in a design that responds appropriately to the site context.
Whilst the site is not located within the Mentone Activity Centre, it is located within approximately 290 metres of the Centre’s nearest boundary, and importantly, 330 metres from the Mentone Railway Station. The broader strategic context of the site is therefore considered suitable for a medium density development.
Element 2 – Building Envelope
This element aims to ensure that new development is appropriate to the scale of nearby streets, other public spaces, and buildings and to relate building height to street width and intended character. The objective also aims to protect sunlight access to public spaces, to respond to existing or preferred neighbourhood character, to ensure building separation supports private amenity and reinforces neighbourhood character, and to ensure that areas can develop with an equitable access to outlook
63 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
and open space. The objective aims to ensure that visual impact to dwellings at the rear are appropriate to the context and to maximise informal or passive surveillance of streets and other public open spaces.
Height and Massing: At the 27 April 2011 Council meeting it was resolved to develop a built form analysis with the intent of implementing height controls of 3 storeys and a Design Development Overlay on a number of parcels of land in Mentone, including the subject site. Work is currently being undertaken in line with Council’s resolution and Hansen Partnership, external consultants, has been engaged to prepare advice for Council’s consideration. Until that work has been completed and adopted by Council, the application is required to be assessed against current Planning Scheme requirements.
Current planning policies relating to the subject site contemplate medium density residential development, as identified within the Residential 1 Zone and within Clause 22.11 of the Local Planning Policy Framework. As previously discussed under Element 1, the broader strategic context of the site is considered suitable for a medium density development due to proximity to community infrastructure and fixed rail public transport. The site’s corner location, with one frontage to Nepean Highway, a busy major arterial road, and commercial premises located to the east and south of the site is considered to provide an appropriate context for a residential development of four or more storeys where the most sensitive interface is restricted to the west side of the site and off-site amenity impacts have been limited.
The proposal entails a stepping in of built form to the building located to the western portion of the site, in order to respond to the abutting single storey dual occupancy at No. 142 Collins Street. The design proposes a minimum 3 metre setback from the western boundary at first floor, with this increasing at upper levels. The built form also steps back from the Collins Street frontage, concentrating massing towards the rear (south) of the site at the fourth and fifth floors. This predominantly presents to the street as a three storey development, with the degree of articulation and stepping back of built form from the western boundary providing an appropriate transition to the abutting dwellings to the west. The proposed building located to the eastern portion of the site, does not entail significant setbacks from its two street frontages or side and rear boundaries, with the massing on this part of the site considered an appropriate response to the corner of Collins Street and Nepean Highway, the commercial properties to the south-east and the Business 1 zoning of this part of the site. Built form of the commercial properties is a mixture of single and double storeys, which generally entail boundary to boundary development on narrow allotments (compared to a standard residential allotment).
Street Setbacks:
Existing conditions on the site result in the TAB betting agency having a zero street setback to both street frontages. This will not significantly change at the corner of the site. The remainder of the site’s frontage to Collins Street will be provided with setbacks between 3 metres and 5.2 metres at ground level, with planter boxes and 1.79 metre high fences to provide privacy to ground floor terraces within the front
64 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
setback. Street setbacks at the first floor are reduced to between 3.1 metres and 3 metres.
The proposed street setbacks are considered to provide an appropriate transition from the commercial built form and zero lot setbacks that currently exist on the subject site and around the corner on Nepean Highway, with the proposal providing a transition from zero setback, to 3 metres, to 5 metres towards the western part of the land (at ground/pedestrian level), responding to the adjoining setback of 6 metres at No. 142 Collins Street.
Relationships to Adjoining Buildings:
As previously discussed the built form to the east and south of the site is a mixture of single and double storey commercial developments, and directly west of the site is a single storey dual occupancy. The site’s abuttals to commercial built form and part location within a Business 1 Zone are sympathetic to a more intensive built form to the eastern part of the land. The proposal will entail a zero setback to commercial properties to the south-east, however no windows have been proposed to that boundary which would otherwise compromise future development of the site at No. 92 Nepean Highway. The design response to the wall on that boundary has not been depicted on elevations, to appropriately demonstrate that whilst the abutting site remains single storey, that the five storey wall which will be capable of being viewed from Nepean Highway and Balcombe Road will be adequately articulated and visually interesting. This could however be rectified by an appropriate condition on any permit issued to provide colours and materials to demonstrate that this wall will be articulated.
The building’s stepping down in built form towards the abutting single storey dual occupancy to the west of the site is considered to provide for an appropriate transition in building height. It is also noted that directly adjoining the site’s western boundary at No. 142 Collins Street is a driveway which services the two dwellings, siting the two dwellings closer towards their own western boundary away from the subject site. It is considered however, that at the fourth floor, the proposed side boundary setback of 4.67 metres would be increased where the development is opposite the rear dwelling of No. 142 Collins Street. This would most likely require the deletion of apartment 3.04, which will be addressed through a condition of any permit issued.
Shadow diagrams provided with the application show that at 9am at the September equinox overshadowing will occur to these residential properties and to some of the commercial properties to the south of the subject site which are located on Balcombe Road. It is not entirely clear from plans where the secluded private open spaces of the two dwellings are located; however it would appear that they may be to the rear (south) of each dwelling. The shadow cast by the development by midday would be entirely removed from these two properties, with the shadow falling on the subject site and to commercial properties south and south-east of the site.
It would appear that when using Standard B21 of ResCode as a guide to assess overshadowing impacts that the existing private open spaces would not currently receive the minimum 5 hours of sunlight to at least 40 square metres of area between
65 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
9am and 3pm, particularly the dwelling to the rear. As will be discussed further under Element 5, it is recommended that the western most wall at the third floor is further recessed from the western side boundary, this would require the deletion of apartment 3.04, and would achieve a 10 metre setback allowing a greater degree of sunlight access to the rear dwelling at No. 142 Collins Street. Whilst ResCode is only used as a general guide to assess some aspects of developments of four or more storeys, it is considered that achieving side setbacks in accordance with Standard B17 of ResCode will help to alleviate overshadowing impacts. It is likely that the overshadowing caused by the proposed development would still further reduce the current level of sunlight achieved to these two south facing private open spaces, but this overshadowing would be significantly reduced at 10am and even more so with the deletion of apartment 3.05 at the third floor, and is considered acceptable.
As discussed above, due to the orientation of the site shadow cast by the development will primarily be within the site’s bounds and to the west, south and south-east, with pedestrian spaces to the north of the site largely unaffected by the development. In regard to the light and shade design principles of Clause 15.01-2, the existing conditions on Collins Street will therefore remain unchanged.
Views to and from Residential Units: The proposal will entail a good degree of passive surveillance from balconies to the Collins Street frontage and will enhance both perceived and real safety outcomes in the immediate area which is also consistent with the safety and public realm objectives contained within the urban design principles of Clause 15.01-2.
Overlooking from the proposed development is largely addressed through the orientation of habitable room windows/balconies to street frontages or the right of way which dissects the site or the right of way to the south of the site. West facing balconies at the first and second floors are either provided with screening to a height of 1.8 metres, or where this has not has not been provided, balconies are setback in excess of 9 metres from any windows that are located on the abutting property. West facing windows at the fourth and fifth floors are provided with significant setbacks (11.3 metres), with these windows provided to the shared hallway on each floor. This setback and the height of these floors would prevent downward views to any adjoining windows and private open spaces located at No. 142 Collins Street. The remaining west facing windows are provided to the building located on the east side of the site, with the setbacks of these windows considerable and unlikely to result in unreasonable overlooking.
Balconies oriented to the south of the site would have views to the commercial properties that are located on Balcombe Road. Given the Business 3 Zoning of this land, and the commercial uses that occupy those properties (with dwellings prohibited in this zoning), any views from south facing balconies is considered acceptable, with any passive surveillance that may be achieved to the right of way that extends along the rear south boundary a good outcome in terms of increasing safety.
66 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Wind protection: Given the five (5) storey nature of the application, it is considered that the stepped building form and articulation applied to the external facades of the proposed development and building mass will assist in reducing wind turbulence at ground level.
Roof forms: The proposed flat roof design is considered to be in keeping with the contemporary style of the development and assists in minimising the overall building height. The type of roof form proposed is not considered atypical to other forms of development in the immediate area and is envisaged to ingrate well within the streetscapes of Nepean Highway and Collins Street.
Element 3 - Street Pattern and Street-Edge Quality
Aims to create walkable areas within a safe and interesting public setting and to closely integrate the layout and occupation patterns of new development with the street. This objective also encourages entrances with a strong identity. Entrances that provide a transition from the street to residential interiors by accentuating and identifying building entrances to provide good visual and physical connections between the street and lobby spaces. It is important to ensure that car parking does not dominate or detract from the streetscape. Front fences should respect and contribute to the neighbourhood character and avoid creating inactive frontages as a result of fencing private open spaces. The shared infrastructure in higher density development, including circulation, parking and service spaces is important to ensure that buildings function well, are efficient and capable of being properly maintained.
Street Pattern and Street Edge Integration:
The existing street pattern and size of the lot will remain, with the continued dissection of the site by the right of way. The development’s presentation to the street has responded to its commercial abuttals by maintaining a larger built form – of boundary to boundary coverage to the east half of the site and a hard edge of commercial built form on the Nepean Highway corner. The proposed development to the west half of the site will provide a similar width of built form, similar to that which exists on the abutting western property and continuing along the south side of Collins Street. The setback of the building from the western boundary, and right of way along the east side of the building will be sympathetic to the current pattern and rhythm of building siting and access arrangements.
The application proposes 1.79 metre high front fences to ground floor terraced areas, with planter boxes provided in front of these fences along the front boundary. It is considered that the height of these front fences in combination with planter boxes will obscure the majority of the residential ground floor of both buildings and will inhibit the buildings integration with the street at a pedestrian level. Whilst some privacy is required for ground level private open spaces and habitable room windows this needs to be balanced with providing appropriate street edge integration. A condition is recommended to be included on any permit issued requiring fences to be no higher than 1.5 metres, and constructed of materials to allow some transparency (minimum
67 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
25% transparency). Council’s Vegetation Management officer has recommended the planting of small trees within these planter boxes which will assist with providing privacy to these areas. The integration of the building with the street will be aided by balconies and windows at all upper levels oriented to Collins Street.
The proposed hard edge to the site’s north-east corner requires further consideration. Whilst the zero lot setback is appropriate with regard to the site’s context and commercial setting, the degree of design detail and lack of windows presenting at this prominent corner is deemed to be unsatisfactory. This will be discussed further under Element 5.
Building Entries:
A main pedestrian entry is proposed to each building, from the Collins Street frontage. These entries are appropriately identified by way of pedestrian paths which provide for a legible linkage to entries; however it is recommended that the entry to the building on the western portion of the site is brought forward to align with the front wall of the building to improve its visibility and prominence along with a more prominent architectural feature.
Secondary entries are proposed to provide a pedestrian connection at ground level between both buildings and the basement car parking provided within the western building. This will require residents to walk across the right of way, and it is considered that further treatment will be required to the right of way to ensure that appropriate street lighting is provided for security purposes, as well as a pedestrian crossing to prioritise pedestrian movements. This issue has been addressed by way of conditions in the recommendation section of this report.
Element 4 - Circulation and Services
Aims to provide adequate, safe and efficient car parking layouts, bicycle areas and pedestrian entries to buildings. Encourages the creation of shared living spaces that contribute positively to the experience of living in high density developments. This objective also aims to minimise running and maintenance costs and to minimise water use, collect and reuse stormwater where practical, use natural irrigation in landscaping and provide a clear method of refuse disposal.
Parking Layout:
The proposed two levels of basement and the basement ramp are considered satisfactory with regard to the provision of appropriate floor to ceiling heights and ramp grades.
The location of storage areas and bicycle spaces to the upper level basement are generally satisfactory, however full details of dimensions of storage cages and bicycle wall mounts have not been provided, but are recommended to be rectified by way of permit conditions. It is considered that storage cages which are located along walls opposite car spaces be relocated to above bonnet cages. A number of storage areas are awkwardly located and would be difficult to access, such as those located on the upper
68 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
level basement adjacent to car space No. 18. These spaces are also recommended to be relocated.
Car space No. 50 does not allow pedestrian access to the lift and stairwell, the clearance between the stairwell and car space has not been dimensioned, however it would appear to be 0.4 metres. It is recommended that this car space is deleted. Adequacy of car parking numbers will be discussed later in this report.
An uncovered car space is proposed at the ground floor to apartment G09. This space would be accessed from the right of way. Details have not been provided on plans to indicate a roller shutter or how this will be secured, however this has been rectified by the inclusion of an appropriate permit condition.
Generally car space lengths should be 5.4 metres. Car space lengths to both upper and lower basements are indicated to be 4.9 metres with a minimum 2.6 metre width and accessway width of 6.4 metres. It is considered that with the recommended relocation of many storage spaces to above car bonnets that increased car space lengths can be provided, and where necessary the accessway width can be decreased to 5.8 metres, which would still be consistent with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 Parking Facilities – Off-street car parking. A condition to require appropriate car space dimensions is recommended.
Wheel stops are recommended to car spaces where they are located near pedestrian walkways/circulation spaces, or may result in cars encroaching into other car spaces, for example car space No’s 53 and 54 on the lower level basement.
Signage and way finding measures will be required by permit conditions to direct traffic and denote the allocation of car spaces.
Overall, subject to conditions the layout of car parking areas is considered adequate and will meet the safety design principles also outlined within Clause 15.01-2.
Circulation Spaces:
The shared spaces within the building have been designed in accordance with the suggestions outlined in the guidelines. Hallway widths are approximately 1.5 metres wide, and lifts approx. 4 square metres which are considered sufficient for the movement of furniture etc.
Site Services:
It is considered that due consideration has been given to the service operations necessary for a development of this nature. Adequate provision has been made for refuse collection, mail delivery and emergency services access.
A Waste Management Plan (WMP) has been submitted for review, with the WMP specifying private waste collection will occur. Whilst Council prefers that Council collection services are used wherever possible, it is conceded that private collection in this instance is appropriate, with regard to the limited footpath area to the front of the site and the number of bins that would be required to be collected. The WMP
69 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
provides details regarding the likely generation of waste and the number and type of bins that would be required. It is proposed that collection will occur twice a week, with this considered acceptable. There is sufficient area allocated within the ground floor areas of each building to accommodate the required general waste and recycling bins. Waste from the commercial tenancy is also proposed to be collected privately, with a refuse storage area to be internalised within the tenancy. Each floor of each building will have chutes to dispose of waste and recycling, and ground floor residents will be able to access the ground floor waste collection points to dispose of rubbish and recycling.
A permit condition is recommended requiring the provision of clotheslines to ground floor open spaces wherever possible to increase the energy efficiency of dwellings.
Element 5 - Building Layout and Design
The objective aims to provide a range of dwelling sizes and types in higher density residential developments, to optimise the layout of buildings in response to occupants’ needs as well as identified external influences and characteristics of a site and to promote buildings of high architectural quality and visual interest. The objective also identifies the need to provide adequate storage space for household needs, to ensure that a good standard of natural lighting and ventilation is provided to internal building spaces.
Dwelling Diversity: The dwellings are primarily a mix of 1 and 2 bedrooms and one 3 bedroom, providing for diversity of households, particularly smaller households. All the dwellings are provided with lift access, and are therefore suitable for persons with limited mobility.
Building Layout:
The layout of each building on either side of the right of way has generally allowed for a reasonable degree of amenity achieved to dwellings. There are a number of south facing dwellings, within the development at all floors which cannot be avoided; however the overall proportion of dwellings with solely south facing windows has been limited. Dwellings with the least amenity achieved are primarily located within the eastern building and are noted as apartment’s G.13, 1.15, 2.15, 3.11 and 4.10, with the potential that these dwelling’s could lose access to morning sunlight if the abutting south-east property is further developed. All of these apartments contain one bedroom only. South facing dwellings to the western building generally have adequate access to daylight, though it is acknowledged that they will not receive direct sunlight. It is recommended that north facing operable clerestory windows are provided to south facing dwellings at the fourth floor. This would apply to apartments 4.04, 4.05, 4.06, 4.09 and 4.10. This will improve daylight access, as well as achieve better energy efficiency with these windows able to provide heat in winter and ventilation in summer.
Apartment G.11 is also problematic, this dwelling is north facing but abutting walls to its north for the lift and refuse room will block the majority of light. It is recommended that G.11 is deleted and merged with G.10 to become one apartment. Whilst this does not fully resolve access to daylight, the merging of these two dwellings into one, will allow a reconfiguration of the internal layout to locate the majority of most used habitable rooms towards the eastern side with greater access to daylight. It is quite
70 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
likely that this dwelling would be able to be converted to a three bedroom dwelling or two bedrooms and a study.
A number of one bedroom dwellings rely on borrowed light, with these dwellings located to the south-west corner of the western building. Bedrooms to apartments G.06, 1.08, 2.08 and 3.04 would be required to borrow light from south facing living room windows. The west walls to these dwellings currently present as a sheer wall with no articulation. It is recommended that highlight windows are provided to bedrooms at the ground, first and second floors, and as discussed above it is recommended that apartment 3.04 is deleted. Whilst west facing windows are not desirable, highlight windows would provide an adequate degree of sunlight whilst limiting the total glazed area exposed to afternoon sun.
The deletion of apartment 3.04 to provide a stepping in at the third floor, and provision of windows to the first and second floor will alleviate the appearance of a sheer wall in this location, as well as reduce overshadowing impacts (as discussed under Element 2)
West facing windows to shared hallways of the western building at the third and fourth floors will result in excessive heating to the hallways in the afternoon. It is strongly recommended that these windows are provided with some form of shading which will be required by a condition on any permit issued. Similarly shading devices are recommended to fourth floor north facing windows to apartments 4.01, 4.02, 4.03, 4.07 and 4.08.
An Environmentally Sustainable Development (ESD) Report was submitted which has provided an assessment of the development on the basis of sixty four (64) dwellings. The report submitted that a sample of 13 apartments have undergone an energy rating assessment, to ensure that a minimum 6 star average can be met. The report has asserted that most of the apartments have been designed to achieve rating scores in a range of 7.0 – 8.0 stars with an overall average of 7.4 stars. The report refers to a number of measures to improve the energy efficiency and sustainability of the proposed buildings which are not reflected on plans such as solar panels, water tanks, pervious pavers to ground floor terraces, and operable windows to hallways to allow for natural ventilation. Whilst an average rating above 6 stars may be able to be achieved, the plans that have been submitted do not reflect statements and commitments made within the ESD report. It is considered that given the number of changes that are recommended to be made to the built form, including the reduction of dwellings, that an amended ESD report is required, and plans are amended to reflect ESD measures such as solar panels and this will be required by a condition on any permit issued. This approach is also considered to be in keeping with the energy and resource efficiency design principles contained with Clause 15.01-2 which promote more efficient use of resources and energy within buildings.
Design Detail:
The overall design will provide a visually interesting built form, which subject to conditions, will reduce the appearance of its upper floors to the western building which is considered an appropriate response to the residential built form to the site’s west. The design incorporates the appearance of lighter weight materials and colours to the upper floors which aids in lessening any appearance of bulk. Stepping in of floor levels on the western façade of the western building along with the use of
71 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
balconies provides an appropriate degree of articulation along this façade. As previously discussed, it is recommended that articulation is required to the western sheer wall of the western building, with conditions recommended to include highlight windows to bedrooms and the stepping in of this wall at the third level.
The building is well integrated with Collins Street in terms of providing active frontages with views of the street and into the development; this however is limited at ground level by high fencing which is recommended to be altered so that lower fences with greater transparency are provided, allowing for an appropriate balance of privacy to ground level private open spaces with a better sense of integration between the public and private realm at the pedestrian level.
The design entails a prominent feature to the corner of Nepean Highway and Collins Street proposed to be constructed to the boundary and presenting as a tower-like form. Windows are proposed al upper levels on the north-east side (frontage to Nepean Highway), however a relatively blank façade would be visible on the north side. It is considered that this is a lost opportunity to provide an element that is an architectural feature, and it is recommended that this is redesigned. Urban design advice provided by Council’s Activity Centre Place Manager has acknowledged that a taller corner architectural landmark is fitting, but the proposed treatment is not appropriate. Suggested remedies included removing the curved edge from the corner and provide a defined corner, removing blank walls through greater articulation, continuing the canopy treatment around the corner from Nepean Highway to Collins Street and internal layout changes to swap bedroom locations with balconies to the corner. A condition will be included on any permit issued to ensure that this corner element is treated to ensure that it is an appropriate landmark feature, consistent with the urban design principles relating to landmarks, views and vistas contained within Clause 15.01-2. It is recommended that treatment includes continuation of the canopy to Collins Street and improved articulation through materials, colours and windows.
Element 6 - Open Space and Landscape Design
New developments should contribute to the creation of private and public open spaces that are accessible, attractive, safe and comfortable for their users and to allow solar access to the private and shared open spaces of new high density residential units. New developments should integrate the design of shared and private open space into the overall building design and facade composition and to provide greenery for open spaces. In areas of higher residential development, residents and visitors will rely in part on public open space for relaxation, recreation and meeting places, therefore, access to adequate and safe public open spaces is essential for the well being of the whole community. Public open spaces need to be appropriate to the context of the development.
Private and Communal Open Space:
Each dwelling is provided with private open space in the form of a balcony or ground level terrace areas. Dimensions vary between dwellings, however minimum depths are provided of 1.6 metres, with the average appearing to be 1.77 metres, with all balconies usually greater than 8 square metres. Ground level open spaces also vary,
72 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
with most dimensions greater than 3 metres and average areas over 10 square metres. Whilst Clause 55 (ResCode) is not applicable to residential developments of four or more storeys, it provides a helpful benchmark to assess the adequacy of proposed balconies. The areas of private open space proposed are consistent with those required under Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Planning Scheme and generally exceed the requirements of ResCode. Where some balconies are proposed to be provided with a depth of 1.6 metres, it is recommended that minimum depths are increased to 1.8 metres to ensure that these areas are useable and have an adequate degree of amenity. An appropriate condition on any permit will require this, along with a general condition that where any external air-conditioning/heating units are proposed to balconies that these are screened from view and located outside of the main useable areas of private open space.
Overall, subject to conditions, the proposed design is deemed acceptable and satisfies the design guidance which is provided within the Guidelines for Higher Density Development and the urban design principles contained within Clause 15.01-2. Precedent within the locality has been set for residential and mixed use development above four storeys, and along with proximity to public transport, arterial roads and the Mentone Activity Centre the subject site is considered to satisfy the broader context requirements for an increase in residential density.
The design has also responded to the site’s immediate context with regard to both the commercial and residential abuttals, and has taken advantage of the less sensitive interfaces whilst limiting off-site amenity impacts to the west (the most sensitive interface). It is considered that an appropriate degree of amenity will be achieved on- site for future residents, with adequate provision of private open space, access to daylight and natural ventilation and that, subject to conditions, the development will be able to maximise its overall energy efficiency and sustainability through the use of solar panels, built materials, rainwater tanks etc. The degree of architectural quality achieved through the proposed design is also considered satisfactory, with the use of varied materials and the incorporation of visually interesting architectural elements. A number of conditions are recommended to enhance these elements, including the corner of the building where it has an opportunity to provide a landmark feature.
12.3 Car Parking & Traffic
Under the provisions of Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the following car parking rates are applicable to the proposed development:
2 car parking spaces for each dwelling – 2 x 64 dwellings = 128 spaces 8 car spaces per 100 square metres of leasable floor area of a Shop = 6.64 (7) spaces
No car parking has been proposed to be provided to the shop. The applicant submitted a Traffic Report, prepared by Ratio Consultants, which calculated the parking requirement for a Retail Premises using the ‘Shop’ use within the parking rates specified under Clause 52.06 and concluding that 6 car spaces are required. Whilst the
73 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
applicant has considered that the commercial component does not require an allocated parking space it is considered that one (1) car space should be provided for a staff members use. The relatively small floor area of the proposed retail tenancy is unlikely to result in a significant number of staff members, and one (1) space is considered sufficient. The limited floor area would suggest that the premises is unlikely to result in a significant demand on parking, with a shop more likely to be utilised by people living and working within proximity of the shop, with less reliance on car travel to the site. The on-street parking which currently serves the existing commercial premises in the shopping strip in which it would be located should be able to accommodate customers of the proposed retail premises.
A total of 128 on-site car parking spaces are required for the proposed dwellings based on Clause 52.06 requirements, however a total of 69 car parking spaces are proposed. No visitor car spaces are proposed. As previously discussed, a number of recommendations would impact on the overall total number of apartments. It has been recommended that one dwelling (apartment 3.04) is deleted and one dwelling (G11) is merged with G10. This would reduce the total number of dwellings from 64 to 62. In addition, it has been recommended that in order to improve accessibility within the lower basement that car space No. 50 is deleted, resulting in a total of 68 car spaces on site.
In regard to visitor car parking, the submitted Traffic Report has provided limited details regarding a parking demand survey of on-street parking and the TAB private car park on a week day and a Saturday. The report surveyed 55 on-street spaces and the 50 off-street TAB parking spaces and found that on a week day a peak parking demand of 75 occupied spaces occurred, and on a Saturday the peak parking demand was 80 spaces. The parking survey has demonstrated that at peak times visitors to the site may have difficulty finding a car space within the immediate vicinity. Unfortunately the submitted Traffic Report has not provided any information regarding likely visitor demand for parking in order to assist in the assessment of the proposal. It is considered that the site’s location outside of the Mentone Major Activity Centre requires consideration to be given to the need to provide on-site visitor car parking spaces. It is acknowledged that the site is within walking distance of fixed rail, and the Activity Centre, however given the limited degree of parking on Collins Street, that visitor parking is required within the basement.
It is accepted that the parking rates specified within ResCode provide a better benchmark of parking requirements for developments of four or more storeys. The application of ResCode parking rates in these circumstances is accepted by Councils and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), and more accurately reflects the smaller households which generally occupy apartment style developments. This approach is also consistent with the Advisory Committee Report (dated August, 2007) for the Review of Parking Provisions in the Victoria Planning Provisions (Clause 52.06) which has recommended that Clause 52.06 is amended to adopt ResCode residential parking rates. Whilst recommendations discussed above would create two (2) x 3 bedroom dwellings which would each require 2 parking spaces, it is considered that one car space to each is sufficient. Council’s Traffic Engineers have
74 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
also specified that should a permit be issued for the site that no resident parking permits will be issued, further discouraging residents from owning more than one car.
Council’s Traffic Engineers were in principle supportive of the proposal; subject to resolution being reached regarding adequate provision of visitor parking, given there is a lack of on-street parking within the vicinity of the site. Using Clause 55 as a guide to calculate visitor parking rates, this would generate a requirement for 12 visitor spaces. The applicant has advised Council that a possible reduction in the number of dwellings to a total of 59 could be considered, allowing for the provision of 9 visitor car parking spaces, however given the recommendation to delete car space No. 50, and the total 68 car spaces that would result, this would leave 7 car spaces for visitors. It is considered that visitor parking should be provided in accordance with Clause 55 requirements which would require a further reduction in dwellings from 59 to 56 generating a demand for 11 car spaces. On the basis of 68 car parking spaces able to be provided in the two levels of basement, car parking could therefore be provided as follows:
56 car spaces – 1 per dwelling 1 retail car space 11 visitor spaces
Any reduction in dwellings is recommended to occur to the building on the western portion of the land. Taking into account the recommended deletion of apartment 3.04 and G10, a further reduction of dwellings from 62 – 56 would entail the deletion of the fourth floor which comprises five dwellings. A further dwelling is required to be deleted, and is recommended to be deleted from the third floor. This will be required by a condition on any permit issued.
The submitted traffic report outlined a traffic assessment undertaken to record traffic movements during morning and afternoon peak travel periods. The report concluded that during the morning peak hour between 8am and 9am, 76 vehicle movements were recorded, with the majority of movements occurring as left turns from the Nepean Highway service road in Collins Street (northbound traffic) and right turns from Nepean Highway into Collins Street (southbound traffic). In the afternoon peak hour between 5pm and 6pm, the survey found that a total of 105 movements were recorded with the dominant movements matching those recorded in the morning. Overall the traffic report estimated an approximate two-way volume of 1000 vehicles per day along Collins Street, with the report concluding that this is within the capacity of a local street.
The traffic likely to be generated by the proposal has been assessed in relation to the original number of apartments proposed, being 69 dwellings. This number is greater than the total that is recommended by this officer’s report for a total of fifty six (56) dwellings. The traffic report estimates that residential apartment developments can be expected to generate 4 vehicle trips per dwelling per day. On that basis 56 dwellings would generate 224 total trips per day, with 10 percent of trips occurring in the morning peak hour (22), and of these 80 percent would be departing and 20 percent arriving. During the afternoon peak hour the same rate would apply of 22 trips
75 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
generated, of which 30 percent would be departing the site and 70 percent arriving. The traffic report has provided an estimate of trips generated for the retail component of the development and concludes that 6 trips per hour are possible, with a total of 24 trips per day – taking into account both staff and customer travel. On the basis of the above estimates, the total development could result in 28 vehicle trips per hour during morning and afternoon peak hours, and a total of 248 trips throughout the day.
The development will entail an increase in traffic in the local area, however the site’s proximity to Nepean Highway and conditions on Collins Street are considered adequate to cater for the increase in the estimated number of vehicle movements. The dominant flow of traffic from the site to Nepean Highway, with Nepean Highway considered having the capacity to absorb additional traffic. Proximity to the signalised intersection to Balcombe Road and Nepean Highway will allow gaps in traffic to enable vehicle movements turning right from Nepean Highway to Collins Street.
12.4 Vehicle Loading & Unloading
Council officers consider that there is insufficient land available within the subject site for a loading bay and, given the small size of the proposed retail tenancy, should be able to accommodate small transport vehicles within the existing service road adjacent to the site’s Nepean Highway frontage. Accordingly, a waiver of the loading and unloading requirements is considered reasonable in this instance. Council’s Traffic Engineers did not object to the proposed waiver of the loading requirements.
12.5 Bicycle Facilities
The exact number of bicycle spaces for residents has not been specified, however thirteen (13) are required by Clause 52.34 – Bicycle Facilities for 62 dwellings. There would appear to be sufficient spaces to the northern side of the upper floor basement, with wall mounts in an area of approximately 25 square metres. Further details are required by a condition of permit. On the basis of recommendations to delete the overall number of dwellings to 56, this would require a minimum of 6 visitor spaces and 11 resident spaces. It is considered that there is sufficient area set aside for the storage of bicycles for residents and visitors.
13.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS
As outlined in the objections received by Council and as expressed in detail at the preliminary conference meeting held between all parties, there appear to be a number of matters that are of concern to objectors, pertaining to this application. Specifically, the key grounds of objection which relate to planning matters are outlined below:
13.1 Car Parking/Traffic
As discussed above, the development will result in an increase in traffic to the local street network and to Nepean Highway, however the limitation of one vehicle per dwelling, and the site’s proximity to Nepean Highway and the service road of Nepean Highway where the dominant vehicle movements are
76 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
likely to occur to and from the site, are considered able to be absorbed within this street network.
Parking on the site has been recommended to be increased, with the current proposal not providing any visitor or staff parking. With a recommended decrease in the total number of dwellings, it is considered that the proposal would be able to provide 11 visitor car parking spaces, which would be commensurate with a rate that could be applied using ResCode as a guide. This parking rate of 1 visitor space per 5 dwellings is also supported by the Advisory Committee Report (dated August, 2007) for the Review of Parking Provisions in the Victoria Planning Provisions (Clause 52.06). A condition is also recommended to allocate one (1) car parking space for a staff member associated with the retail premises within the proposed development. It is considered overall, that the proposal is able to provide adequate on-site parking (subject to conditions) and will not unduly impact on the street network.
13.2 Overdevelopment
As previously discussed, the proposal is considered an appropriate development within an area which is identified within local planning policy as designated for an ‘increased housing diversity’, where apartment style development can be contemplated. The site’s overall size (2167 square metres) and abuttal to commercial development to the south-east provide a context which is suitable for a higher density ‘apartment style’ development, in addition to proximity to public transport and the Mentone Activity Centre. The proposed design steps down in built form to alleviate the appearance of height and bulk with regard to adjoining single storey residential properties which is considered an appropriate response to the context of the site.
13.3 Overlooking
Overlooking from the site has been addressed through a combination of setbacks and screening to balcony balustrades to prevent unreasonable overlooking. Screening or obscured glazing has not been provided to west facing windows at the third and fourth floor to the western building; however these windows are to shared hallways rather than habitable rooms, with the setback and height of these windows limiting downward views. Unscreened balconies would be oriented to Collins Street, allowing important passive surveillance of the street, and to the south where commercial properties are located and a right of way.
13.4 Building Height/Visual bulk
The building which would be located on the eastern portion of the site has limited side and rear setbacks. This approach is considered appropriate in consideration of the Business 1 zoning of that portion of the land, corner location, and abuttals to a right of way and commercial properties. The western building, whilst five storeys in height, has significant setbacks from Collins
77 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Street and the abutting residential property to the west applying to the top two storeys, significantly reducing the overall appearance of height from the street and residential properties. The design also entails a high degree of articulation and use of light colours and materials which aid in lessening the presentation of visual bulk. As discussed under the Car Parking and Traffic assessment, changes are recommended to reduce the number of dwellings, which would delete the top (fourth) floor, and reduce dwellings at the third floor. Remaining floor footprints at ground, first and second floors would remain unaltered. Whilst the concept for a five storey building is considered acceptable, changes required to provide visitor parking which impacts on the number of dwellings to be accommodated within the development will result in a reduction in height which is considered acceptable.
13.5 Neighbourhood Character
The existing neighbourhood character whilst predominantly a combination of single storey and double storey detached housing, is evolving. Dual occupancies and multi-dwelling development is present in the locality, along with new development under construction which would provide apartment style development over four (4) storeys in height. A more recently approved development at No. 33-35 Childers Street, like the subject site, is also located outside of the Mentone Activity Centre and would comprise forty one dwellings over four storeys.
13.6 Overshadowing
The overshadowing impacts have been assessed, with the majority of shadow falling within the site or to commercial properties to the south, however it is recommended that alterations to the western building are made which would alleviate overshadowing to the western properties. Whilst Clause 55 (ResCode) is not applicable to developments of four or more storeys, it is recommended that the setback requirements under this Clause should be met with regard to the south-west corner of this building which in turn will reduce shadow cast to No. 142 Collins Street. Conditions have been recommended to pull back the built form which will reduce overshadowing at the third floor.
13.7 Noise
Objectors have raised concerns regarding noise during construction as well as after the development is complete. Any noise generated by residents and occupiers of the building would be considered to be consistent with a mixed use building and not unreasonable. Noise generated during the construction of the development will be inevitable, however if a permit is to be issued a condition requiring a Construction Management Plan is recommended, requiring the applicant to demonstrate that measures will be put in place to limit off-site amenity impacts, including construction hours. A condition is also recommended to require an acoustic report to identify noise sources within the development that should be appropriately treated such as plant
78 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
equipment, as well as limiting any noise impacts on future occupants of the development.
14.0 CONCLUSION:
14.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.
14.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by: The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area; The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and, The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy (inclusive of the Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines and the Designing Contextual Housing Guidelines), Residential 1 zoning and the Schedule to the zone, Overlays, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).
15.0 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered reasonable and warrants support.
16.0 RECOMMENDATION:
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued for the use and development of the land for the construction of fifty six (56) dwellings and a Shop with a reduction in the car parking requirement of Clause 52.06 and waiver of the loading requirements of Clause 52.07 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, subject to the following conditions: 13. 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 21 June 2011, 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: 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;
79 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
ii) the delineation of all garden beds, paving, grassed areas, retaining walls, fences and other landscape works including areas of cut and fill throughout the development; iii) all existing trees on the site and within three (3) metres to the boundary of the site on adjoining properties, accurately illustrated to represent actual canopy width and labelled with botanical name, height and whether the tree is proposed to be retained or removed; iv) a range of plant types from ground covers to large shrubs and trees; v) adequate planting densities (e.g.: plants with a mature width of 1 metre, planted at 1 metre intervals); vi) the provision of twelve (12) suitable small to medium sized (at maturity) canopy trees within the planters along Collins Street, and one (1) small (at maturity) tree within the private open space area of each ground floor dwelling, with species chosen to be approved by the Responsible Authority; vii) the planter boxes proposed along Collins Street are to be 800mm in depth to allow for the trees required; 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) all requirements of Melbourne Water, in accordance with Condition 21 of this permit; c) the provision of a notation on the plans stating: “The Right of Way located between the two proposed buildings must be reconstructed with coloured concrete with exposed aggregate feature bands and appropriate drainage up to the southern- most property boundary in accordance with the engineering plans approved by Council”; d) all ramps longitudinal sections with grades and apex; e) the surface material of all driveways / accessways and car parking spaces nominated in all-weather coloured concrete sealcoat, or similar; f) the provision of a roller shutter grille and intercom secure entry at the car park entry; g) dimensions of bicycle storage areas for residents and staff, to comply with Clause 54.34 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the Australian Standard for Bicycle Parking (AS2890.3-1993) and Austroads Guide to Traffic Engineering Practice –
80 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Part 14: Bicycle, with a minimum of 11 spaces allocated to residents and 6 spaces allocated to visitors; h) columns located a minimum of 750mm from the entry to car spaces; i) the allocation of car parking in accordance with Condition 8 of this Permit; j) the deletion of car space No. 50, maintaining clear pedestrian access to the lift and stairwell with the provision of bollards in that space; k) the provision of wheel stops to the end of car space No’s. 16, 17, 51, 53 and 54 designed to meet Australian Standards AS2890.1 – 2004, Parking facilities, Part 1: Off-street car parking; l) the relocation of storage areas in the lower basement from the eastern wall, to above bonnet cages and storage areas to the north and east of car space No. 18 relocated to above bonnet cages; m) the provision of 5.4 metres length to car spaces which abut a wall to the front of the space, with a reduction in accessway width to 5.8 metres and where appropriate car space widths to 2.4 metres (not abutting a wall or column to the side of the space); n) dimensions of storage areas and allocations to each dwelling; o) the pedestrian entry to the building on the western portion of the site brought forward to align with the front (north) wall of apartment G.03, and the provision of an architectural feature to identify this location as a main entry to the building; p) the deletion of apartment G11, with apartment G10 reconfigured to include the footprint of G11, maximising access to daylight to habitable rooms; q) the deletion of the fourth floor of the western building and two (2) dwellings from the third floor of the same building, which must include apartment 3.04; and the provision of a minimum setback at the third floor from the western side boundary of 10 metres; r) the provision of west facing highlight windows to apartments G06, 1.08, and 2.08. s) the provision of passive solar shading devices to west facing windows of the shared hallways at the third floor of the western building and to west facing windows of apartment 2.04, and to north facing windows of apartments 2.04, 4.01, 4.02, 4.03, 4.07 and 4.08; t) the provision of north facing operable clerestory windows to apartments 4.09 and 4.10, and third floor south facing dwellings in the western building, maximising daylight to habitable rooms; u) the removal of the curved wall and provision of a hard corner edge to the building at the corner of Nepean Highway and Collins Street, along with the continuation of the canopy to the retail premises to the Collins Street frontage, and at upper levels articulation measures through the use of windows, materials and finishes to articulate this corner element, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the Responsible Authority; v) materials and finishes to articulate the south-eastern elevation of the building located on the eastern portion of the site;
81 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
w) the incorporation of vertical architectural elements to the western façade of the western building; x) the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule, including samples, for all external elevations and driveways of the development with light colour tones where appropriate to be predominantly selected for the external facades of the building to increase heat reflection from those surfaces most exposed to heat loads, and where possible, the selection of applied finishes to the building’s façade to be of heat resistant properties; y) the provision of front fences to the Collins Street frontage with heights of no more than 1.5 metres above natural ground level, and constructed with a minimum of 25 percent (25%) transparency; z) full details of all boundary and internal fencing on floor plans; aa) provision of full details of walls that separate the balconies of dwellings, with heights to be a minimum of 1.7 metres; bb) the provision of external clothes lines for all ground floor dwellings, with the exception of apartments G01, G02 and G10 and G13; cc) clear definition on floor plans of all openings and windows; dd) north facing windows to the stairwell of the eastern building; ee) full details of louvre screening to prevent overlooking, with louvres angled to, prevent downward views and no more than 25 percent (25%) transparency; ff) full details of translucent glazing to prevent overlooking, with no more than 25 percent (25%) transparency; gg) the dimensions to all balconies on floor plans, with these to be no less than 1.8 metres in depth; hh) full details of the western elevation of the eastern building; ii) a comprehensive detailed drainage strategy of the site incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design Treatments to the satisfaction of the Council; jj) the provision of rainwater tank/s with a capacity relative to the roof surface catchment areas, clearly nominated for water re-use for toilet flushing; kk) a pedestrian path across the Right of Way, connecting the service entries of each building; ll) the location of any external heating/cooling units, plant equipment, lift overruns and clothes drying facilities clearly shown, with these suitably screened and where located on balcony areas must have minimal interruptions to the useability of that area; mm) a notation on the floor / site plan(s) stating: “The redundant vehicle crossing must be removed, kerb & channel must be reinstated and the extension to the existing footpath up to the wing of the vehicle crossing must be constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority”; and nn) measures identified within the amended ESD Report required under Condition 3 of this Permit.
82 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2. The development and use as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. Prior to the endorsement of the Plans required pursuant to Condition 1 of this permit, the provision of an updated ESD report prepared by a suitably qualified professional must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority, to reflect changes made within the built form and reduction of dwellings. 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 ESD report must include, but is not limited to, how the development will achieve a minimum 5 star and average 6 star energy rating, detailed initiatives for stormwater harvesting, insulation, daylighting, collective rainwater tanks and/or individual rainwater tanks, public and private landscape irrigation, energy efficient concepts, waste and recycling, building materials, glazing and internal/ cross-flow ventilation and the like. 4. Prior to the commencement of buildings and works associated with this approval, the owner of the land must enter into an agreement with the Responsible Authority pursuant to Section 173 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, in which it shall be covenanted as follows: a) Unless Council consents to the collection of waste from Collins Street, the owner/s of the site must engage the services of a waste contractor to collect and dispose of waste generated on site, including all commercial, domestic and recyclable waste. b) Except with the written consent of Council, the collection of refuse and recyclable materials must only occur between the hours of: 7am and 7pm – Monday to Saturday 9am and 6pm - Sundays and Public Holidays c) All owners and occupiers associated with the development forfeit the right to utilise the municipal domestic waste collection service, unless otherwise agreed by the Responsible Authority in writing. d) The Agreement is to be applied to each subsequent lot title created from the parent title. e) The owner is to cover all costs relating to the preparation and registration of the Agreement (including costs incurred by the Responsible Authority). 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 not limited to, the following: a. a detailed schedule of works which includes full project timing including right of way works and any footpath works; b. full details of any proposed construction hoarding locations, temporary footpath closures, proposed public safety signage and any proposed crane location positions external to the subject land; c. a full traffic management plan which is approved by VicRoads and details all proposed local or main road partial or full closures, locations as to how concrete
83 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
pours will be managed including vehicle storage locations and all required temporary signage and suggested locations; d. all proposed locations for how materials will be stored on and if permitted off site including site sheds and facilities; e. the location for the parking of all construction vehicles and construction worker vehicles during construction; f. full details as to the location and means in which loading/unloading of materials will occur; g. the means in which construction waste / waste materials will be managed both on and from the site; h. the means in which dust will be suppressed during construction i. business operations on the site during construction; j. site security; and k. construction times, noise and vibration controls. 6. Prior the commencement of the development, a report to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The report must be prepared by a suitably qualified acoustic engineer to show how the requirements of State Environment Protection Policy N-1 and relevant Australian Standards will be met and must prescribe the form of acoustic treatment to: a. dwellings to protect occupants from external noise sources b. any mechanical plant equipment installed or constructed as part of the development 7. The plans submitted to the Responsible Authority for endorsement must be updated to incorporate the acoustic engineer's recommendations and, where there are recommendations of an ongoing nature, must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 8. Prior to the occupation of the development, a car parking management plan prepared by an appropriately qualified traffic consultant must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the car parking management plan will be endorsed and form part of this permit. The car parking management plan must address, but is not necessarily limited to, all of the following:
a. The number and location of the car parking spaces to each dwelling/tenancy generally in accordance with the following (and denoting those that are designated as disabled spaces): 1 car space per dwelling (minimum) 1 car space for the retail premises 11 residential visitor car spaces b. The management of visitor car parking spaces and security arrangements for occupants of the development; c. Details of way finding, cleaning, security of end of trip bicycle facilities; d. Policing arrangements and/or formal agreements;
84 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
e. A schedule of all proposed signage including directional arrows and signage, informative signs indicating location of disabled bays and bicycle parking, exits, restrictions etc; f. Details on how the resident bicycle parking and visitor bicycle parking spaces are to be secured and how visitors are to gain access to this area; and g. Details regarding the management of loading and unloading of goods and materials for the retail premises and residential uses. 14. The car parking management plan must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. No alterations may be made without the prior written approval of the Responsible Authority. 9. Before the use commences, the Right of Way as described in Condition 1(c) must be reconstructed at the developer’s cost and maintained in accordance with the plans approved by the Council. Discussion with Council’s Development Engineer is recommended prior to the submission of a design. A priced schedule of works within Right of Way and the payment of Council’s engineering fees of 3.25% of the cost of works are required to be submitted prior to commencement. 10. 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 as contained in the Urban 11. Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines, CSIRO 1999. 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 for toilet flushing and irrigation, and a detention system. The overall permissible site discharge must be limited to 37l/s. 12. 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.). 13. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties. 14. The existing drainage within the Right of Way must be protected during construction at all times. 15. The existing rain garden located in the front of the development must be protected during construction all the times. 16. Prior to the occupancy of the development any part of damaged laneways abutting the development and footpath must be reinstated to Council’s satisfaction at the Developer’s cost. 17. Stormwater Quality Measures must be implemented during the construction.
85 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
18. The width of the land abutting the existing Right of Way and used for the widening of the Right of Way must be transferred to the Council as a Road Reservation. 19. Property boundary and footpath levels are not to be altered. 20. Any ramps or steps required by the development are to be wholly contained within the property boundary. 21. Melbourne Water Conditions a) No polluted and/or sediment laden runoff is to be discharged directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drains or watercourses. b) Dwellings are to be constructed with floor levels a minimum of 300mm above the applicable flood level. c) All doors, windows, vents and opening to the basement carpark/subfloor area must be a minimum of 300mm above the applicable flood level. d) The levels of the laneway must not be raised any higher than the existing surface level. e) Prior to the development plans being endorsed and commencement of works, plans must be submitted to Melbourne Water addressing Melbourne Water’s conditions showing ground and floor levels to Australian Height Datum (AHD). 22. The developer/owner must contact the Responsible Authority and VicRoads (if required) and arrange traffic management plans and WORKS ZONE for any works that may affect traffic (both vehicular and pedestrian) or parking on Collins Street or any of the surrounding streets. Works vehicles may not be able to stop in the street fronting the property. The developer will be responsible for the costs of arranging a WORKS ZONE and reinstatement of parking restriction signs, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 23. The obscure glazing to balconies 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. 24. 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. 25. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification. 26. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner. 27. 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.
86 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
b. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans. c. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. d. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 28. Any changes to external boundary fencing required for under this development shall be constructed at the cost of the owner of No. 90 Nepean Highway, Mentone to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 29. 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. 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. Service units, including air conditioning/heating units, must not be located where they will be visible from any public area. 32. The development must be provided with lighting capable of illuminating access to each car parking space, bicycle parking space, store, rubbish bin, recycling bin, pedestrian walkways, stairwells, lift, dwelling entrances and entry foyer. Lighting must be located, directed, shielded and of limited intensity so that no nuisance or loss of amenity is caused to any person within and beyond the site, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 33. The amenity of the area must not be detrimentally affected by the use or development, through: a) the transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from land; b) the appearance of any buildings, works or materials; c) the emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil, or d) the presence of vermin. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
87 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
37. 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.
The use does not start within one (1) year of the completion of the development.
The use is discontinued for a period of two (2) years. In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.
Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit. Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit. Note: If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water’s permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on telephone 9235 2517, quoting Melbourne Water’s reference 178323. Note: The applicable floor level for the property is 19.2 metres to Australian Height Datum (AHD). Note: No parking permits will be issued to residents of 90 Nepean Highway, Mentone. Note: Except where no permit is required under the provisions of the Planning Scheme, no sign, flashing or intermittent lights, bunting or advertising device may be erected or displayed on the land without the permission of the Responsible Authority.
Prior to the erection of any advertising signs on the land, consultation should be made with officers of the Town Planning Department to determine the relevant Planning Scheme Controls. OR
In the event that Council wishes to oppose the application, it can do so using the following grounds:
1. The inadequate provision of car parking fails to meet the objectives of Clause 52.06 and the objective and strategies of Clause 18.02-5 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, which will adversely affect the amenity of the locality.
88 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Bob Tyler addressed the meeting on behalf of the Objectors. Shane Williamson addressed the meeting on behalf of the Applicant.
Crs Dundas/Peulich
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued for the use and development of the land for the construction of fifty six (56) dwellings and a Shop with a reduction in the car parking requirement of Clause 52.06 and waiver of the loading requirements of Clause 52.07 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, subject to thirty-seven (37) conditions with the addition of an extra condition as follows:
“That the eastern most building on the corner of Nepean Highway and Collins Street be modified so that its uppermost (5th level) is removed so that it becomes a maximum 4 storey building, with car parking provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.”
Cr West foreshadowed a motion of refusal if the motion was not carried.
The Motion was put and Lost.
Crs West/Staikos
That Council issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit be issued, on the following grounds: 1. The inadequate provision of car parking fails to meet the objectives of Clause 52.06 and the objective and strategies of Clause 18.02-5 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, which will adversely affect the amenity of the locality. 2. The proposal would prevent the orderly and proper planning of the zone. 3. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the amenity of area. 4. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site. 5. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape. 6. The proposal is not consistent with the objectives of Clause 55.03-2 (Building Height) of the Kingston Planning Scheme as the proposed overall height of the residential building does not respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. Carried
Cr Athanasopoulos left the meeting at 9.36pm
Cr Athanasopoulos returned to the meeting at 9.39pm.
89 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 191 KP893/10 – 2 Bank Road / 271-282 Nepean Highway, Edithvale
APPLICANT Neil Fletcher Design ADDRESS OF LAND No.2 (Lot 10 on PS 004920) Bank Road, Edithvale (also known as 278-281 Nepean Highway) PROPOSAL Eight (8) dwellings (apartment style) PLANNING OFFICER Helen Walker REFERENCE NO. KP893/10 RELEVANT STATE Clause 11: (Settlement) PLANNING POLICY Clause 15: (Built Environment and Heritage) FRAMEWORK Clause 16: (Housing) RELEVANT LOCAL Clause 21.05: MSS – Residential Land Use PLANNING POLICY Clause 21.06: Retail and Commercial Land Use FRAMEWORK Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy ZONE Clause 34.01: Business 1 Zone OVERLAYS Clause 43.02: Design and Development Overlay 1 & 7 PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 52.06: Car Parking Clause 52.29: Land Adjacent to a Road Zone Clause 55: Two or more dwellings on a Lot and Residential Buildings (guide only) GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines RESIDENTIAL POLICY N/A AREA ABORIGINAL CULTURAL No HERITAGE SENSITIVITY DECISION DATE BY 29th July 2011 STATUTORY DAYS 176 days at 24/11/11 CONSIDERED PLAN 27th May 2011 REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED
1.0 KEY ISSUES RELATING TO THIS APPLICATION
- Traffic considerations - Neighbourhood character - Amenity impact (external & internal) - Energy efficiency - Site Zoning (Business 1 Zone)
90 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.0 PROPOSAL
2.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing dwelling and outbuildings on the land and construct eight (8) apartment style dwellings on this site.
2.2 Development summary:
Dwelling Floor Area Private Open Space No. of Bedrooms No. of Car (excluding proposed Parking Spaces garage / provided verandah) 1 90m² 15m² (balcony) 2 1 2 95m² 19m² (terrace) 2 1 3 90m² 14m² (balcony) 2 1 4 90m² 17m² (terrace) 2 1 5 75m² 13m² (balcony) 2 1 6 74m² 11.3m² (balcony) 2 1 7 75m² 11.5m² (balcony) 2 1 8 78m² 10m² (balcony) 2 1
2.3 There would be nine (9) car parking spaces within the basement car park that are accessible via a 6 metre wide crossover from Bank Road. Each apartment would have one (1) car space, and there would be an additional independent visitor car parking space provided.
2.4 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 68.3 percent and a permeability percentage of 10.6.
2.5 Development Assessment Table (Using ResCode requirements for the Residential 1 Zone as a guide only):
Criteria ResCode Requirement Proposed Development Provision Private Open A balcony of 8 square metres with a minimum width All dwellings comply with a terrace/ balcony Space of 1.6 metres and convenient access from a living area. room.
Car Parking One (1) car parking space for one (1) or two (2) Each dwelling would have one (1) car parking bedroom dwelling space within the basement, with an additional visitor parking space.
Front Setback There is no existing building on either of the 6.95m building setback and 3.5m to terrace of abutting allotments facing the same street, and the dwelling 1. site is not on a corner: 6 metres for streets in a Road Zone, Category 1, and 4 metres for other streets.
91 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Site Coverage Maximum 60% - as per ResCode Site coverage is 68.3% and does not meet standard (refer to the ResCode discussion section within this report – consideration to be given to the site which is within a Business 1 Zone)
2.6 The proposed building materials, colours and finishes are summarised in the table below:
Roof: Metal roofing, zincalume klip-lok Walls: Face brickwork – Austral ‘Bluestone’ & smooth faced blockwork Render: colorbond ‘surfmist’ & colorbond ‘shale grey’ Metal cladding: VM Zinc ‘Quartz Zinc’ Garage doors Open grille mesh Windows: Anodised aluminium Driveways: Ramp paving: non slip pebble mix paving Front fencing: Rendered 600 high front fence retaining wall: colorbond ‘surfmist’ Boundary fences: 1.8m high paling
3.0 SITE & SURROUNDS
3.1 The subject site comprises a 644.3m2 allotment on the south-east side of Bank Road in Edithvale, one (1) site south-west of the corner of Nepean Highway. It site is currently vacant with the exception of a metal shed at the rear (south-eastern) portion of the site and does not contain any significant vegetation. The site is encumbered by a 0.91 metre wide drainage easement that runs along the majority of the sites north- eastern common boundary. There appear to be no restrictions listed on the Certificate of Title.
3.2 Vehicle access to the site is currently via two (2) crossovers located at the north-eastern and south-western end of the Bank Road frontage.
3.3 The surrounding area typically comprises:
North-east (corner site): vacant land North-west (opposite): retail (on the corner) and double storey medium density housing South-west: vacant land South-east: double storey medium density development
There is no predominant fencing style in the neighbourhood.
It is noted that a development application was approved, at the direction of VCAT, and the permit issued on the 15th June 2011 for 16 apartments (over two levels, with roof top decks and basement parking), next to the subject property (on the south west side) at 4-6 Bank Road (also known as 279-281 Nepean Highway). This site is also within the Business 1 Zone.
92 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The Tribunal concluded in their determination on this proposal:
“The design of this proposed two-storey apartment development within the Business 1 Zone provides an appropriate transition from the commercial component of the Edithvale Neighbourhood Activity Centre to the foreshore residential precinct.
The development of 16 apartments on this prominent site in Edithvale also aligns well within State and local strategic objectives to encourage urban consolidation and increase housing diversity in activity centre locations. I consider that the proposed design will make a positive contribution to the rejuvenation of Edithvale.”
The proposal details a two storey apartment style development, of which the north east elevation faces the south west elevation of No. 2 Bank Road. The first floor balconies of units 11, 12, 13 and 14 on the north east elevation of 4-6 Bank Road face the subject site. Those balconies have solid balcony walls to 1000mm above the finished floor level, and only unit 14 has obscure glazing to 1700mm above the finished floor level, to restrict views to No.3 Turakina Avenue and No. 284 Nepean Highway (both at the rear of the subject site). The setback of the balconies is 1.8m to the boundary.
The windows on the south east elevation of the subject development, at first floor level for dwellings 7 and 8 are proposed with clear glazing, with a set back of 1.6m to the boundary. All habitable room windows are proposed to have fixed lourve screening to 1700mm (part) above the finished floor level for the south east elevation, as shown on the first floor plan. A condition of any permit issued can require the screening to be shown on the elevation plan. The design detail would consistent with Standard B22, and satisfies the objective of Clause 55.04-6 Overlooking objective, which is to limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows.
4.0 TITLE DETAILS
4.1 The Permit Applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there is no restrictive covenant on the title.
5.0 PLANNING CONTROLS
5.1 The subject site is located within a Business 1 Zone and is subject to Design and Development Overlays Schedules 1 and 7.
6.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
6.1 Pursuant to Clause 34.01 (Business 1 Zone), a planning permit is required to construct a building or construct and carry out works and to use the land for the purpose of a dwelling.
93 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.2 A planning permit is also required for a reduction in car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme.
7.0 RELEVANT HISTORY
7.1 The site is one of six (6) lots that previously formed part of a larger allotment that contained “Gales Marine” boat sales yard. Gales Marine has not existed on the site for some time, and the allotments have sold for further development. The site was previously used for commercial development, and is still zoned Business 1.
8.0 ADVERTISING
8.1 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. Three (3) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:
Parking and traffic concerns Neighbourhood character Overdevelopment
9.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
9.1 A preliminary conference was held on 9th August 2011 with the relevant Planning Officers, the Permit Applicant and two (2) objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.
9.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand.
10.0 REFERRALS
10.1 The following internal and/or external referral departments were notified:
Council’s Development Engineer – standard conditions are required to be placed on any approval issued. Some conditions regarding the basement access are also required and the modifications can be requested under Condition 1 of any permit issued.
Council’s Vegetation Management Officer – there is minimal area on the site to provide for landscaping, and therefore, a landscape plan is not required.
Council’s Roads and Drains Section - standard conditions are required to be placed on any approval issued.
Urban Design – No conditions required.
94 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Council’s ESD Officer – an ESD report will be required to be submitted via a Condition of any permit issued.
Council’s Traffic Engineer – No conditions required
Council’s Waste Management Section – A Condition requiring a Waste Management Plan will be placed on any approval issued.
Melbourne Water – No conditions Required
10.2 The above-mentioned referral authorities had no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being included on any permit issued.
11.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
11.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)
Clause 11 (Settlement) Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) Clause 16 (Housing)
11.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)
Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) Clause 21.06 (Retail and Commercial Land Use) Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy)
11.3 Particular Provisions
Clause 52.06 (Car Parking)
11.4 General Provisions
Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)
11.5 Other
11.6 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document)
11.7 The land is located within Area 65 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines. The proposal is generally in accordance with the applicable character profile. Any areas of non-compliance are discussed in the following sections of this report.
12.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
12.1 It is considered that the proposed development generally complies and satisfies the State and Local Planning Policy Framework guidelines which aim to encourage
95 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
well-designed housing, shops and higher density mixed used development in appropriate locations.
12.2 State Planning Policy Framework
The State Planning Policy Framework sets out the relevant state-wide policies for residential development and activity centres 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. With regard to activity centres, the policy encourages a diversity of housing types at higher densities in and around activity centres.
It is submitted that the proposed development satisfies the aforementioned State strategies and policy direction. 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.
This is further supported by the Tribunal’s decision in relation to Nos. 4-6 Bank Road whereby the member stated that “The development of 16 apartments on this prominent site in Edithvale also aligns well within State and local strategic objectives…”.
12.3 Local Planning Policy Framework
12.3.1 Clause 21.05 - Residential Land use
Activity Centres
As highlighted in the Policy, opportunities exist for higher densities within Kingston’s activity centres, particularly in the form of shop-top housing and mixed use developments.
The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include:
Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development.
96 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.
Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include: Encourage residential development within activity centres via shop-top housing and mixed use developments, and on transitional sites at the periphery of activity centres. The intensity and scale of such development will need to be in keeping with the scale of these centres. Support innovative residential infill development on former industrial sites adjacent to established residential areas, and on other mixed use or traditionally non-residential sites where appropriate. Promote a range of lot sizes and housing types, including medium density housing, on large residential opportunity sites, particularly where such sites have good access to public transport and other facilities. Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity nodes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving urban character. Ensure the siting and design of new residential development does not encroach on strategic infrastructure or create potential conflict with established uses which have potential to erode residential amenity including: . Industrial areas, extractive industries and rural land uses. . The Moorabbin Airport environs which are subject to aircraft noise. . The interface between urban and non urban areas. Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood. Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants. Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, waste and recycling, and stormwater management. Promote medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations. Ensure the siting and design of new residential development sensitively responds to interfaces with environmentally sensitive areas, including the foreshore. Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts. Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required,
97 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure. Require the provision of car parking to satisfy the anticipated demand having regard to average car ownership levels in the area, the environmental capacity of the local street network and the proximity of public transport and nearby on and off street car parking. Ensure that all new medium density housing provides adequate private open space that is appropriately landscaped.
It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal is considered to be an appropriate development for the site, and would present well to the existing streetscape and would be consistent with the neighbourhood character. Furthermore it contributes to the rejuvenation of Edithvale, and directly accords with the objective of promoting a range of lot sizes and housing types, including medium density housing, on large residential opportunity sites, particularly where such sites have good access to public transport and other facilities. The site adjacent has approval for 16 smaller units and the 8 proposed here, complements each other in providing a mix of residential opportunities.
12.3.2 Clause 21.06 – Retail and Commercial Land Use
The objectives (as relevant to this application) include:
To protect and strengthen the hierarchy of activity centres within Kingston. To reinforce the different built form character and function of activity centres consistent with their position in the activity centre hierarchy.
Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:
Promote mixed use precincts around key activity centres which encourage a broader range of cultural, social, commercial and higher density housing opportunities to complement retail functions of activity centres and enhance their economic vitality.
Opportunities to enhance retail mix, land use diversification (including medium density development opportunities) and development of specialist niche markets.
In accordance with Clause 21.06, the proposal supports one of the main issues surrounding retail and commercial land use, that being “…the nature of retailing activity strip centres remain an important part of the City’s retail scene and there is a need to support such centres by ensuring that decisions on new retail proposals underpin rather than undermine these centres.”. Whilst this is not a retail proposal, the proposed development in a Business 1 Zone will directly benefit the retail strip of
98 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Edithvale and contribute positively to the supporting objective of “Diversification of land use activity to incorporate residential/mixed use activity…”.
It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The site is considered to be an appropriate location for a medium density development as proposed.
12.2.3 Clause 22.11 - Residential Development Policy
As outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable Local Planning Policy Framework, which essentially aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations.
Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to:
. Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered. . In areas where building placement makes a major contribution to neighbourhood character, design new development to reinforce the established rhythm of buildings in the street and retain the existing single dwelling character of the streetscape.
Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Encourage the two storey component of new medium density housing to be located towards the front of a site. . Ensure that two storey dwellings are designed to respond to the character of the local neighbourhood. Where the local neighbourhood is characterised by single storey development and this characteristic makes a major or critical contribution to neighbourhood character, new two storey development should incorporate rooms within the roof form of attic style dwellings, and should set the second storey building envelope back from the ground level envelope. . Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours. . Encourage well articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk. . Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows. . Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties. . Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.
99 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape. Performance measures . Locating garages or carports at the rear of dwellings fronting a street wherever possible. . Ensuring that where garages are located in the street elevation, they are set back a greater distance than the front wall of the building. . Ensuring that garages and carports are sited so that a tandem car parking space can be provided in front of the garage or carport. . Incorporating garages and carports within the main roof line of the dwelling.
Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems. Performance measures On-site infiltration should be maximised by: . Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving. . Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system. . Designing to limit the impervious area. . Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.
Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy essentially extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) along with the State Planning Policy Framework provisions found at Clause 14.02-2 – Settlement and Clause 16.02 – Medium Density Housing, effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.
In summary, the proposal is seen to be strongly consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it delivers on some very specific objectives for the type and form of medium density development expected in areas within and around activity centres.
12.2.4 Clause 32.06 - Business 1 Zone
The purpose of the Business 1 Zone is:
. To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.
100 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. To encourage the intensive development of business centres for retailing and other complementary commercial, entertainment and community uses.
It is proposed to develop and use the site for residential purposes, within an existing activity centre. Whilst it is noted that the proposal is essentially inconsistent with the purpose of the Business 1 Zone which seeks to encourage commercial use and development, the proposal is consistent with the broader objectives and policy provisions of the scheme that are have been previously discussed in this report. Furthermore the use “Dwelling” is a permitted use in the Zone, therefore supporting residential activity. Specifically, the proposal is considered to encourage a higher density form of housing around an existing activity centre.
12.2.5 Clause 43.02 – Design and Development Overlay Schedules 1 & 7
The site is within the Design and Development Overlay Schedules 1 (Urban Coastal Height Control Area) and 7 (Urban Coastal Foreshore Setback Control Area). Neither Overlay triggers the requirement for a permit.
12 PLANNING ASSESSMENT
Pursuant to Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, the ResCode provisions do not apply to land within the Business 1 Zone. However, pursuant to the Decision Guidelines for Buildings and works listed at Clause 34.01-4 (Business 1 Zone) the objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 55 must be considered as appropriate.
As a residential development is proposed, ResCode should be used as a Guide to assess the development’s appropriateness.
Standard B1 Neighbourhood Character - The site is located within a Business 1 Zone with proximity to residential development. It is noted that there are a number of double storey multi-dwelling developments and commercial building forms in the area immediately surrounding the site, and given the site’s proximity to the Foreshore, there are a number of more recently constructed developments and renovated dwellings that have a contemporary built form, incorporating flat roofs, rendering and balconies positioned where possible to capture bay views. The site was previously occupied by Gales Marine, which did little visually to the amenity of the area, comprising brick building and associated outbuildings and sealed surface areas for display of boats.
The building form would be two (2) storeys in height and contemporary in its overall design and built form. The building form utilises the majority of the site area, resulting in an overall high site coverage and low site permeability. Given the nature of surrounding development, and also the nature of the development recently approved on land abutting to the north-east at 278-281 Nepean Highway, the proposed building form is generally consistent with the streetscape and appropriate to this locality. The designer has essentially used a variety of building materials with staggered setbacks where appropriate to reduce any perceived visual bulk. Car parking has been located within a basement, and would not dominate the Bank Road frontage.
101 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Overall, the built form that is proposed is considered to be appropriate within the surrounding area and broader neighbourhood.
Standard B8 Site Coverage & Standard B9 Permeability - The proposed building would have a high site coverage (68.3%) and low permeability (10.6%). It is noted that the site is located within a Business 1 Zone, and is within the Edithvale Shopping Centre with abuttal to residential development. Many of the surrounding commercial development and more recently approved residential development also maintains a relatively high site coverage. Overall, the design of the development is considered appropriate within the streetscape and locality, and the site coverage and permeability is justified.
Standard B10 Energy Efficiency & Standard B29 Solar Access to Open Space - The apartment design of the dwellings means that apartments 3 & 4 and 7 & 8 achieve poor northern sunlight into main habitable rooms and balcony/ terrace areas (albeit the balcony of dwelling 7 will achieve some northern access). The balcony for dwelling 8 in particular is not only located on the south-western side of the building, but is essentially enclosed, resulting in a poor amenity for future occupants. A Condition of any approval issued, will require that the balcony be designed with at least two (2) ‘open’ sides. This may result in the deletion of a bedroom for this dwelling.
However, it is noted that each dwelling achieves adequate natural light within all rooms, and overall, the building design and dwelling layout are considered appropriate. Waiving the requirements of this Standard can be justified in this instance.
Standard B13 Landscaping - There is minimal opportunity for landscaping on the site, given the overall high site coverage. Overall, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the streetscape and surrounding commercial/ residential development and the lack of landscaping can be justified.
Standard B17 Side and Rear Setbacks - As indicated on the elevation drawings submitted, a small part of the building form and features (not walls) encroaches into the side setback requirements of this Standard. However, these elements are part of the overall design and contribute to a less bulky and more visually interesting building form when viewed from the street and abutting properties. Land abutting to the south-east is presently vacant, and it is considered that, given the location of existing development on land abutting to the north-east and south-east, these properties would not be detrimentally impacted by the proposed setbacks. As such, a minor encroachment into the setback areas is justified.
Standard B18 Walls on Boundaries –The boundary walls proposed would exceed an average of 3 metres in height, as required under this Standard. It is considered appropriate that the boundary wall height proposed comply with a 3 metre average, and a Condition of any approval issued will require this.
13 Car Parking
In accordance with the Table at Clause 52.06-5 a dwelling requires two (2) car parking spaces. This equates to sixteen (16) car parking spaces for the apartments. Each apartment would be assigned one (1) space and there would be one (1) additional visitor parking space.
102 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
A total of nine (9) spaces are provided, which falls short of the 16 car spaces required. A reduction in car parking spaces pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme is therefore sought.
All apartments would contain 2 bedrooms, and if the proposal were assessed under the provisions of ResCode, which is considered the more relevant guide, only one (1) car parking space would be required for each. This being the case, the development would also generate a requirement for at least one (1) visitor car parking space, which is provided within the basement.
It is further noted that the site is within close proximity (about 150m) from Edithvale Railway Station, allowing residents easy access to trains as a mode of public transportation. The location, number and allocation of the car spaces is considered to comply with the purpose of Clause 52.06 which suggests “…promotion the efficient use of car spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities. “, and “To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car spaces having regard to the activities on the land and the nature of the locality.”. The number and location of spaces provides a safe, efficient and easily identifiable parking opportunity.
14 Aboriginal Cultural Heritage
It is important to note that the Subject Land is not identified in an area of Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Sensitivity.
15 Environmental Audit
Given that the site was previously developed and used as a boat sales yard, a condition of any approval issued will require the owner to supply a preliminary site assessment in accordance with the National Environment Protection Measures (Assessment of Site Contamination) 1999, and a report detailing the findings of the preliminary site assessment. If the site assessment identifies contamination of the land an environmental audit report will be required. A Soil Management Plan (SMP) will also be required.
16 RESPONSE AGAINST GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS
16.1 Parking and traffic concerns – Objectors have outlined concerns with traffic and car parking, particularly during the summer months with visitors using the beach, parking on streets within the surrounding area. At these times, street parking can reach saturation point. In this instance, the development has provided at least one (1) car parking space per apartment, and an additional visitor space. It is also noted that the site is within 150m of the Edithvale Railway Station.
Whilst it is noted that there is a great deal of street parking occurring during the summer months, it is considered that the proposal would not cause a marked change to on-street car parking. Given that the existing crossover at the north-eastern end of the frontage would be reinstated, at least one additional on-street parking space may in fact result from the proposal.
103 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
With regard to parking during summer months, this is something that occurs in bayside areas, and something that must generally be tolerated during warmer times when the beach is more extensively used. In a recent VCAT Determination P1794/2020 Vladimir Chernow v City of Kingston for the development of sixteen (16) apartments at 278-281 Nepean Highway Edithvale (abutting the site to the north-east) the Tribunal noted that “...development such as that proposed on the subject site is not unexpected and, in my view, unlikely to cause a dramatic change to on-street parking demand”.
It is considered that the surrounding road network would be able to accommodate any additional vehicle movements that are generated by the development. Overall, the proposal does not raise any traffic concerns.
16.2 Neighbourhood character – As outlined earlier in this report, the proposal is considered to be appropriate in terms of neighbourhood character.
16.3 Overdevelopment - As outlined above, the proposal achieves compliance with the provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including relevant local residential policy, municipal strategic statement and Clause 55. It is considered that the proposal represents an appropriate design solution for the site, and can be accommodated on the land, without adverse impact to abutting properties or the surrounding area. As such, the proposal is not considered to represent an overdevelopment.
17 CONCLUSION:
17.1 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by: The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area; The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and, The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy, Business 1 zoning and the Schedule to the zone, Overlays, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings (guide only), and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).
18 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered reasonable and warrants support.
19 RECOMMENDATION:
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit to use and develop the land for the construction of eight (8) dwellings and a reduction in the car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme be issued, subject following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When
104 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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 27th May 2011 but modified to show: a. a comprehensive detailed drainage strategy of the site incorporating the Rainwater Tanks and Water Sensitive Urban Design Treatments to the Satisfaction of Council; b. the basement ramp longitudinal section with grades and apex: the access ramp grades modified to 4.5m @ 1 in 14 (top); 1.5m @ 1 in 8; 4.4m @ 1 in 4 ; and 2.5m @ 1 in 8 (bottom); c. a notation on the plan stating “Property boundary and footpath levels are not to be altered”; d. a notation on the plan stating “Offset between the footpath and property boundary is not to be altered”; e. all boundary walls nominated as no higher than an average 3 metres; f. the balcony for Dwelling 8 on the south-east side of the building, modified to be open along at least two (2) sides, with the dwelling floor area to be decreased in size accordingly and screening measures in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; g. the wall of the balcony on the south west elevation for Dwelling 7 provided with screening measures in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; h. a notation on the plan stating “All reinstatements are to be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority”; i. relevant measures and recommendations identified in the ESD Report required under Condition 3; j. a pedestrian sight triangle provided on the western side of the proposed ramp measuring at least 1.5m (along driveway edge) x 1.0m (along the property line) and not containing any objects or vegetation greater than 600mm in height; k. the lower ramp transition flanged outwards by at least 1.5m; l. a 2.25m minimum height clearance above the access ramp and on the path to the bicycle storage area, and a 2.2m minimum height clearance elsewhere in the basement car park. These clearances are not to be intruded upon by any overhead obstructions including pipes, lights, ducts, garage door mechanisms; m. all habitable room windows on the first floor for dwellings 7 and 8 to show fixed louvre screening to 1700mm (part) above the finished floor level for the south west elevation, or screening measures in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; n. undercroft lighting to the basement ceiling and/or security lighting for carparking; and
105 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
o. the bicycle storage area is to be modified to include at least 8 wall mounted racks, spaces 0.5m apart and allowing for bicycles to extend 1.2m from the wall with an adjacent 1.5m wide (minimum) access aisle. 2. The development and as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. Prior to the endorsement of the plans required pursuant to Condition 1 of this permit, the applicant must provide an ESD report prepared by a suitably qualified professional with this plan to be submitted to an 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 must thereafter be complied with. The ESD report must include, but is not limited to, detailed initiatives for stormwater harvesting, insulation, day lighting, collective rainwater tanks and/or individual rainwater tanks, public and private landscape irrigation and car washing, energy efficient concepts, glazing and internal ventilation and the like. 4. Environmental Assessment: (a) Prior to commencement of the development the owner must supply a preliminary site assessment of the site in accordance with the National Environment Protection Measures (Assessment of Site Contamination) 1999 and a report detailing the findings of the preliminary site assessment must be submitted to the Responsible Authority: or (b) Prior to the use or development authorised by this permit the applicant must submit a Soil Management Plan (SMP) to the responsible authority. When approved, the SMP will form part of this permit and the actions required by the SMP must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Whichever is to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. (c) If the site assessment identifies contamination of the land identified in (a) or (b) above, an environmental audit report must be produced in accordance with Section 53X of the Environmental Protection Act or alternatively a Certificate of Environment Audit produced in accordance with Section 53Y of the Environment Protection Act must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. (d) Soil validation testing must take place during any excavation works to determine whether soil is unreasonably contaminated for the proposed residential uses noting that residential development is to be erected on the first and second floors. If site contamination is detected, the results of the soil testing must be forwarded to the Responsible Authority and the EPA within 7 days of receipt of the soil validation testing. 5. 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. 6. 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 and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The CMP must specify and deal with the parking of
106 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
vehicles during construction, delivery of materials, containment of waste on site and suppression of dust, business operations on the site during construction. 7. Before the commencement of any buildings and works on the Land, 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. 8. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater runoff quality and which also retains on site any increase in runoff as a result of the approved development. The system must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Council's Development Engineer can advise on satisfactory options to achieve these desired outcomes which may include the use of an infiltration or bio retention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system. 9. Before the development commences, a Stormwater Management Plan showing the stormwater works to the nominated point of discharge must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The Stormwater Management Plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed stormwater works including all existing and proposed features that may have impact (e.g. trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels, etc.). 10. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties. 11. Stormwater outflow from the development to the Council drainage system should not exceed the predevelopment outflow of the site. 12. A flood proof apex (i.e. hump) a minimum 250mm above the existing invert of kerb and channel along the Bank Road frontage must be provided to protect the basement entrance from overland flows or implement an alternative engineering solution for major flooding, approved by the Council. This apex is to be a permanent structure (e.g. hump in concrete driveway/ pathway, sleeper retaining wall, solid brick fence/ wall). Low mounted soil on its own is unlikely to be acceptable due to the likelihood of future disturbances. 13. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the nature strip, kerb and channel,
107 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
vehicle crossover and footpath must reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
14. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification.
15. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner.
16. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be: e. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. f. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans. g. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. h. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 17. 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. 18. Finished floor levels shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered or modified without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 19. External clothes drying facilities must be provided for each dwelling. 20. All works on or facing the boundaries of adjoining properties must be finished and surface cleaned to a standard that is well presented to neighbouring properties in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 21. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 22. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
The development and/or use are not started 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.
108 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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. Notes: Council’s Rates Department is responsible for determining and assigning property address details which include unit and street numbers, and street names. The onus is on the Permit Applicant/Land Owner to contact Council’s rates Department to determine unit 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 unit and street numbers, and street name purposes.
In the event that Council wish to oppose the application, it can do son on the following grounds:
a. The proposal would have an adverse affect on the amenity of an established residential neighbourhood. b. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site. c. The proposal fails to satisfy all the requirements of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme (ResCode), in particular Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character Objective, Clause 55.02-2 Residential Policy Objectives, Clause 55.03-3 Site Coverage Objective, Clause 55.03-4 Permeability Objective, Clause 55.03-5 Energy Efficiency Objective and Clause 55.05-5 Solar Access to Open Space Objective. d. The proposal does not fully satisfy the requirements of Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy, of the Kingston Planning Scheme. e. The proposal fails to meet the objectives and strategic directions of the Municipal Strategic Statement – Residential Land Use contained at Clause 21.05 of the Kingston Planning Scheme.
Neale Gale addressed the meeting of behalf of the applicant.
109 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Crs Shewan/Moloney
Council issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit to use and develop the land for the construction of eight (8) dwellings and a reduction in the car parking requirements pursuant to Clause 52.06 of the Kingston Planning Scheme on the following grounds: 1. The proposal would have an adverse affect on the amenity of an established residential neighbourhood. 2. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site. 3. The proposal fails to satisfy all the requirements of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme (ResCode), in particular Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character Objective, Clause 55.02-2 Residential Policy Objectives, Clause 55.03-3 Site Coverage Objective, Clause 55.03-4 Permeability Objective, Clause 55.03-5 Energy Efficiency Objective and Clause 55.05-5 Solar Access to Open Space Objective. 4. The proposal does not fully satisfy the requirements of Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy, of the Kingston Planning Scheme. 5. The proposal fails to meet the objectives and strategic directions of the Municipal Strategic Statement – Residential Land Use contained at Clause 21.05 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. Carried
110 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Note: as outlined previously in this report, the ResCode Assessment is used as a Guide only.
APPENDIX A – RESCODE ASSESSMENT Standard of the Kingston Planning Scheme Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings (Clause 55)
Complies with Requirement and Title and Objective Standard Proposed ? B1 Neighbourhood Character Yes See report – proposal is Design respects existing neighbourhood considered appropriate character or contributes to a preferred within the streetscape. neighbourhood character. Development responds to features of the site and surrounding area. B2 Residential Policy Yes Refer to report. 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. B3 Dwelling Diversity N/A Eight (8) dwellings Encourages a range of dwelling sizes and proposed. types in developments of ten or more dwellings. B4 Infrastructure Yes Can be addressed through Provides appropriate utility services and a permit condition. infrastructure without overloading the capacity. B5 Integration with the Street Yes Building integrates well Integrate the layout of development with with Bank Road frontage. the street B6 Street Setback Yes See report – the setback The setbacks of buildings from a street proposed is considered respect the existing or preferred appropriate to the locality neighbourhood character and make and streetscape. Refer to efficient use of the site. further discussion in the report.
B7 Building Height Yes Maximum: 9 metres Building height should respect the existing Proposed: 6.6 metres or preferred neighbourhood character. B8 Site Coverage No Maximum: 60% Site coverage should respect the existing or Proposed: 68.3%
111 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Requirement and Title and Objective Standard Proposed ? preferred neighbourhood character and Acceptable within the zone respond to the features of the site. and locality.
B9 Permeability No At least: 20% Reduce the impact of stormwater run-off Proposed: 10.6% on the drainage system and facilitate on- site stormwater infiltration. Acceptable within the zone and locality.
B10 Energy Efficiency No Not all apartments have Achieve and protect energy efficient north facing windows or dwellings and residential buildings. POS areas – refer to main Ensure orientation and layout reduces body of report for fossil fuel energy use and makes discussion. appropriate use of daylight and solar energy. B11 Open Space N/A Integrate layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development. B12 Safety Yes Does not raise any Layout to provide safety and security for concerns with regard to residents and property. safety.
B13 Landscaping No Limited ability for on-site To provide appropriate landscaping. landscaping which is To encourage: appropriate to the style/ Development that respects the form of development. 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. B14 Access Yes Access arrangements Ensure the safe, manageable and appear appropriate. convenient vehicle access to and from the development. Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood character.
112 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Requirement and Title and Objective Standard Proposed ? B15 Parking Location Yes Car parking within the Provide resident and visitor vehicles with basement is conveniently convenient parking. located. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments. B16 Parking Provision Yes Required: 9 (1 each Ensure car and bicycle parking meets the dwelling) + 1 visitor needs of residents and visitors. Proposed: 9 Accessways should be practical, attractive and easily maintainable. B17 Side and Rear Setbacks No The setbacks proposed Ensure the height and setback respects the are considered existing or preferred neighbourhood appropriate within the character and limits the amenity impacts on locality and more existing dwellings. particularly within the Business 1 Zone. Refer to main body of report for further discussion.
B18 Walls on Boundaries No It is considered that the Ensure the location, length and height of a boundary wall height wall on a boundary respects the existing or should meet the ResCode preferred neighbourhood character and average height limits the amenity impacts on existing requirements. dwellings. B19 Daylight to Existing Windows Yes Complies. Allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows. B20 North Facing Windows Yes Complies. Allow adequate solar access to existing north-facing habitable room windows. B21 Overshadowing Open Space Yes Complies. Ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space. B22 Overlooking Yes No detrimental Limit views into existing secluded private overlooking of abutting open space and habitable room windows. properties.
113 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Requirement and Title and Objective Standard Proposed ? B23 Internal Views Yes No internal views Limit views into existing secluded private envisaged. open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within the same development. B24 Noise Impacts Yes No noise impacts Protect residents from external noise and envisaged. contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings. B25 Accessibility Yes Apartments easily Consider people with limited mobility in accessible. the design of developments. B26 Dwelling Entry Yes Entry is clearly Provide a sense of identity to each identifiable. dwelling/residential building. B27 Daylight to New Windows Yes Complies Allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows. B28 Private Open Space Yes Decks/ balconies comply. Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate private open space. B29 Solar Access to Open Space No Poor solar access for Allow solar access into the secluded private balconies on the southern open space of new dwellings/buildings. side of the building.
B30 Storage Yes 6m3 storage areas within Provide adequate storage facilities for each the basement dwelling. B31 Design Detail Yes Complies. Encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. B32 Front Fences Yes No fencing proposed. Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character. B33 Common Property Yes Appears workable. Ensure car parking, access areas and other communal open space is practical, attractive and easily maintained. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.
114 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Requirement and Title and Objective Standard Proposed ? B34 Site Services Yes Complies. 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.
115 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 192 KP79/11 – 8 – 18 Bendigo Street Cheltenham & 13 – 17 Wilson Street Cheltenham
APPLICANT Ratio Consultants Pty Ltd ADDRESS OF LAND No. 8-18 Bendigo Street, Cheltenham & No. 13-17 Wilson Street, Cheltenham PROPOSAL Develop the land for an extension to a residential aged care facility PLANNING OFFICER Tanya Sokolowski REFERENCE NO. KP-79/2011 RELEVANT STATE Clause 11 (Settlement) PLANNING POLICY Clause 15: (Built Environment and Heritage) FRAMEWORK Clause 16: (Housing) RELEVANT LOCAL Clause 21.05: MSS – Residential Land Use PLANNING POLICY Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy FRAMEWORK ZONE Residential 1 OVERLAYS Not applicable PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities Clause 55: Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines RESIDENTIAL POLICY Increased Housing Diversity AREA ABORIGINAL CULTURAL No HERITAGE SENSITIVITY DECISION DATE BY 12 November 2011 STATUTORY DAYS 9 days at 21 September 2011 CONSIDERED PLAN 13 September 2011 REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED
1.0 KEY ISSUES
1.1 This application was tabled at the October Council meeting, where it was determined to defer it to the November Planning Committee meeting for further discussion. A number of issues were raised in relation to the application at the October Council meeting and following this meeting, Council officers met with the applicant and applicant’s representative on 3 November 2011 to discuss those matters, which included the following:
1. Site coverage 2. Retention of existing vegetation 3. Treatment of Wilson Street façade 4. Increasing side setbacks
116 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The above issues were discussed at length, however the applicant advised that they wish to pursue the current application as it stands on the basis that the application largely satisfies requirements of the Planning Scheme, and this report therefore remains substantially unchanged since it was tabled at the October Council meeting. It is important to note that the issue of site coverage has been clarified, with an error in the report identified and corrected. The previous report stated that the proposed site coverage is 77%. The proposed site coverage for the land at No’s 13 – 17 Wilson Street is 59%. This report has been amended accordingly to reflect that the proposal complies with the numerical requirements of Clause 55.03-3 of the Kingston Planning Scheme.
1.2 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to: Traffic and Parking considerations Neighbourhood character Amenity impact (internal and external) Vegetation/landscaping considerations
2.0 RELEVANT HISTORY
2.1 A search of Council records found a number of Planning Permits have been issued to the site at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street, Cheltenham. Permit KP97/325 was issued by the City of Kingston on 3 July 1997 for the subdivision of the land into twelve (12) lots. Permit No. MBN/7372 was issued by the City of Moorabbin on 17 January 1995 for the construction of a double storey institutional home (Special Accommodation House).
2.2 The current planning application was lodged on 8 February 2011. Subsequent to the application being advertised, the applicant amended plans on 13 September 2011 pursuant to Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act, 1987. It is these plans which are now being considered.
2.3 The subject site is comprised of several allotments over No. 10-12 Bendigo Street and No.’s 13-17 Wilson Street. For the purposes of this assessment, No.’s 13-17 Wilson Street and No. 10-12 Bendigo Street are combined and considered to form the ‘subject site’.
3.0 PROPOSAL (AS AMENDED)
117 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing dwellings and outbuildings on the land at No’s 13-17 Wilson Street, and construct an extension to the existing aged care facility located at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street. The proposed extension would comprise a basement car park, and three storeys. It is proposed that the extension would provide for 81 additional beds to the existing facility, and that these beds would be used for ‘high care’ patients. The proposal would also entail minor alterations to the ground floor of the existing facility at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street, including the provision of a walkway between the old and new buildings.
3.2 The details of the proposal are as follows:
Basement
35 car spaces (including 22 within tandem spaces) A loading bay Plant and store rooms Staff room Bathroom Kitchen and associated refrigerated rooms and storage Linen/laundry rooms 2 lifts and 3 stairwells allow access to upper levels
Ground floor (shown as first floor on submitted plans)
27 bedrooms Courtyard Lounge Chapel Theatre room Dining and living area Hairdressers room Activities room Nurses station and office Reception area Storage areas, consulting rooms A covered north-facing outdoor area with stairs to a first floor balcony
First floor (shown as second floor on submitted plans)
35 bedrooms Void/light well Lounge room Dining and living area, including a café Activities area Nurses station and office Storage areas, consulting rooms Small sitting areas throughout this level, located off hallways 118 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
A north-facing balcony
Second floor (shown as third floor on submitted plans)
19 bedrooms Void/light well with a balcony Two (2) lounges Dining and living area Activities room Nurses station and office 1 balcony facing Wilson Street and 1 north facing balcony
General The topography of the site requires a significant degree of cut into the northern portion of the site, resulting in a subterranean ground floor towards the northern boundary and requisite retaining walls. The building would be constructed of prefabricated concrete panels, cladding with a timber vertical appearance, stone cladding, and colorbond corrugated roof sheeting. The building is proposed to be provided with a flat roof. A 1.8 metre high front fence is proposed to part of the front boundary, constructed of rendered bricks. Access to the basement is proposed to be provided from a double crossover located towards the southern site boundary at No. 13 Wilson Street. The existing crossovers to No’s 15 and 17 are proposed to be removed, and a new single width crossover located approximately 16.6 metres from the southern most boundary (No. 13 Wilson Street). A driveway to the front of the building is proposed, with access in and out via the 2 new crossovers, with the intention that this would only be used for emergency vehicles. Visitor access to the site is proposed to remain from the existing facility on Bendigo Street, where the main reception and secure entrance is located, with parking at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street, proposed to remain for visitor use. The overall proposed height of the building would be 11.2 metres. The proposed street setback from Wilson Street is proposed to be 7.95 metres.
3.3 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 59 percent and a permeability percentage of 23.
3.4 The proposal is required to be assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode), however a Development Assessment Table is not provided in this instance, as the assessment of critical elements such as car parking and private open space differ from typical residential development. A full Clause 55 assessment is provided in Appendix A, and discussion of this assessment can be found at Section 13 of this report.
4.0 SITE & SURROUNDS
119 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
4.1 The subject site comprises allotments at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street and No.’s 13-17 Wilson Street, located to the eastern (rear) boundary. No. 10-12 Bendigo Street is occupied by an existing aged care facility, Cheltenham Manor, which currently has a licence for a 90 bed ‘low care’ facility. The land at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street has 12 car parking spaces. The building is single storey in height at the Bendigo Street frontage, and two (2) storeys in height to the rear. A 2 metre wide drainage and sewerage easement dissects the site in half, between the single storey building and the larger, double storey component.
4.2 No. 13 Wilson Street has a frontage width of 15.24 metres, depth of 84.12 metres and overall approximate area of 1281.9 square metres. A 1.83 metre wide drainage and sewerage easement extends along the rear boundary. The site is occupied by a single storey brick dwelling, with tiled transverse gabled roof and an outbuilding. The land is heavily vegetated to the rear of the dwelling and within the front yard. A driveway extends along the site’s northern site boundary.
4.3 No. 15 Wilson Street has the same dimensions as No. 13 Wilson Street, and also contains a 1.83 metre wide drainage and sewerage easement extending along the rear boundary. The site is occupied by a single storey brick dwelling, with a concrete tiled hipped roof and outbuildings. Access to the site is via a crossover located to its southern site boundary. The site also contains notable vegetation to the rear of the dwelling.
4.4 No. 17 Wilson Street has a frontage width of 15.24 metres, site depth of 45.72 metres and overall approximate area of 696.7 square metres. The site is occupied by a single storey weatherboard dwelling with a tiled transverse gabled roof and a garage to the rear of the dwelling. The site is accessed from a crossover located towards its southern site boundary. The site contains a large Lilly Pilly tree towards its north-east corner.
4.5 To the front of each allotment at No.’s 13-17 Wilson Street are a street tree, and two (2) on-street car parking spaces.
4.6 Topography over the 3 allotments on Wilson Street rises significantly from south to the north, by approximately 4 metres.
4.7 To the south of No. 10-12 Bendigo Street is Our lady of the Assumption Parish Primary School. To the south of No’s. 13 -17 Wilson Street, at No. 11 Wilson Street, are seven (7) single storey, attached villa units, constructed of brick. Two (2) crossovers are provided to the site, with one located towards the site’s northern boundary. Private open spaces for 6 of the dwellings are oriented to the north, adjacent to the shared boundary with the subject site and to the west for one dwelling at the rear.
4.8 Adjoining the site to the north at No’s 19-21 Wilson Street, are eight (8) single storey brick dwellings, arranged around a central accessway. Part of this site extends behind No. 17 Wilson Street and shares a side boundary with No. 15 Wilson Street.
120 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
4.9 The site is within proximity of the Cheltenham Major Activity Centre to the south- west of the site, and is located approximately 630 metres south-east of Southland Shopping Centre. Cheltenham Railway Station is approximately 470 metres south- west of the subject site.
4.10 The broader surrounds to the north, east and west of the site are characterised by residential development, predominantly comprised of single detached dwellings, with evidence of some infill and multi-dwelling development (including double storey forms) scattered throughout. Within Wilson Street the character is a predominantly suburban setting, with a varied character towards Centre Dandenong Road where multi-dwelling developments are located, along with the Primary School and a recreational facility on the corner of Wilson Street and Centre Dandenong Road.
4.11 An aerial photo of the existing facility at Bendigo Street, and the 3 allotments on Wilson Street is provided below:
121 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Subject Site Melway Ref: 86 KI
5.0 TITLE DETAILS
5.1 The Permit Applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there is no restrictive covenant on the title.
6.0 PLANNING CONTROLS
6.1 The subject site is located within a Residential 1 Zone and is not subject to any overlays.
7.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
7.1 Pursuant to Clause 32.01-4 a planning permit is required to construct or extend a residential building.
7.2 Pursuant to Clause 52.34 a planning permit is required to waive the requirement to provide bicycle facilities.
122 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
8.0 ADVERTISING 8.1 Prior to advertising, the Permit Applicant submitted revised plans on 7 April 2011 that sought to address concerns outlined within the Planning Officer’s further information letter. It is these revised plans that formed part of the advertising documentation but have since been further amended on 13 September 2011 (pursuant to Section 57A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987), following the advertising process, to address some of the concerns raised by objectors and Council officers.
8.2 As discussed, the proposal was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining notices on site for fourteen (14) days. Seventy-three (73) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:
Neighbourhood Character Overdevelopment and visual bulk concerns Parking and traffic concerns Loss of privacy Overshadowing Overlooking Drainage
8.3 In addition to objections, forty-four (44) letters of support for the proposal were also submitted. A summary of common themes includes difficulties experienced trying to find available beds in high care facilities locally, the importance of being able to continue care for patients in the same facility from low care to high care needs and keeping families together in their community.
8.4 The amendments made to the plans following the advertising process include the following:
. Extension to the basement level to the north to provide eleven (11) additional car spaces (within tandem arrangement) . Basement ramp widened to 6 metres . Reduction of bedrooms from 84 to 81 . Variances in some side setbacks, with variances generally increasing setbacks (small decrease to the front), enabling the retention of the Lilly Pilly to the north- east corner . Provision of a balcony to the front of the building oriented to Wilson Street. . Increased screening to windows and balconies.
8.5 The revised plans submitted after the advertising process constitute those that are now under consideration by Council and, therefore, supersede all earlier plans.
123 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
9.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
9.1 A preliminary conference was held on 21 June 2011 with the relevant Planning Officer, the Permit Applicant and 24 objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.
9.2 The above concerns were unable to be resolved at the preliminary conference, and the objections still stand.
10.0 REFERRALS
10.1 The following internal referral departments were notified:
Council’s Development Engineer who advised of no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being included on any permit issued, including a comprehensive drainage strategy incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design. Council’s Vegetation Management Officer who advised that the Lilly Pilly required retention. Council’s Traffic Engineer who advised of no objection to the proposal subject to changes which included the widening of the basement ramp, provision of a delivery/loading bay in the basement, further details regarding headroom clearance for delivery vehicles utilising the basement and ramp, provision of adequate sight lines in line with Australian Standard Figure 3.3, AS/NZS2890.1:2004 and swept path movements for delivery vehicles utilising the basement. Council’s Street Trees Co-ordinator who advised that the street tree (Chinese Elm) to the front of No. 13 Wilson Street is able to be removed at the cost of the owner/developer, at a cost of $279. Council’s Roads and Drains Engineer who advised of no objection subject to permit conditions specifying footpath reinstatement requirements and footpath and property boundary levels to remain unaltered. Council’s Waste Management Officer who advised that the proposed private collection of waste from the site was deemed suitable.
11.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
11.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)
Clause 11: Settlement Clause 15: Built Environment and Heritage Clause 16: Housing
11.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)
124 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Clause 21.03: Land Use Challenges for the New Millennium Clause 21.04: Vision Clause 21.05: Residential Land Use Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy
11.3 Particular Provisions
Clause 52.34: Bicycle Facilities Clause 55: Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings – Refer to Appendix A for the Planning Officer’s full assessment against this Clause.
11.4 General Provisions
Clause 65: Decision Guidelines
11.5 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document under Clause 21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF)
The land is located within Area 8 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines. These guidelines are not considered relevant to the application, as they relate to the development of dwellings, rather than aged care facilities, however they are instructive in identifying the predominant characteristics of the locality, which will be used to assess the proposal further under the Clause 55 discussion within this report.
11.7 Design Contextual Housing Guidelines (April 2003 – reference document within Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy)
The Design Contextual Housing Guidelines offer a range of design techniques and suggestions to assist with residential design, which is responsive to local character.
It is considered that these guidelines are not applicable to the proposal, as they relate to the development of dwellings, rather than larger scale residential buildings such as aged care facilities.
12.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
12.1 State Planning Policy Framework
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.
Specific to this application is Clause 16.02-3 - Residential aged care facilities with the objective:
125 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
To facilitate the timely development of residential aged care facilities to meet existing and future needs.
Identified strategies to achieve the objective are:
Encourage planning for housing that: Delivers an adequate supply of land or redevelopment opportunities for residential aged care facilities. Enables older people to live in appropriate housing in their local community.
Clause 16.02-4 – Design and location of residential aged care facilities contains the objective:
To encourage well-designed and appropriately located residential aged care facilities.
The following strategies are applicable:
Recognise that residential aged care facilities contribute to housing diversity and choice, and are an appropriate use in a residential area. Recognise that residential aged care facilities are different to dwellings in their purpose and function, and will have a different built form (including height, scale and mass). Provide for a mix of housing for older people with appropriate access to care and support services.
Ensure that residential aged care facilities are located in residential areas, activity centres and strategic redevelopment areas, close to services and public transport. Ensure that: o Residential aged care facilities are designed to respond to the site and its context. o Residential aged care facilities aspire to high urban design and architectural standards. 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. 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. It is considered the subject site is a suitable location for an aged care facility, and that the built form of the proposed extension, whilst generally of a greater scale and mass than the predominant built form within Wilson Street, is appropriate.
126 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
12.2 Local Planning Policy Framework
The Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF) includes the Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) and Local Policies. The MSS is contained within Clause 21 of the Scheme, with the Municipal Profile outlined at Clause 21.02, within which the following is noted:
The City of Kingston is home to around 135,000 people within an area of approximately 91 square kilometres. 2001 census figures indicated that 31% of people were aged over 50, and 19.3% over 60 years of age, with these figures notably exceeding the Melbourne average. Between 1986 and 2001, the proportion of the population aged over 70 increased from 7.5% to 11%. Detached housing remains the predominant form of housing, accommodating around 80% of Kingston’s population. Kingston’s average household size is decreasing, with this projected to fall from 2.5 in 2001 to 2.31 by 2021.
Clause 21.03 (Land Use Challenges for the New Millennium) acknowledges Kingston’s growing aged population, coupled with the municipality’s trend towards smaller household sizes will put pressure on the supply of appropriate housing stock to meet current and future needs. As a result of increasing pressure to supply housing and meet urban consolidation objectives, change management is required to ensure that development is responsive to neighbourhood character issues specific to each locality.
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.
The subject land is identified within an Increased Housing Diversity area.
The intention in these areas is for new medium density housing to comprise of a variety of housing types and layouts that respond to the established, yet evolving, urban character. As these residential areas are already established, the design of any new medium density housing proposal should display sensitivity to the existing residential context and respond to the amenity standards in these areas.
The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include:
Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change.
127 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. Objective 3: To preserve and enhance well landscaped/vegetated environments and protect identified significant vegetation. Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development. Objective 5: To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses. Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities. Objective 7: To ensure all residential neighbourhoods in Kingston are provided with supporting social infrastructure adequate to the population’s needs. Objective 8: To recognise and respond to special housing needs within the community.
Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:
Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity notes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character. Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood. Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants. Encourage the retention of existing vegetation wherever possible. Improve landscape character by accommodating appropriate landscaping within new residential developments. Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, wast and recycling, and stormwater management. Promote medium density housing development in close proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations. Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts.
128 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required, where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure. Ensure the development of large residential opportunity sites contributes to identified social infrastructure needs. Ensure the provision of aged and low cost accommodation is integrated within residential neighbourhoods to ensure linkages with the general community and social networks and to avoid physically or socially isolating people. Support opportunities for the innovative provision of housing specific to housing needs not well catered for in the mainstream housing market such as aged accommodation and housing for low income groups. Recognise and respond to the specific needs for supporting infrastructure and services of some parts of the community.
It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement as outlined above. The proposal creates an acceptable standard of amenity for the future occupants of the facility, as well as for occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area. It is considered that whilst the development will introduce double storey built form into a predominantly single storey streetscape, that this is suitable in a location which is earmarked for increased residential densities where apartment style development could be appropriately located. The proposed extension supports critical objectives and strategies which seek to increase the diversity of housing available within the Kingston municipality, and will achieve an integrated form of specialised accommodation which will allow the people to age within their community.
12.3 Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy
As outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable Local Planning Policy Framework, which essentially aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations.
Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to:
. Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered. . In areas where building placement makes a major contribution to neighbourhood character, design new development to reinforce the established rhythm of buildings in the street and retain the existing single dwelling character of the streetscape.
Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:
129 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Encourage the two storey component of new medium density housing to be located towards the front of a site. . Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours. . Encourage well articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk. . Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows. . Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties. . Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.
Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape.
Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems. Performance measures On-site infiltration should be maximised by: . Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving. . Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system. . Designing to limit the impervious area. . Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.
This Clause is of particular relevance to dwelling development, but does provide guidance to how the built form of residential buildings generally, should respond to their context. The subject site is located within an area which is identified as being suitable for ‘increased housing diversity’ with the proposal for an aged care facility considered to be consistent with the objectives of this Clause.
130 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The design, siting and scale of the proposal will be discussed in further detail within this report, however it is considered that the nature of the building being an aged care facility does mean that it may have a different appearance from a traditional apartment style development. The design has addressed the side setbacks which are required by Clause 55 (ResCode), and has incorporated screening devices to ensure the privacy of adjoining dwellings. The site’s topography has been addressed well by the development, with the degree of cut proposed to the northern portion of the site minimising the appearance of the upper floor and presenting as a two (2) storey development to properties to the north.
In summary, the proposal is seen to be strongly consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it delivers on some very specific objectives regarding improving the diversity of housing choice available to people in the community, and catering for a special housing need for Kingston’s growing ageing population.
12.4 Zoning Provisions
The subject site is located in a Residential 1 Zone, as is the land to the north, south and west. Land to the east of the site, is located within a Residential 3 Zone.
The purpose of the Residential 1 Zone outlined at Clause 32.01 is:
To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. To provide for residential development at a range of densities with a variety of dwellings to meet the housing needs of all households. To encourage residential development that respects the neighbourhood character. In appropriate locations, to allow educational, recreational, religious, community and a limited range of other non-residential uses to serve local community needs.
It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the purpose of the zone.
Pursuant to Clause 32.01-4, a permit is required to construct or extend a residential dwelling. The development must meet the requirements of Clause 55.
12.5 Overlay Provisions
No overlays apply to the subject site.
12.6 Particular Provisions
Clause 52.34 Bicycle Facilities does not provide a specific rate for residential aged care facilities, however provides the following requirements at Clause 52.34-3 for a Residential Building :
131 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
In developments of four or more storeys, 1 bike space for employees/residents to each 10 lodging rooms In developments of four or more storeys, 1 bike space for visitors to each 10 lodging rooms
As the proposal entails only three (3) storeys, no bicycle facilities are required under this provision, however this will be discussed further in this report.
13.0 CLAUSE 55 (RESCODE ASSESSMENT) The proposal has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to attachment A). The assessment of the application against Clause 55, results in the need to vary some of the requirements of Clause 55 which relate more specifically to development for residential dwellings, as opposed to a residential building for an aged care facility. In particular, car parking and bicycle facilities will be discussed separately from this Clause 55 assessment, as well as landscaping and vegetation issues of the site. Overall, the proposal has addressed the requirements of ResCode well, with a summary of the assessment and further discussion of any concerns addressed below.
Neighbourhood Character 13.1 The existing neighbourhood character around the subject site is predominantly low scale, detached dwellings, with the area yet to see significant residential development reflective of the site’s Residential 1 Zone and its location within an area earmarked for ‘increased housing diversity’. The site is located in proximity to the Cheltenham Railway Station, Cheltenham Major Activity Centre, and Southland Shopping Centre (and Principal Activity Centre). The preferred character, as nominated within local planning policy at Clause 21.05 and Clause 22.11 envisages that this area is suitable for medium density development, and over time the character of the neighbourhood will evolve in line with this policy direction. The proposed built form is therefore considered to be consistent with the preferred future character that has been identified. The design has attempted to limit its off-site amenity impacts (to be discussed further below), and has responded to the constraints of the site’s topography by proposing a degree of cut which would sink the ground level, and reduce the overall three storey appearance of the proposal.
13.2 The overall built form however, is a departure from the existing character, with this acknowledged by the applicant. Aged care facilities, as a specialised form of housing, often entail a built form which is different from other residential buildings in relation to massing and height. This is considered acceptable in this subject site’s context. Local and State planning policy strongly encourage development to meet increasing demand for housing, and in particular for housing which meets special needs such as aged care services. The location of aged care facilities within existing residential neighbourhoods is also strongly encouraged, allowing people to age within their communities and retain a sense of social inclusion.
132 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
13.3 The design is considered to propose a development which will integrate well with the street, pursuant to Standard B5 – Integration with the Street. Windows are oriented to the street, along with a balcony, presenting an active façade and importantly allowing passive surveillance of the street, also satisfying Standard B12 – Safety. A 1.8 metre solid rendered fence is proposed to part of the site’s frontage to Wilson Street, however the height of this fence is considered appropriate as a security measure to enclose the communal open space located to the north of the building. The fence would not extend along the entire front boundary, but rather for an approximate length of 15 metres. It is considered that the fence will not impinge on the building’s integration with the street.
Site Layout and Building Massing 13.4 The overall proposed building height of 11.2 metres exceeds the height specified in Standard B7. The building height objective of Clause 55.03-2 is ‘to ensure that the height of buildings respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character’. Standard B7 of this Clause states that the maximum building height should not exceed 9 metres, unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case the maximum building height should not exceed 10 metres. The site has a slope of 10 degrees, which results in the maximum building height under consideration being 10 metres. The design will entail significant cut towards the northern boundary, with the ground floor effectively being below the ground level of the adjoining properties and presenting as a two storey building along the northern elevation. Along the southern elevation, the significant recessing of the third storey also minimises the impact of this upper floor to adjoining dwellings to the south. When viewed from the street, the appearance of height is also limited by the cut to the site, with design detail such as varied materials, planter boxes and balcony helping to break up the massing of the front façade. The overall height proposed is considered acceptable.
13.5 As discussed above the proposal entails a departure from predominant built form in the locality. The design proposes built form throughout the length of the site, and consideration has been given to the impact that this massing will have on adjoining properties. The attached nature of the development, whilst not dissimilar to the massing throughout the length of the abutting site at No. 11 Wilson Street, proposes a three storey height. The cut which will be undertaken to the site will assist in alleviating the degree of height presenting to adjoining dwellings, combined with a recessed third floor, stepping in and out of side walls and use of varied building materials will assist in breaking up the visual mass of the building.
133 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
13.6 The proposal entails site coverage of 59%, which falls under the maximum of 60% under Standard B8 of Clause 55, and therefore satisfying the numerical standard. As discussed above, the built form of aged care facilities is often different from other residential development with particular regard to massing and height. The design does ensure that the basement is provided with substantial setbacks from side boundaries, which will allow for landscaping to soften the development, and retention of some established trees. In addition, Council’s Drainage Engineers have recommended permit conditions regarding the requirement for a drainage plan, and the utilisation of water sensitive urban design principles in the treatment of stormwater. It is considered that these factors lessen the impact of the proposed site coverage on the impact of drainage of the site and the appearance of visual bulk to adjoining properties.
Offsite Amenity 13.7 A number of areas of Clause 55 are not met by the proposal; of particular concern is the overshadowing impact to dwellings at No. 11 Wilson Street. The degree of amenity received to these dwellings is currently impacted by the shadow cast by the existing boundary fence, in addition to some established trees on the subject site near the shared boundary. The private open spaces of these dwellings would appear to be modest (approx. 25 square metres), with these areas unlikely to currently receive 5 hours of sunlight between the hours of 9am and 3pm to at least 75% of their yards (as required by Standard B21 of Clause 55). The proposal would add further shadow to the private open spaces of Units 2, 3, 4 and 5. This is considered unsatisfactory, and a condition is recommended to pull back walls to meet the requirements of this Standard. This may result in the loss of bedrooms to the proposed extension and is considered the most significant amendment required, in order to achieve an acceptable outcome for the site. A condition can be included on any permit issued to resolve this concern; this would most likely impact upon bedrooms numbered 9-12 on the first floor (4 bedrooms) and the stairwell which appear to be the walls which create the most shadow affecting abutting properties.
13.8 Existing windows on adjoining properties are provided with appropriate setbacks in accordance with Standard B19, where this Standard requires a minimum light court of 3 square metres. Generally across the site, walls would be setback at least 4 metres from the side boundaries. Where the setback proposed is less than 4 metres, such as towards the north-west corner of the site at No. 15 Wilson Street, the habitable room window located at No. 6/19-21 Wilson Street is setback from the shared boundary 2.6 metres, with the proposed development setback 2.5 metres from that boundary, providing an overall separation of 5.1 metres.
13.9 Overlooking from ground floor windows is generally limited by low finished floor levels and 1.8 metre high boundary fencing. Screening is proposed to north facing windows and balconies at the first and second floors, with these for the most part meeting the requirements of Standard B22, however permit conditions are recommended to ensure that the vertical fins proposed to the dining areas are appropriately angled eastward to prevent overlooking to adjoining habitable room windows. Similarly, it is recommended that full screening to the entire north length of the second floor balcony is provided to prevent unreasonable overlooking. South facing bedroom windows at the first floor are proposed to be provided with planter
134 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
boxes and fixed screening, which are considered acceptable. South facing windows to the second floor located in excess of 11 metres from the property boundary and therefore meets the overlooking requirements of this Standard.
13.10 The proposal has not demonstrated that internal views will be achieved between the extension and the existing facility at the first floor in accordance with Standard B23; however it is considered that this can be rectified by a condition of any permit issued. Plans currently show screening to west facing windows of bedrooms to reduce afternoon solar impacts, if required these screens should be amended to prevent internal views.
Site Services 13.11 The applicant submitted a Waste Management Plan, with the proposed private collection of waste deemed suitable by Council’s Waste Department; however the Plan did not provide sufficient detail to satisfy concerns around the proposed bin storage area to the site’s Wilson Street frontage. The location of the bin storage is not supported, and is recommended for relocation to the basement area. A condition is also recommended on any permit issued requiring a more detailed Waste Management Plan to provide more detail regarding the amount of waste likely to be generated on the site, with a consequent analysis of the required area to store that waste, and collection arrangements.
13.12 It is considered that the development overall satisfies the requirements of ResCode, or can do so via conditions. The application will achieve an adequate degree of internal amenity for future residents of the proposed extension, with all bedrooms provided with access to daylight and communal spaces (both internal and external) provided at all levels of the development. The development will achieve a balance of on-site internal amenity, whilst limiting its off-site amenity impacts, subject to conditions.
14.0 Car Parking
The requirements of Clause 52.06 do not apply to an application to construct or extend a residential building within a Residential 1 Zone with the application required to be assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55. Standard B16 contained within Clause 55.03-11 does not specify a rate for residential buildings. The proposal must therefore satisfy the objectives contained within Clause 55.03-11:
To ensure that car and bicycle parking for residents and visitors is appropriate to the needs of residents. To ensure that the design of parking and access areas is practical and attractive and that these areas can be easily maintained.
The applicant has submitted a traffic report, prepared by Ratio Consultants. This report was submitted prior to the amendment of plans which are now under consideration (with these plans proposing an addition of 11 spaces within the basement – an overall total of 35 in the basement).
135 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The traffic report undertook an empirical assessment to establish an acceptable parking rate for an aged care facility. The report references three surveys undertaken by Cardno Grogan Richards Pty Ltd, with peak parking rates between the facilities ranging from 0.25 parking spaces per bed, and 0.4. The report further analyses two studies undertaken by Andrew O’Brien & Associates Pty Ltd, conducted in 1997, with the surveys showing peak parking rates of 0.29 and 0.3 spaces per bed. Visitation rates across all facilities surveyed was relatively low with the majority of parking demand generated by employees. The traffic report concludes from a summary of the above cases that a reasonable rate to apply is 0.3 spaces per bed, inclusive of staff and visitor parking. The application of this parking rate would require the provision of 24 (24.3) parking spaces for 81 beds.
Whilst the above surveys could be used to garner a broad understanding of potential car parking rates, of the five (5) surveys referenced, none were comparable to the current facility at Cheltenham manor in terms of number of beds and staff, with the comparison falling well short if the proposed extension were also taken into consideration. The surveys conducted by Andrew O’Brien & Associates also lack veracity due to the age of these reports being in excess of 10 years.
Staffing levels on the site vary considerably throughout the day as a result of shift work and different shift times for staff. Information submitted by the applicant provided an overview of the different shift times and categories of employees. From those figures it could be said that at 10.00am on any day the current facility would be staffed by 18 people. The proposed extension would add a further 16 staff members at that time – an overall total of 34 employees.
The current parking at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street for the existing facility, has 12 car parking spaces. The submitted traffic report details a survey of 23 staff at the existing facility regarding mode of travel to work. 57% of those surveyed, drove to work, with 11 out of the 13 that drove, parking on the site, and the remaining 2 parking off-site. The current parking arrangement would appear to result in some visitors being required to utilise on-street parking, as well as some staff.
It is acknowledged that whilst visitation to aged care facilities can be low, the proposal should provide dedicated visitor spaces on the site, to ensure that the proposal will minimise potential impacts on on-street parking. As visitors will be entering from the existing facility, it is recommended that a minimum of twelve (12) visitor spaces are designated in the existing car park, with the proposed basement to cater for staff only. Staff only access to the basement car park alleviates concerns regarding the practicalities of securing the basement. The proposal would therefore provide 35 staff spaces within the basement at the existing facility. It is considered that the provision of 35 staff spaces and 12 visitor spaces will address the current parking deficit at Cheltenham Manor, and provide adequate car parking for the new extension.
136 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Amended plans have provided for a two way ramp access and egress from the basement consistent with the recommendation provided by Council’s own Traffic Engineers, along with a double crossover (not dimensioned on plans). In order to retain appropriate sightlines of pedestrians, the southern boundary fence is recommended to be reduced in height to 1.2 metres for a length of 2.5 metres from the street property boundary.
The proposed basement parking layout is considered adequate. It is acknowledged that the disabled parking space does not comply with revised access requirements pursuant to AS/NZS 2890.6, for a 2.4 metre wide shared area, however the width of the space at 3.6 metres, in conjunction with the 2 metre of space to the eastern side will allow sufficient area for access.
A loading bay for small food delivery vehicles is proposed adjacent to the utility/services rooms within the basement, with a width of 3.6 metres. This bay is considered sufficient to meet loading requirements for food delivery vans which are to be used. The site will no longer require linen deliveries, as a laundry linen room will be accommodated within the basement. It is recommended that the basement is secured with a roller shutter grille and a security entry installed.
The proposal also entails a ‘porte cochere’ to the front of the extension. Rather than a porte cochere it would appear to be a horse shoe driveway allowing an in and out arrangement for vehicles via two crossovers. A structure in the form of a porte cochere could not be found on plans. This access arrangement is proposed for emergency vehicles and for waste collection. It is considered that should a permit be issued, the ingress and egress arrangements must be clearly specified and sign posted for safe vehicle movements. The access of emergency vehicles at this entry is considered satisfactory, however it is not clear from plans or the submitted Waste Management Plan, how much waste will require collection, the type of vehicle to be used and if there is sufficient area nominated for waste collection. It is recommended that a more detailed Waste Management Plan is provided to ensure that waste can be appropriately managed, and that the location of waste bins be removed from the front of the building and into the basement.
15.0 Bicycle Facilities
The application proposes a waiver of the bicycle provision requirement of Clause 52.34 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. As noted previously, the proposal is considered exempt from requiring the provision of facilities for a Residential Building over four (4) storeys, however it is deemed suitable and feasible to incorporate some bicycle parking at the site at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street to ensure that staff and visitors are able to utilise an alternative mode of transport to the site. Staff shower and change room facilities are already proposed within the basement, which is a suitable arrangement for staff cycling to work. It is acknowledged that the areas to the front of the existing reception building that could accommodate bike racks are limited, therefore it is recommended that a minimum of 5 bicycle spaces are provided – this could be required by a condition on any permit issued.
137 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
16.0 Vegetation and Landscaping
The applicant submitted an Arboriculture Report prepared by Greenwood Consulting, dated 11 January 2011. The report provided an assessment of the thirty (30) trees located on No’s 13-17 Wilson Street and eight (8) trees located on abutting properties and the nature strip. Of the 30 trees located on the subject site, one (1) tree was nominated as being of high retention value, this being a large Lilly Pilly tree. A tree protection zone of 8.8 metres is specified in the report.
Council’s Vegetation Management Officers conducted a site inspection and advised that the Lilly Pilly would have to be retained, with the proposed built form to be setback a minimum of 6 metres, and graduated to the upper levels.
Amendments made to plans have shown the retention of the Lilly Pilly tree, with the ground and first floors setback a minimum of 7.2 metres, and the second floor setback 7.5 metres. Should a permit be issued, a condition must be included to require a Tree Protection Zone during construction to ensure the tree is not damaged.
17.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS
17.1 Neighbourhood Character/Visual bulk
The development will introduce a new built form not currently found within proximity of the site along Wilson Street. Overall, however, it will be consistent with the built form of the existing facility in terms of its overall scale. The future character for this locality as identified within the Local Planning Policy Framework contemplates medium density housing, which may be in the form of apartment style development. It is therefore recognised that the character of this neighbourhood will evolve over time, with more contemporary style built form and greater densities compared to the traditional detached housing which currently dominates the streetscape. As discussed within this report it is also acknowledged that the built form of aged care facilities can differ from more traditional housing in terms of massing and height, and this is considered acceptable, provided that the design has demonstrated responsiveness to abutting development by limiting its off-site amenity impacts. The proposal as amended has also incorporated design elements to improve the residential appearance of the building, such as balconies and planter boxes. This is considered appropriate.
The overall design response to the topography of the site has helped to reduce the impact of the building’s height in terms of the two storey presentation to the northern adjoining properties, and recessing of the upper floor away from southern adjoining properties. The proposal ensures that reasonable setbacks of the basement from side boundaries will enable the retention of some established trees and allow the incorporation of screening plants to these boundaries to soften the development.
17.2 Overlooking
138 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The proposal incorporates screening devices to windows and balconies to limit unreasonable overlooking. As discussed above, it is recommended that if a permit is to be issued that conditions are included to ensure that the screening proposed will be designed appropriately and that the north facing balcony to the third storey is screened entirely on its north side. Subject to these conditions the proposal meets the requirements of Clause 55 in regard to overlooking.
17.3 Overshadowing
The proposal will overshadow properties to the south at No. 11 Wilson Street, it is recommended that if a permit is issued, that a condition is included to require amendments to plans to ensure compliance with Clause 55.04-5 of the Kingston Planning Scheme.
17.4 Inappropriate commercial development in a residential street
Whilst some objectors believe that an aged care facility is primarily a commercial use, an aged care facility is categorised as a residential building. The primary purpose of this facility is to provide specialised housing for aged people. Clause 16.02 of the State Planning Policy Framework encourages the location of aged care facilities within residential areas, with the current proposal considered to be appropriately located so as to allow residents to age within their community.
17.5 On-site amenity for future residents
Objectors raised concerns that the development will not result in adequate internal amenity outcomes for future residents of the development. Objectors contend that the proposal has a lack of outdoor areas for recreation, and that there are sources of potentially loud noises from abutting residential development. Whilst the surrounding properties will produce typical noises that you would expect from a residential neighbourhood, it is not considered that this noise would have any more of a detrimental impact on future residents of this development, as it would on anyone else.
The proposal will entail communal open space towards the northern boundary in the form of landscaped areas and a covered outdoor area, in addition balconies are proposed at upper floor levels. Whilst these areas would not be considered sufficient for most other forms of residential buildings, they are considered appropriate in the context of an aged care facility which is providing a level of high care to residents – meaning that residents are being provided with a high degree of assisted living arrangements, would generally have limited mobility and their usage of private open space would differ significantly from more able bodied people.
The degree of internal amenity achieved for future residents is considered satisfactory, with all bedrooms having access to daylight and natural ventilation, and appropriate levels of internal and external communal areas for residents.
17.6 Noise
139 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The proposal will generate noise, however the kitchen, laundry and plant areas are all proposed within the basement so as to internalise any noises that may be generated by these activities, which is considered appropriate.
Deliveries to the new extension will be in the form of food deliveries to the kitchen in the basement, with deliveries to be made by small vehicles such as vans. The internalisation of this activity within the basement is considered appropriate, limiting noise impacts. It is not anticipated that food deliveries would occur during the night at times when kitchen staff would not be on duty. With the proposed inclusion of a laundry within the basement, a linen delivery and pick up service is no longer required (current facility uses a linen service), reducing delivery vehicles entering the site.
Visitors will continue to be required to enter from Bendigo Street, with a recommended condition discussed within the report requiring the provision of designated visitor car parking within the existing car park at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street. No pedestrian access is available from the site’s Wilson Street frontage, further discouraging visitors from parking on Wilson Street.
In the event that emergency vehicle access is required to the new extension this is proposed to be facilitated by a circular driveway/in and out arrangement to enable ease of access to the building. It is not known how often emergency vehicles would be required in the day to day operation of the site, however it is not expected that this would necessarily create an unreasonable degree of noise to neighbouring properties.
Staff will be required to enter parking in the basement from Wilson Street, however details of the shift times that operate at the site provided by the applicant would indicate that changes in shifts does not occur in the middle of the night. Care staff that work night shift would commence work between 9.30pm and 10.00pm and finish between 6.30am and 7.00am. These times are considered reasonable, with staffing numbers over this shift less than those during the day and unlikely to result in an unreasonable number of vehicles accessing and exiting the site at the start and end of shift.
17.7 Car Parking & Traffic
The proposal was amended subsequent to the advertising process and the Preliminary Conference held with the objectors and applicants representatives. Following the concerns raised by objectors regarding the sufficiency of car parking spaces proposed, plans were amended to provide an addition of 11 car parking spaces within the basement. The proposal, as assessed by Council’s Traffic Engineers, is considered to satisfy the likely demand generated by the proposed extension.
140 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
As discussed earlier in this report, it is acknowledged that the current facility at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street has a deficit in car parking, with some visitors and staff required to utilise on-street parking. It is considered that the proposal is able to sufficiently accommodate parking to meet the demand of existing and new staff within the basement, with a condition recommended to allocate eight (8) visitor parking spaces within the existing car park at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street. In addition, a condition is also recommended to provide a minimum of five (5) bicycle spaces for employees and visitors to the site, to encourage and enable cycling as an alternative mode of transport.
It is not anticipated that the local street network will be unduly impacted by the proposal, with the sharing of traffic between Wilson Street and Bendigo Street. The overall staffing numbers accessing the site at any one time is not significant, along with visitors to the site.
18.0 CONCLUSION:
18.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.
18.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by: The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area; The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and, The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy (inclusive of the Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines and the Designing Contextual Housing Guidelines), Residential 1 zoning and the Schedule to the zone, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings, and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).
18.3 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered reasonable and warrants support.
19.0 RECOMMENDATION:
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued to develop the land for an extension to a Residential Aged Care Facility, subject following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 13 September 2011, but modified to show:
141 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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: ii. 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; iii. 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; 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 two (2) additional 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. the location of seating for residents within communal open spaces and any other communal facilities at ground level; xi. medium to large shrubs to be provided at a minimum pot size of 200mm; and xii. 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. xiii. the retention of the Acmena smithii (Lilly Pilly) growing within the front setback of 17 Wilson Street; xiv. the provision of a notation of the Tree Protection Details as provided in Conditions 3, 4 and 5 of this permit.
142 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
b. the provision of setbacks from the southern site boundary to ensure that the development meets the requirements of Standard B21 of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, in relation to the overshadowing of the adjoining private open spaces of dwellings at No. 11 Wilson Street. Increase of setbacks to the southern boundary must be achieved through internal alterations and not reduce any other setbacks within the development; c. a minimum of twelve (12) visitor car parking spaces, within the existing car park at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street; d. the provision of a minimum of five (5) bicycle spaces at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street, accessible to employees and visitors to the site, with the dimensions of these spaces to comply with the requirements of Clause 52.34 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; e. provision of crossover dimensions, with a minimum of 5.5 metres to the double crossover located near the southern site boundary to No. 13 Wilson Street; f. a basement ramp longitudinal section with grades, demonstrating compliance with Australian Standard AS/NZS2890.1:2004; g. relocation of the bin storage area from the site’s frontage to Wilson Street, to within the basement level, with no loss of parking or loading areas; h. the southern boundary fence reduced in height to 1.2 metres for a length from the street boundary of 2.5 metres, ensuring compliance with AS/NZS2890.1:2004 Figure 3.3 Minimum Sight Lines For Pedestrian Safety; i. a comprehensive drainage strategy for the development of the site, incorporating Water Sensitive Urban Design treatments; j. the location of any rooftop plant equipment, with any plant equipment to be screened from views from the street and adjoining properties; k. the vertical fin screening provided to the first and second floor dining rooms, angled with views enabled eastward, consistent with the living room vertical fin details, so as to prevent overlooking to the habitable room windows of No. 5/19-21 Wilson Street, in accordance with the requirements of Standard B22 of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; l. screening to a height of 1.7 metres above the finished floor level to the entire length of the north facing balcony on the second floor; m. elevation details of the screening to be provided to all balconies, with the screening designed with no more than 25 percent (25%) transparency and preventing downward views; n. the location of any existing east facing windows at No. 10-12 Wilson Street on first floor plans, and if required, new west facing windows appropriately screened to prevent internal views, with screening to be fixed (unopenable) with no more than 25 percent (25%) transparency and projecting approximately 400mm off the wall, to a height of 1.7 metres above the finished floor level; o. the provision of a roller shutter grille and secure entry at the car park entry; p. measures identified within the ESD Report required in Condition 6 of this Permit;
143 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
q. direction signs for the entry and exit points for vehicles using the emergency vehicle entrance from Wilson Street; and r. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule, including samples (illustrated on an A4 or A3 sheet), for all external elevations and driveways of the development. 2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. A Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) must be installed at a distance of 6 metres from the Acmena smithii (Lilly Pilly) located in the front setback of the property facing Wilson Street. A qualified Arborist is to be employed to oversee any works (excavation and or construction) outside of this zone. The following must be observed within 6m of the tree: a) the existing soil level must not be altered either by fill excavation; b) the soil must not be compacted or the soil’s drainage changed; c) no fuels, oils, chemicals, poisons, rubbish and other materials harmful to trees are to be stored or dispersed; d) no storage of equipment, machinery or material is to occur; e) open trenching to lay underground services e.g.: drainage, water, gas, etc. must not be used; f) tree roots must not be severed or injured; and g) machinery must not be used to remove any existing concrete, bricks or other materials. without the further consent in writing of Council’s Vegetation Management Officer. 4. Prior to the commencement of the development herby permitted a Tree Protection Fence defined by a 1.2 metre high temporary fence constructed using steel or timber posts fixed in the ground or to a concrete pad, with the fence’s side panels to be constructed of cyclone mesh wire or similar strong metal mesh or netting, must be erected 6m in a radius from the Acmena smithii (Lilly Pilly). The above requirements in condition 2 must be observed within this area. 5. All tree pruning work must be in accordance with the Australian Standards AS4373 (2007) “Pruning of Amenity Trees” and be undertaken by a qualified and experienced Arborist. 6. Prior to the endorsement of the Plans required pursuant to Condition 1 of this permit, the applicant must provide an ESD report prepared by a suitably qualified professional with this plan to 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 must thereafter be complied with. The ESD report must include, but is not limited to, detailing initiatives for stormwater harvesting, insulation, day lighting, collective rainwater tanks and/or individual rainwater tanks, landscape irrigation, energy efficient concepts, glazing and internal ventilation and the like.
144 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
7. Before the commencement of any buildings and works on the land, an improved Waste Management Plan (WMP) 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 supply of bins for both ‘general waste’ and ‘recyclable waste’ and demonstrating how the garbage and recycling aspects of the development will operate, including minimisation of bin numbers where possible to increase collection efficiency; b. The manner in which waste will be stored and collected including: type, size and number of containers and procedure(s) put in place as to how tenants/occupiers are required to dispose of waste; c. Spatial provision for on-site storage; d. Private contractor details; and e. The size of the collection vehicle and the frequency, time and point of collection, with waste collection to occur with minimal interference to pedestrian amenity. 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. 8. Prior to the removal of the street tree from the nature strip to the front of No. 13 Wilson Street, Cheltenham, the Developer/Owner must pay to Council a compensation, removal and replacement fee ($279.00) (including GST) for the removal of this existing tree. The removal of this tree must be undertaken by Council, and the Developer/Owner must advise Council when this tree is required to be removed. 9. Prior to the occupation of the development 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. 10. Prior to the occupation of the development 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. 11. Prior to commencement of the development hereby permitted, a Construction Management Plan, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The Construction Management Plan must clearly set out measures to prevent amenity loss to surrounding properties during the construction period. The Plan is to include, but limited to, measures to control the emission of dust/sand, rubbish on site, loading/unloading times, construction times, and parking of builder’s vehicles etc. This plan when endorsed must not be varied without the prior approval of the Responsible Authority. It must also be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 12. Construction on the site must be restricted to the following times:
145 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
a. Monday to Friday 7:00am to 7:00pm; and b. Saturday 9:00am to 6:00pm. Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority in writing. 13. 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. 14. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater treatment works which must incorporate water sensitive urban design principles (including re-use) to improve discharge quality and a detention system for 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 treatment. 15. Before the development commences, a drainage plan showing the method of treatment and discharge to the nominated point must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The plan must be prepared by a qualified person and show all details of the proposed drainage works, including all existing and proposed features that may have an impact on the drainage (eg. Trees to be retained, crossings, services, fences, abutting buildings, existing boundary surface levels etc). 16. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties. 17. Existing property boundary and footpath levels are not to be altered. 18. Footpath reinstatements must have a 200mm offset between the property boundary and the back of the footpath. 19. Prior to the occupation of development hereby permitted, or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the nature strip, kerb and channel, vehicle crossover and footpath must reinstated to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 20. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification. 21. Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner. 22. Prior to the occupation of the development hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be: i. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. j. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans. k. 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. l. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.
146 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 23. All works on or facing the boundaries of adjoining properties must be finished and surface cleaned to a standard that is well presented to neighbouring properties in a manner to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 24. 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. 25. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 26. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:
The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue.
The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue. In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.
Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit. Note: The applicant/owner must provide a copy of this planning permit to any appointed Building Surveyor. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner and Building Surveyor to ensure that all building development works approved by any building permit is consistent with the planning permit. Note: Before removing / pruning any vegetation from the site, the applicant or any contractor engaged to remove any vegetation, should consult Council’s Vegetation Management Officer to verify if a Local Laws Permits is required for the removal of such vegetation. OR
In the event that Council wishes to oppose the application, it can do so using the following grounds:
1. The proposal does not satisfy the objectives of Clause 55.04-5 – Overshadowing Open Space, and will unreasonably impact on the secluded private open spaces of dwellings to the south of the subject site.
2. The proposal has not adequately responded to the site’s context, and will result in a development which is out of character and proposes uncharacteristic visual bulk and massing, failing to meet the objectives of Clause 55.02-1 – Neighbourhood Character.
147 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Linda Day addressed the meeting on behalf of the Objectors. Will Bromhead addressed the meeting on behalf of the Applicant.
Cr Dundas requested that parts 1 (a) and 3-11, part 1 (b)
Crs West/Shewan
That the recommendation be adopted subject to the following changes: 1(a). That Condition 1. be amended to require the following healthy trees close to the southern and north/western boundaries to be retained, without requiring variation to the setback shown on the plans, with Tree Protection Zones and fences to be installed with this in mind: trees 11, 13, 14, That appropriate care be taken eg that any work being done eg for drainage and other services should be hand-drilled through the roots and other sections of condition 3 be applied as relevant. 3. White cedars (deciduous natives) to be planted along the southern fence line. 4. Provide new 1.8m high timber paling fence to south side at the developers cost. 5. Provide new 1.8m high timber paling fence to north side at developers cost. 6. Eliminate the overshadowing to adjoining south properties at equinox (as per the existing proposed condition). 7. Change 2 north windows on level 3 lounge room from 2 vertical windows to one horizontal window at a high level ie will height of 1700mm. 8. Change level 2 balcony on northern side of proposed development to have approx 3.0m setback from north boundary (currently has a setback of about 1.2 metres). Provide screening to prevent overlooking of two adjoining units. 9. Provide new 1.8m high timber paling fence to properties common boundary with units 6 and 7 of 19 Wilson Street at developers cost. 10. Provide new 1.8m high timber paling fence to the western boundary of 19 wilson Street. 11. That cream brick be used as a cladding material, particularly on the Wilson Street frontage to be more sympathetic to the neighbourhood character. Carried
Crs West/Shewan
That the recommendation be adopted subject to the following change: 1(b) That Condition 1. be amended to require the following healthy trees close to the southern and north/western boundaries to be retained, without requiring variation to the setback shown on the plans, with Tree Protection Zones and fences to be installed with this in mind: trees 15, 41. That appropriate care be taken eg that any work being done eg for drainage and other services should be hand-drilled through the roots and other sections of condition 3 be applied as relevant. Lost
148 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Crs West/Shewan
That the recommendation be adopted subject to the following change: 2. That the peppercorn tree be retained on the northern boundary, with a setback of 7.7m for all floors by the width of the tree canopy and extending to the western end of the deck of the adjacent unit 5/19 Wilson St. Carried
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 1 Zone) Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B1 Neighbourhood Character Yes The proposed residential building proposes a Design respects existing built form which is different from a suburban neighbourhood character or residential context, however the design has contributes to a preferred minimised its impact on adjoining neighbourhood character. development, and is considered consistent Development responds to with the future character which is expressed features of the site and in local policy at Clause 22.05 and Clause surrounding area. 22.11. The area is nominated as being suitable for ‘increased housing diversity’ in conjunction with its zoning, would mean that an apartment development could be contemplated in this location. The subject site has challenging topography which the design has responded, with significant cut proposed to the north of the site resulting in a built form which minimises the appearance of being a three storey development.
B2 Residential Policy Yes The proposal is consistent with local and state Residential development is policies, in particular Clause 16.02-3 and consistent with housing policies Clause 16.02-4 which recognise that aged in the SPPF, LPPF including the care facilities contribute to housing diversity, MSS and local planning are appropriately located in residential policies. neighbourhoods and often entail a different Support medium densities in built form from traditional housing. areas to take advantage of public transport and community infrastructure and services. B3 Dwelling Diversity Yes Whilst this Standard relates to individual Encourages a range of dwelling dwellings, it is recognised that aged care sizes and types in developments facilities contribute to dwelling diversity, and 149 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? of ten or more dwellings. are important to meet growing demand. B4 Infrastructure Yes, subject The site has access to adequate road Provides appropriate utility to conditions and drainage infrastructure. The services and infrastructure development will need to make without overloading the application to the appropriate suppliers capacity. for water, sewerage, electricity, gas and phone services. Given surrounding developments, it is not expected that this development will unreasonably overload the capacity of those services. Council’s Drainage Engineer’s have advised that standard drainage conditions should be placed as conditions on any permit issued, including the need to provide a drainage plan and stormwater treatment works which must incorporate water sensitive urban design principles.
These objectives can therefore be met subject to conditions. B5 Integration with the Street Yes The design will orient windows of bedrooms Integrate the layout of and lounge areas to the street, and a balcony, development with the street allowing for good passive surveillance opportunities of the street, and in turn presenting an active façade. A 1.8 metre high front fence is proposed to a portion of the boundary to enclose communal open space. Whilst this fencing is not desirable, it is required for security purposes. The portion to be enclosed is approximately 15 metres of the frontage. The overall result will enable satisfactory integration with the street, with this fencing balanced by the remainder being unfenced and windows at all floors oriented to the street. B6 Street Setback Yes Required: 7.65 metres The setbacks of buildings from Proposed: 7.95 metres a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood The façade wall of the building will exceed character and make efficient use the street setback required, however concrete of the site. steps that provide access to the floor above will encroach into the setback, this is considered satisfactory, with the appearance of any walls associated with the stair well limited by the cut to that portion of the site, resulting in limited visibility of this element.
150 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard?
B7 Building Height No Maximum: 9 metres Building height should respect Proposed: 11.2 metres the existing or preferred The topography of the site has a significant neighbourhood character. fall across the land, at the frontage to Wilson Street, a slope of 10 degrees results in the maximum height under this Standard to be 10 metres. The variance sought therefore is 1.2 metres. It is noted that the cut proposed towards the northern boundary reduces the appearance of the building’s height to adjoining northern properties and to the Wilson Street frontage. Where height would have the most impact is to the properties to the south, where the upper level has exceeded required setbacks to reduce the visibility of the second floor. As previously acknowledged within this assessment and report, the site is located within an area that supports the development of medium density development, which could include apartment style development. It is also acknowledged that the proposal is for a specialised residential building, aged care facilities often have different built form and appearances, and in this instance a variance of 1.2 metres in building height is considered warranted for the above reasons. B8 Site Coverage Yes Maximum: 60% Site coverage should respect the Proposed: 59% existing or preferred The proposal meets the Standard. It is neighbourhood character and acknowledged that aged care facilities often respond to the features of the entail a greater intensity of built form and site site. coverage in comparison to other residential development. In this instance the site coverage requirement is met.
B9 Permeability Yes At least: 20% Reduce the impact of Proposed: 23% stormwater run-off on the See discussion above under Standard B8. drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration. B10 Energy Efficiency Yes The proposal will allow daylight to all Achieve and protect energy bedrooms, Incorporates shading devices to efficient dwellings and west facing windows and double glazed north residential buildings. facing windows, and will limit its impact on 151 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? Ensure orientation and layout the energy efficiency of adjoining dwellings. reduces fossil fuel energy use An ESD report was not submitted with the and makes appropriate use of application, however given the overall size of daylight and solar energy. the proposal it is recommended that a condition be included on any permit issued to require an ESD report to demonstrate how the proposal will incorporate environmentally sustainable measures.
B11 Open Space Yes The design entails communal open space over Integrate layout of development all floor levels in the form of ground level with any public and communal garden areas and balconies to upper floors. open space provided in or The layout of the development in most cases adjacent to the development. provides access to communal open space from living areas. B12 Safety Yes Ground level communal open space is Layout to provide safety and secured by a 1.8 metre high rendered brick security for residents and fence with gate, whilst the high fencing is not property. desirable in this residential setting, it is necessary to ensure resident safety in this context. Plans do not indicate that the basement is secured, it is recommended that if a permit is to be issued that the basement is provided with a roller shutter and security entry. B13 Landscaping Yes, subject A concept landscape plan was submitted with To provide appropriate to conditions the application, however this did not include landscaping. the retention of the Lilly Pilly tree. If a permit To encourage: is to be issued, it is recommended that an Development that respects amended landscape plan is submitted the landscape character of showing the Lilly Pilly tree, within an the neighbourhood. appropriate Tree Protection Zone. The proposal entails an internal courtyard, Development that maintains conditions will also be required to ensure that and enhances habitat for appropriate planting are provided to the plants and animals in courtyard to ensure their long term locations of habitat sustainability. importance.
The retention of mature vegetation on the site. B14 Access Yes The proposal will entail two new crossovers Ensure the safe, manageable which will not exceed the permitted width and convenient vehicle access to and will allow for safe access to and from the and from the development. site, subject to a condition being included on Ensure the number and design any permit issued requiring the reduction in of vehicle crossovers respects fence height to 1.2 metres on the southern 152 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? neighbourhood character. boundary to enable clear sightlines of pedestrians from cars exiting the basement. B15 Parking Location Yes The location of parking within the basement Provide resident and visitor is conveniently located for staff, with lifts and vehicles with convenient stairwells providing access to the upper floor. parking. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments. B16 Parking Provision Yes See report. Ensure car and bicycle parking meets the needs of residents and visitors. Accessways should be practical, attractive and easily maintainable. B17 Side and Rear Setbacks Yes Proposed: Ensure the height and setback Ground Floor respects the existing or North: Min. 2.53 metres proposed. Majority preferred neighbourhood of ground floor sits below ground level. character and limits the amenity Setbacks comply. impacts on existing dwellings. East: N/A (frontage) South: Min 3.8m, increasing to max of 7.5m setbacks proposed. With wall heights varying between approx. 6.8m – 7.3m this would require a minimum setback of 3.39 metres. Setbacks comply. West: Not applicable. Extension abuts existing facility to the west. First Floor North: Min. 3.35m proposed to bedrooms 28 and 29, and min. 1.28m proposed to the balcony. The wall height is 7.35m at the point that the minimum setback of 3.35m is proposed, the wall height requires a setback of 3.44 metres. A variance of less than 10cm is considered acceptable, noting that the setback increases to over 4 metres for the majority of the length of the development. Where the balcony is located 1.28m from the north boundary the wall height of the balcony is 3 metres due to the cut proposed at that part of the site, requiring a minimum setback of 1 metre. Setbacks comply.
153 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? East: N/A (frontage) South: Min 3.8m, increasing to max of 7.5m setbacks proposed. With wall heights varying between approx. 6.8m – 7.3m this would require a minimum setback of 3.39 metres. Setbacks comply. West: Not applicable. Second Floor North: Min. 3.35m proposed to bedrooms 28 and 29, and min. 1.28m proposed to the balcony. The wall height is 7.35m at the point that the minimum setback of 3.35m is proposed, the wall height requires a setback of 3.44 metres. A variance of less than 10cm is considered acceptable, noting that the setback increases to over 4 metres for the majority of the length of the development. East: N/A (frontage) South: Min. of 7.5m proposed, increasing to 11.3m and 13.3m. Wall heights vary with a max. of 10m requiring a setback of 6.08m. Setbacks comply. West: Not applicable.
B18 Walls on Boundaries Yes No walls on boundaries proposed. 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. B19 Daylight to Existing Yes Appropriate setbacks provided to existing Windows windows allowing for at least a minimum 3 Allow adequate daylight into metre light court required by this Standard. existing habitable room windows.
154 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B20 North Facing Windows Yes North facing windows at No. 11 Wilson Allow adequate solar access to Street are shown to be located 3 metres from existing north-facing habitable the shared boundary. The minimum setback room windows. provided at ground level is 3.85 metres, with this setback increased and varied along the length of the boundary (varying at 4 metres, 5 metres, 6.5 metres and 7.5 metres). These setbacks are mirrored at the first floor and increased at the second floor to a minimum of 7.5 metres, increasing to 11.3 metres and 13.3 metres. The proposed setbacks exceed the requirements of this Standard. Where wall heights at the first floor are a max. of 7.3 metres, a setback of 3.39 is required, with the minimum setback provided at 3.8 metres to a stairwell. The majority of setbacks are 4 metres and greater at this floor. At the upper level (second floor) where wall heights vary but generally are 10 metres or less, this would require a setback of 6.08 metres, with this requirement exceeded.
155 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B21 Overshadowing Open No Overshadowing will fall primarily within the Space subject site, however the overshadowing that Ensure buildings do not will occur will be to the adjoining properties significantly overshadow to the south at No. 11 Wilson Street. Shadow existing secluded private open will generally not exceed that currently cast space. by the fence, where that shadow is exceeded relates to No’s 2, 3, 4 and 5 at No. 11 Wilson Street. It would appear that these dwellings have private open space areas of 25 square metres, due to overshadowing cast by the existing 1.8 metre high fence, these areas would not currently receive 5 hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm to 75% of their yard. Currently along the shared boundary is a considerable degree of vegetation including established trees, some of which are proposed to be retained. The current degree of sunlight achieved to these open spaces is not only affected by the paling fence, but also trees on the subject site. It is considered that where the current amenity of secluded private open spaces to dwellings at No. 11 Wilson Street do not meet the requirements of this Standard, that they should not be further impacted upon by the proposal. It is therefore recommended that a condition be included on any permit issued requiring appropriate setbacks to ensure compliance with this Standard. Overshadowing would appear to be the result of the ground and first floor wall heights (same heights and setbacks at these levels) and will therefore require further stepping in at these levels to reduce overshadowing.
156 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B22 Overlooking Yes, subject The design has incorporated screening to Limit views into existing to conditions windows and balconies to prevent secluded private open space and unreasonable overlooking. habitable room windows. NORTH ELEVATION On the ground floor of the development would be constructed below natural ground level, where windows and glazed doors are proposed to living and dining areas, these would be below the ground level of the abutting properties to the north, facing a retaining wall. At the first floor, due to the degree of cut proposed and the subterranean construction of the ground floor, the first floor would have floor levels comparable to a ground floor. Windows to bedrooms numbered 27-31 have finished floor levels below 0.8 metres, combined with a new 1.8 metre high north boundary fence, this would prevent unreasonable overlooking from these windows. Windows to the living and dining area have finished floor levels in excess of 0.8 metres (between 1.2m and 1.6m approx.), with these windows located 4.13 metres from the boundary to No. 5/19-21 Wilson Street. These windows are shown with vertical fins angled at 45 degrees to prevent views to the abutting property, however plan details show the angling of some fins which would enable views to adjoining habitable rooms, this could be rectified by an appropriate permit condition. Provided that the screen detail is appropriately designed, this could prevent unreasonable overlooking. The balcony accessed from the activities room is shown with horizontal screening to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level, with a break in the screening allowing light penetration whilst sited so as to prevent views to habitable rooms on the adjoining properties. At the second floor windows to bedrooms 9-13 are located opposite habitable room windows on the adjoining properties, however the windows are located in excess of 11 metres, meeting the requirements of this Standard. For windows to the living and dining
157 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? room, vertical fins are proposed, same as the floor below – with a condition recommended to angle the dining room window fins to prevent westward views to habitable room windows. The balcony of this floor is shown with screening to 1.7 metres above finished floor level, however the break in screening would allow overlooking to windows at No. 5/19-21 Wilson Street and a condition is recommended to provide screening to the entire north elevation of the balcony. SOUTH ELEVATION Ground floor windows would not appear to achieve unreasonable overlooking, with floor levels less than 0.8 metres and the boundary fence being 1.8 metres high. First floor windows are provided with varied setbacks from the southern site boundary, but the majority would appear to be located within 9 metres of habitable room windows located at No. 11 Wilson Street. All of the south facing bedroom windows are proposed to be provided with planter boxes, designed so as to prevent downward views. Views measured at a 45 degree angle from a height of 1.7 metres would be limited by the provision of a screening device provided to the outside of the planter boxes. This screening is considered satisfactory. WEST ELEVATION Views will be internal, with this discussed below under B23. EAST ELEVATION Views from windows and the proposed balcony will be to the street, which is considered appropriate.
158 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B23 Internal Views Yes, subject Details have not been shown on plans of the Limit views into existing to conditions location of all east windows of the existing secluded private open space and facility at No. 10-12 Bendigo Street, so that habitable room windows of an assessment of the impact of proposed dwellings and residential windows cannot be made. It is recommended buildings within the same that a condition is included on any permit development. issued to require plans to show existing windows and any screening required to new windows to prevent internal views. The applicant has noted that bedroom windows at ground floor located around the internal courtyard may require treatment to prevent internal views but plans have not indicated how they will be treated, this can be rectified by a condition on any permit issued. B24 Noise Impacts Yes, subject The proposal entails plant equipment being Protect residents from external to conditions located within the basement, along with the noise and contain noise sources laundry and kitchen, internalising any noise in developments that may affect that will be created by these uses. existing dwellings. B25 Accessibility Yes The building will be appropriately designed Consider people with limited so that residents with limited mobility will be mobility in the design of able to fully utilise the facility. developments. B26 Dwelling Entry Yes Whilst the primary entry to the building will Provide a sense of identity to continue to be from Bendigo Street, the each dwelling/residential extension will still present as an identifiable building. facility, though a pedestrian entry is not provided. B27 Daylight to New Yes All windows to bedrooms will be provided Windows with adequate daylight and be oriented clear Allow adequate daylight into to the sky. Similarly the main living areas new habitable room windows. throughout the building will also achieve adequate access to daylight. B28 Private Open Space Yes No private open space is provided, instead Provide reasonable recreation communal open space at ground level and in and service needs of residents the form of balconies to the upper floors is by adequate private open space. proposed. Ground floor open space is proposed towards the northern boundary. It is considered that the proposed outdoor areas are adequate to meet resident demand. B29 Solar Access to Open Not Space applicable Allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings/buildings. 159 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B30 Storage Not Provide adequate storage applicable facilities for each dwelling. B31 Design Detail Yes The design is contemporary in style, Encourage design detail that incorporating a flat roof in order to minimise respects the existing or the overall height of the building. Character preferred neighbourhood within Wilson Street generally conforms with character. a low scale suburban typology, with the area yet to be significantly redeveloped for contemporary style dwellings, however the west side of Wilson Street located within a Residential 1 Zone and earmarked for ‘increased diversity’ is considered an appropriate context for a development which does not replicate the existing predominant built form. The design will incorporate a mix of materials to provide some articulation along the north and south elevations, along with stepping in of walls to alleviate sheer walls within the development. It is acknowledged that the overall appearance of the development does have an ‘institutional’ quality however aged care facilities, as a specialised form of housing, by its nature requires different specifications in its built form. Amendments to plans provide a balcony to the street and planter boxes, aiding in identifying the building’s residential purpose, and are considered appropriate. B32 Front Fences No Maximum: 1.2m Encourage front fence design Proposed: 1.8. that respects the existing or As discussed under B5, part of the frontage to preferred neighbourhood Wilson Street will be enclosed by a 1.8 metre character. high solid rendered fence. Whilst the fence height is undesirable, it is noted that it would only be to a portion of the site’s frontage to Wilson Street, and is required for resident safety purposes. The variation in this context is considered acceptable.
160 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies Title and Objective with Requirement and Proposed Standard? B33 Common Property Yes It is not envisaged that the facility would be Ensure car parking, access areas subdivided. and other communal open space Shared areas are easily identifiable and is practical, attractive and easily capable of management by the operators of maintained. the facility. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas. B34 Site Services Yes, subject A Waste Management Plan was submitted, Ensure site services and to conditions however it is not clear from that information facilities can be installed and how much waste is likely to be generated by easily maintained and are the existing and proposed facility, if the accessible, adequate and proposed bin store area is sufficient, and how attractive. Avoid future the waste will be collected. management difficulties in The location of a bin store area to the Wilson common ownership areas. Street frontage is considered unacceptable, it is recommended that it is relocated to the basement, and an improved Waste Management Plan be required by condition of permit (should one be issued) demonstrating how waste will be appropriately managed on the site.
161 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 193 KP259/11 431 Station Street, Bonbeach
APPLICANT Peter Thomas Building Design ADDRESS OF LAND No. 431 (Lot 1 on TP318375U) Station Street, Bonbeach 3196 PROPOSAL Develop the land for the construction of eleven (11) dwellings PLANNING OFFICER Tanya Sokolowski REFERENCE NO. KP259/2011 RELEVANT STATE Clause 11: Settlement PLANNING POLICY Clause 13: Environmental Risk FRAMEWORK Clause 15: Built Environment and Heritage Clause 16: Housing RELEVANT LOCAL Clause 21.05: MSS – Residential Land Use PLANNING POLICY Clause 22.11: Residential Development Policy FRAMEWORK ZONE Clause 32.01: Residential 1 Zone (R1Z) OVERLAYS None applicable PARTICULAR PROVISIONS Clause 55: Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings GENERAL PROVISIONS Clause 65: Decision Guidelines RESIDENTIAL POLICY Increased Housing Diversity AREA ABORIGINAL CULTURAL No HERITAGE SENSITIVITY DECISION DATE BY 6 September 2011 STATUTORY DAYS 112 days at 10 October 2011 CONSIDERED PLAN 29 June 2011 REFERENCES/DATE RECEIVED
1.0 KEY ISSUES
1.1 The key planning issues arising from this proposal relate to:
Neighbourhood Character; Internal Views; and Design Detail (Visual Bulk/Mass).
2.0 PROPOSAL
2.1 It is proposed to demolish the existing dwelling and associated outbuildings on this site and construct a two-storey residential building containing eleven (11) dwellings with basement car parking. A mix of dwelling sizes are proposed with one (1) x 3 bedroom dwelling, seven (7) x 2 bedroom dwellings and three (3) x 1 bedroom dwellings.
162 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.2 The building would extend through the length of the site, with a shared path (‘boardwalk’) along the southern site boundary, and private open spaces oriented to the north (Dwelling 7 with north and west facing balconies).
2.3 The basement would contain three (3) stairwells accessing upper floors, two (2) visitor car spaces, twelve (12) resident car spaces and fourteen (14) bicycle spaces. Storage spaces for each dwelling are also proposed, and three (3) separate areas of bin storage.
2.4 Access to the site is proposed from a new 5.8 metre wide crossover, located towards the northern side boundary.
2.5 Development summary:
Dwelling Floor Area Private Open No. of Bedrooms No. of Car (excluding garage / Space proposed Parking Spaces verandah) provided 1 96.6m² 19.8m² 2 1 2 79.4m² 17.2m² 2 1 3 79.4m2 17.2m2 2 1 4 79.4m2 16.7m² 2 1 5 79.4m2 13.0m² 2 1 6 93.7m2 12.7m2 + 65.0m2 at 2 1 ground level = 67.7m2 7 106.0m2 35.2m² 3 2 8 76.7m2 14.5m² 2 1 9 55.0m2 22.4m² 1 1 10 59.5m2 25.0m² 1 1 11 56.9m2 11.8m2 1 1
2.6 The proposal has an overall site coverage of 56.4% percent and a permeability percentage of 27.8%.
2.7 Development Assessment Table:
Criteria ResCode Requirement Proposed Development Provision Private Open An area of 40m2, with one part of the private open Complies. Each dwelling would be provided Space space to consist of secluded private open space at with a minimum terrace or balcony area of the side or rear of the dwelling with a minimum area 8m2 with a minimum width of 1.6 metres on of 25m2, a minimum dimension of 3 metres and the northern side of the proposed convenient access from a living room or a balcony development. Unit 6 is the only dwelling that area of 8m2 with a minimum dimension of 1.6 would feature some at grade private open metres. space area at the rear (east) of the subject site.
163 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Car Parking One (1) car parking space for each one (1) or two (2) Complies. A total of fourteen (14) on-site car bedroom dwelling and two (2) car parking spaces parking spaces is required for the proposal, for each three (3) or more bedroom dwelling, with given that one (1) car parking space is one (1) space under cover. One (1) visitor car required for ten (10) of the dwellings which parking space is required for every five (5) comprise of one (1) and two (2) bedrooms and dwellings. two (2) spaces for the three (3) bedroom dwelling. An additional two (2) visitor car parking spaces are required. The development proposes to provide fourteen (14) on-site car parking spaces at a basement level. Front Setback The average distance of the setbacks of the front Complies. The minimum front setback of the walls of the existing buildings on the abutting proposed residential building is 7.2 metres, allotments facing the front street or 9 metres, which equates to the average front setback of whichever is the lesser. the two (2) adjoining properties. Site Coverage Maximum 60% - as per ResCode. Site coverage is 56.4% and therefore complies (refer to the ResCode discussion section within this report).
2.8 The proposed building materials, colours and finishes for the proposed development are summarised in the table below:
Roof: Colorbond cladding (colour not specified). Walls: Block work for the basement car parking level and rendered brickwork at the ground floor and upper floor levels. Stone wall feature to be incorporated into the front façade of the proposed building. A combination of colours and tones are proposed. Garage doors N/A Windows: Aluminium powder coat frames (charcoal colour). Driveways: Concrete for the basement ramp and access (colour not specified). Front fencing: A 1.6 metre high timber fence with gate access is proposed along the southern end of the site’s Station Street frontage. Boundary fences: A new 2.0 metre high timber paling fence would be constructed along the site’s north (side), south (side) and east (rear) property boundary. A 400mm high fixed trellis extension would be added to the proposed fencing along the site’s north property boundary whilst a 200mm high trellis extension would be fixed to the new fencing along the site’s south (side) property boundary.
3.0 SITE& SURROUNDS
3.1 The subject site is located on the east side of Station Street in Bonbeach, with a frontage width of 15.24 metres, site depth of 66.27 metres and overall area of 968 square metres. It currently contains a detached, single-storey brick veneer dwelling which is setback 7.3 metres from the street frontage. A single brick and weatherboard clad garage is located adjacent to the site’s south (side) property boundary in addition to a small fibro-cement sheet clad bungalow with the private open space area to the rear of the existing dwelling. The existing front fence is a solid brick construction of 1.7 metres height.
164 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.2 A number of established trees exist within the front setback of the existing dwelling (including a 9 metre high Norfolk Island Pine), however, the site does not contain any significant vegetation. No easements encumber the land, however, there is evidence showing that a sewer line is located adjacent to the site’s east (rear) property boundary.
3.3 Vehicle access to the site is currently via a single width crossover located towards the southern site boundary. A power pole and a Telstra pit are also located within the nature strip to the front of the site.
3.4 Adjoining the site to the south is a single storey detached dwelling with a concrete tiled, hipped roof and generous private open space located to its rear. Abutting the subject site to the north are four (4) properties on Cannes Avenue, each containing a detached single storey dwelling, constructed of either brick or weatherboard, all with concrete tiled hipped roof forms. Abutting the site to the east at No. 3 Brixton Street is a single storey detached dwelling, also with a concrete tiled hipped roof. All dwellings contain private open spaces to their rear.
3.5 The surrounding area is typically comprised of a combination of older housing stock with single detached dwellings on allotments and more recent examples of medium density/infill development. The architectural style and built form of existing residential development in the surrounding area is varied and reflective of an evolving character due to the introduction of newer development, however, the majority of dwellings feature front setbacks of at least 5 metres with setbacks from at least one side boundary, and parking generally to the side of dwellings. Examples of multi- dwelling developments within proximity of the subject site can be found at No. 4-6 Brixton Street, which is an older development of single storey dwellings with flat roofs. Newer infill development is located at No. 434 Station Street, with three (3) double storey dwellings. A permit was issued on 3 November 2010 for the construction of twelve (12) double storey dwellings at No’s 422 and 423 Station Street, approximately 100 metres north of the subject site. That development would entail 6 attached dwellings in a tandem arrangement on each lot, with a central accessway. Most existing dwellings in the locality are single-storey or double-storey in form. There is no predominant fencing style in the neighbourhood.
3.6 The subject site is located within proximity to the Bonbeach Railway Station (approximately 250 metres to the north), local shops, primary and secondary schools, public recreation reserves including the Bonbeach foreshore reserve (approximately 185 metres to the west).
4.0 TITLE DETAILS
4.1 The permit applicant has completed the planning application form declaring that there is no restrictive covenant on the title.
5.0 PLANNING CONTROLS
165 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.1 The subject site is located within a Residential 1 Zone and is not subject to any overlay controls.
6.0 PLANNING PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
6.1 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.
7.0 RELEVANT HISTORY
7.1 Council records indicate that no planning permits have been issued in relation to the subject site.
8.0 ADVERTISING
8.1 Prior to advertising, the permit applicant submitted revised plans on 29 June, 2011, pursuant to Section 50 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, that sought to address the initial concerns outlined within the Planning Officer’s further information letter. It is these revised plans that formed part of the advertising documentation and constitute the considered plans in the determination of this application.
8.2 As discussed, the proposal was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Nineteen (19) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:
Car parking and traffic concerns; Neighbourhood character; Waste management issues; Overdevelopment/visual bulk; and Overlooking.
8.3 No further amendments were made to the application after the public notification process.
9.0 PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
9.1 A preliminary conference was held on 8 September, 2011, with the relevant planning Officer, Ward Councillor, the owner, permit applicant and seven (7) objectors in attendance.
9.2 The above concerns were discussed at length, however, no resolution was reached. No objections have been subsequently withdrawn since this meeting.
10.0 REFERRALS
10.1 The following internal and/or external referral departments were notified:
166 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Melbourne Water who did not advise of any objection to the proposal. Council’s Development Engineer who advised of no objections, subject to the inclusion of conditions on any permit issued, including requirements for a Stormwater Management Plan and the incorporation of water sensitive urban design principles. Council’s Roads & Drains Department who advised of no objections to the proposal, with the recommended inclusion of conditions should a permit be issued, relating to boundary and footpath levels. Council’s Traffic Engineering Department who advised of no objections to the proposal, with recommended alterations to the basement layout in regard to the location of bicycles and storage spaces to Dwelling’s 4, 7 and 10 and the access is to be constructed at 90 degrees to Station Street. Council’s Vegetation Management Officer advised of no objections to the removal of existing vegetation on the site, including the Norfolk Pine which is considered to be a poor specimen, and provided landscaping conditions for inclusion on any permit issued. Council’s Strategic Planning Department (Urban Design) who did not advise of any objection to the proposal. Council’s Waste Management Coordinator noted that Council collection could take place from the subject site, and recommended the sharing of eleven (11) x 240 litre bins. Council’s Sustainable Development Officer who did not advise of any objections to the proposal, and provided suggestions for improvements to the overall energy efficiency of the dwellings. Council’s Street Trees Coordinator who did not advise of any objection to the proposal and consented to the removal of the street tree to the front of the site at the cost of the owner/developer.
11.0 RELEVANT POLICIES
11.1 State Planning Policy Framework (SPPF)
Clause 11 (Settlement) Clause 13 (Environmental Risks) Clause 15 (Built Environment and Heritage) Clause 16 (Housing)
11.2 Local Planning Policy Framework (LPPF)
Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) Clause 22.11 (Residential Development Policy)
11.3 Particular Provisions
Clause 55 (Two or More Dwellings on a Lot & Residential Buildings) – Refer to Appendix A for the Planning Officer’s full assessment against this Clause.
167 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
11.4 General Provisions
Clause 65 (Decision Guidelines)
11.5 Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines (Incorporated Document under Clause 21.05 – Residential Land Use of the LPPF).
The land is located within Area No. 78 of the Neighbourhood Character Guidelines. The proposal is generally in accordance with the applicable character profile. Three (3) “major characteristics” have been identified within this profile area, being:
Building placement Roof Shape Materials
It is considered that the proposal is generally consistent with the above identified major characteristics of the profile area as it would feature a front setback of more than 7.0 metres from Station Street and incorporate side setbacks of more than 1.0 metre. The roof form of the proposed building would comprise a combination of shapes including pitched and flat roof elements which are considered to be sympathetic to the roof forms found within the locality.
The Profile Area suggests that concrete roof tiles and white weatherboard cladding is a major characteristic of this area, it appears from elevations that cladding is proposed to some walls on the first floor, however this has not been accurately reflected on the submitted colours and materials schedule, and should be rectified by an appropriate condition on any permit issued. It is recommended that cladding/weatherboard materials are ensured to be incorporated to assist in reflecting the broader character of the area, as well as providing a lighter weight material with regard to articulation and reducing visual massing.
11.6 Design Contextual Housing Guidelines (April 2003 – reference document within Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy).
The Design Contextual Housing Guidelines offer a range of design techniques and suggestions to assist with residential design, which is responsive to local character.
It is considered that the proposed development does not raise any issues of non- compliance with these guidelines.
12.0 PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
12.1 State Planning Policy Framework
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
168 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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.
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. The proposal provides for residential development which contributes to further urban consolidation. It is therefore reasonable to consider an increase in the density of dwellings on the land, with this also respecting aspects of Clause 21.05 of the Kingston Planning Scheme. 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.
12.2 Local Planning Policy Framework
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.
The subject land is identified within an Increased Housing Diversity area.
The intention in these areas is for new medium density housing to comprise of a variety of housing types and layouts that respond to the established, yet evolving, urban character. As these residential areas are already established, the design of any new medium density housing proposal should display sensitivity to the existing residential context and respond to the amenity standards in these areas.
The objectives of the Municipal Strategic Statement (as relevant to this application) include:
Objective 1: To provide a wide range of housing types across the municipality to increase housing diversity and cater for the changing needs of current and future populations, taking account of the differential capacity of local areas in Kingston to accommodate different types and rates of housing change. Objective 2: To ensure new residential development respects neighbourhood character and is site responsive, and that medium density dwellings are of the highest design quality. Objective 3: To preserve and enhance well landscaped/vegetated environments and protect identified significant vegetation. Objective 4: To promote more environmentally sustainable forms of residential development. Objective 5: To manage the interface between residential development and adjoining or nearby sensitive/strategic land uses.
169 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Objective 6: To ensure residential development does not exceed known physical infrastructure capacities.
Relevant strategies to achieve these objectives (as relevant to this application) include:
Promote increased housing diversity in residential areas that are within convenient walking distance of public transport and activity nodes (increased housing diversity areas). Such areas will accommodate a variety of medium density housing types and layouts at increased residential densities, responding to the established but evolving neighbourhood character. Promote new residential development which is of a high standard, responds to the local context and positively contributes to the character and identity of the local neighbourhood. Promote new residential development which provides a high standard of amenity and quality of life for future occupants. Encourage the retention of existing vegetation wherever possible. Improve landscape character by accommodating appropriate landscaping within new residential developments. Ensure that the planning, design, siting and construction of new residential development responds to best practice environmental design guidelines for energy efficiency, waste and recycling, and stormwater management. Promote medium density housing development in proximity to public transport facilities, particularly train stations. Ensure that where medium and higher density residential areas are proposed adjacent to lower density residential areas, the design of such development takes proper account of its potential amenity impacts. Ensure that the siting and design of new residential development is consistent with Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines and that new development contributes to the maintenance and upgrade of local drainage infrastructure as required, where such new development will impact on the capacity of such infrastructure. Require the provision of car parking to satisfy the anticipated demand having regard to average car ownership levels in the area, the environmental capacity of the local street network and the proximity of public transport and nearby on and off street car parking. Ensure that all new medium density housing provides adequate private open space that is appropriately landscaped.
It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of Clause 21.05 as outlined above. The proposal creates an adequate standard of amenity for the future occupants of each dwelling, as well as for occupants of existing dwellings in the immediate area. It is considered that the development will have minimal impact on the evolving streetscape character, and the broader local neighbourhood character. Further discussion regarding these items will be outlined later within this report.
170 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
12.3 Clause 22.11 – Residential Development Policy
As outlined previously, the proposal is considered to generally comply and satisfy the applicable policies contained within the Local Planning Policy Framework, which essentially aim to encourage well-designed medium density housing in appropriate locations.
Where a planning permit is required for residential development, where relevant, it is policy under Clause 22.11 to:
. Encourage all new residential development to respond positively and creatively to neighbourhood character. Unless a preferred character is specified, the existing character is that which is to be considered. . In areas where building placement makes a major contribution to neighbourhood character, design new development to reinforce the established rhythm of buildings in the street and retain the existing single dwelling character of the streetscape.
Built form, siting and scale of development, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Encourage the two storey component of new medium density housing to be located towards the front of a site. . Ensure that two storey dwellings are designed to respond to the character of the local neighbourhood. Where the local neighbourhood is characterised by single storey development and this characteristic makes a major or critical contribution to neighbourhood character, new two storey development should incorporate rooms within the roof form of attic style dwellings, and should set the second storey building envelope back from the ground level envelope. . Ensure that any upper storey components towards the rear of sites are sensitively designed to avoid unreasonable adverse amenity impacts on neighbours. . Encourage well-articulated and graduated elevations in order to avoid 'box-like' double storey designs, thus reducing visual bulk. . Ensure that the siting of new buildings respects the amenity of adjoining neighbours with regard to rear yards and garden outlooks from habitable living room windows. . Ensure that the design and layout of new dwellings incorporate features which minimise overlooking of adjacent properties. . Address potential overlooking through site layout planning as well as individual dwelling planning.
Car parking and vehicle access, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that adequate on-site car parking is provided to meet the needs of future residents and visitors and sited to reduce its impact on the streetscape. Performance measures
171 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Locating garages or carports at the rear of dwellings fronting a street wherever possible. . Ensuring that where garages are located in the street elevation, they are set back a greater distance than the front wall of the building. . Ensuring that garages and carports are sited so that a tandem car parking space can be provided in front of the garage or carport. . Incorporating garages and carports within the main roof line of the dwelling.
Stormwater run-off mitigation and quality management, it is policy, where relevant, to:
. Ensure that new residential development limits the impact of increased stormwater run-off on drainage systems. Performance measures On-site infiltration should be maximised by: . Wherever possible, using unpaved landscape areas or porous paving. . Where appropriate, constructing on-site stormwater detention with delayed release into the stormwater drainage system. . Designing to limit the impervious area. . Incorporating on-site water re-cycling systems for stormwater run-off.
Clause 22.11 Residential Development Policy essentially extends upon the provision contained at Clause 21.05 (Residential Land Use) along with the State Planning Policy Framework provisions found at Clause 11 – Settlement and Clause 16.01-2 – Location of Residential Development, effectively promoting high-density development around activity centres and locations close to public transport.
In summary, the proposal is seen to be strongly consistent with Council’s Local Planning Policy Framework and, importantly, it delivers on some very specific objectives for the type and form of medium density development expected in areas such as this before the Council.
12.4 Zoning Provisions
It is considered that the proposed development satisfies the purpose of the zone.
The Schedule to the Residential 1 Zone specifies variations to one (1) standard under Clause 55 (ResCode), namely:
Standard B32 – Front Fences: The local variation requires a front fence within 3 metres of a street must not exceed 2 metres in height for streets in a Road Zone – Category 1 or 1.2 metres in height for any other street.
The proposed front fence would be 1.6 metres high and does not satisfy the requirements of the Schedule to the Zone. Refer to Section 13.0 of this report for further discussion.
172 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
12.5 Overlay Provisions
No overlay controls are applicable to the subject site.
13.0 CLAUSE 55 (RESCODE ASSESSMENT)
13.1 The proposal has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode) of the Kingston Planning Scheme (refer to attachment A). It is considered that the development largely satisfies the requirements of ResCode and is a well- designed development. There appear to be the following areas of non-compliance, which are discussed below:
Clause 55.02 – Neighbourhood Character & Infrastructure
Standard B1 – Neighbourhood Character
The objective under this Standard is “to ensure that the design respects the existing or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character”. There is a notable degree of multi-dwelling development located within proximity of the subject site, with significant precedent for increased densities. In particular, at No’s 422 and 423 Station Street, north of the subject site is a development under construction for twelve (12) double storey dwellings.
The subject site is located within Profile Area No. 78 of Council’s Neighbourhood Character Guidelines (2007) which identifies three (3) major built form characteristics of existing residential development in this area.
The proposal generally accords with each of those identified, with the exception of building materials which features concrete roof tiles and white weatherboard external cladding. A condition of any permit issued for the proposed development would require an updated colours and materials schedule to reflect the cladding/weatherboard wall materials shown to first floor elevations.
Clause 55.03 – Site Layout and Massing
Standard B7 – Building Height
Whilst the total proposed building height is less than the 9 metre maximum height that should not be exceeded under this Standard (8.6 metres proposed), the design of the basement sitting approximately 400mm above ground level elevates the ground and first floors, in turn requiring excessive boundary fence heights to prevent overlooking from ground floor windows. It is recommended that there is a reduction in floor to ceiling heights to reduce the overall height of the building, from 2.7 metres to 2.5 metres, and as discussed in the assessment against Standard B31, changes to balcony setbacks and Dwelling 7 to reduce the impact of massing and visual bulk.
Standard B10 – Energy Efficiency
173 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The design overall has maximised north orientation of habitable rooms and private open spaces for dwellings, whilst limiting off-site overshadowing. It is however noted that a south facing bedroom window to Dwelling 11 could be re-oriented to the east to maximise the energy efficiency achieved – this would be required by a condition on any permit issued.
Standard B12 – Safety
It is recommended that a roller shutter grille and intercom secure entry is provided at the entry to the basement, ensuring that the entirety of the basement is enclosed for security purposes. It is also recommended that if a permit is issued that a condition must be included to provide security lighting to the basement and to the shared pathway along the southern boundary. All lighting must be appropriately located and baffled so as to reduce any off-site amenity impacts.
Standard B14 – Access
The proposed crossover width of 5.8 metres meets the requirements of this Standard, however Council’s Traffic Engineer has requested that the crossover to the site is redesigned so as to be located at a 90 degree angle to the road. This is recommended to be required by a condition of permit but will require amendments to the ground floor plan and the design of Dwelling 1. The basement layout and location of bicycle and storage areas will not allow for the safe movement of vehicles or convenient access to storage areas and bins. It is recommended that if a permit is issued, that conditions require the consolidation of bin storage areas towards the entry to the basement to enable easier movements of bins on collection days. Sharing of bins will allow the use of eleven (11) x 240lt bins. The storage areas to dwelling’s 4, 7 and 10 are recommended to be relocated, this can be done by reducing storage areas to a minimum of 3 cubic metres for all dwellings, with storage to be provided in cages over car spaces, deleting the 6 bicycle racks on the north side of the basement, and relocate remaining bicycles to the western end of the basement adjacent to visitor parking.
Standard B16 – Parking Provision
The number of car spaces proposed for residents and visitors meets the requirements of this Standard, however the proposed widths of car spaces which directly abut a wall require a minimum width of 2.9 metres – a condition of permit is recommended to rectify this in relation to car spaces for dwelling’s 3, 4, 6 and 7. Car space lengths at 4.9 metres have been determined by Council’s Traffic Engineer to be appropriate in this instance where they directly abut a wall at the end of the space, with no overhang, vehicles can still be appropriately accommodated in spaces of this length and where the number of vehicles using the basement is relatively low this will not jeopardise safe vehicle movements.
Clause 55.04 – Amenity Impacts
174 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Standard B23 – Internal Views
The objective of this Standard is “to limit views into the secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within a development”.
The submitted plans omit details of any internal visual screening between each of the proposed terrace and balcony areas associated with each dwelling. Accordingly, a condition of any permit issued for the proposed development should require details of the proposed screening to be installed between each respective private open space area.
Clause 55.06 – Detailed Design
Standard B31 – Design Detail
The objective of this Standard is “to encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character”.
Whilst the proposed development is considered to be reflective of the evolving residential character of the area, Council officers consider that the proposed building would demonstrate a high level of visual bulk and mass when viewed from adjoining properties (particularly the property at No. 2 Cannes Avenue). This can be attributed to the location of the north-facing terrace private open space areas for Units 1, 2 and 3 and the north-facing component of the proposed balcony for Dwelling 7 at the upper floor level, combined high finished floor levels and proposed high boundary fencing to prevent overlooking. An application has been received at Council which is running concurrently with this application, for the development of No. 2 Cannes Avenue (property to the north), for the construction of six (6) double storey dwellings, four (4) of which are proposed along the shared boundary with the subject site, with private open spaces on the boundary. Whilst that development has not yet been determined consideration is given to both the existing conditions and potential future development. In relation to existing conditions it is difficult to ascertain which part of the rear yard of No. 2 Cannes Avenue is primarily used for open space, however it would appear to be the larger area to the rear of the dwelling. An existing 5 metre high tree within that garden would in part obscure views of some of the proposed development, including part of the balcony to Dwelling’s 8 and 9.
On balance it is considered that the proposed terraced areas at the lower level be offset from the site’s north (side) property boundary by at least 400mm resulting in a 2.0 metre wide private open space area for Dwellings 1, 2 and 3. This would ensure that the visual dominance created as a result of the additional screening located along this boundary would be reduced by setting it off the site’s northern boundary. Further, Council officers consider that the extent of upper floor balcony area for Dwelling 7 along the northern elevation of the proposed building is excessive and would add to the visual massing of the proposed when viewed from the adjoining property at No. 2 Cannes Avenue, whether that site remains as it currently is, or is developed. It is recommended that a condition is included to orient the balcony of Dwelling 7
175 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
completely to the street, and that the presentation of visual massing of that Dwelling is decreased with the reduction of the master bedroom so that the wall steps in a minimum of 1.5 metres – also providing articulation to compensate for the deletion of the north facing balcony of Dwelling 7.
Standard B32 – Front Fences
The Schedule to the Residential 1 Zone requires that front fences should not exceed 1.2 metres in height or 2 metres where the site fronts a Road Zone Category 1. The proposal seeks the provision of a 1.6 metre high front fence along a section of the site’s Station Street frontage. The proposed increase in front fencing height is considered appropriate having regard to a number of factors, including the existing noise source posed by the Frankston Railway line opposite the site, existing front fences in the immediate area (including the existing solid 2 metre high fence on the subject site) and the need for a secure entrance into the proposed residential building. It is noted that the fence would not extend across the full frontage.
As such, a variation to this Standard is considered appropriate in this instance.
Standard B34 – Site Services
As discussed above it is recommended that if a permit is to be issued that the bin storage areas proposed within the basement are consolidated and located towards the entry to the basement. Council’s Waste Management Department has advised that Council collection can be achieved from the subject site, and recommends that bins are shared, with eleven (11) 240 litre waste and recycling bins able to meet resident demand. This would require seven (7) recycling bins and three (3) general waste bins. If a permit is to be issued it is recommended that a revised Waste Management Plan is submitted providing details for arrangements to ensure that collection will occur through Council’s own waste collection service.
14.0 RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF OBJECTIONS
14.1 As previously discussed, nineteen (19) objections have been received to the proposal. The following section provides a response to each of the main grounds of objection received to the application.
Car Parking and Traffic - It is considered that the proposal adequately accommodates on-site parking and visitor car parking demands. This is demonstrated by full compliance with the requirements of Standard B16 (Parking Provision) of Clause 55 and no issues raised by Council’s Traffic Engineering Department. Furthermore, it is considered that the surrounding road network would be able to accommodate any additional vehicle movements that are generated by the new dwellings. The proposal does not raise any unreasonable traffic concerns.
Neighbourhood Character - Whilst the proposed development is contemporary in nature, the development is provided with various elements which are consistent
176 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
with the existing and emerging neighbourhood character, with many examples found within proximity of the site of multi-dwelling development, incorporating double storey forms.
This section of Station Street as well as the surrounding street network has numerous examples of contemporary built form with added elements of neighbourhood character. It is considered that the built form is consistent with the policy directions of Council’s Residential Development Policy. Overall, it is considered that the proposal would sit appropriately within the streetscape and would be consistent with the broader neighbourhood character.
Visual Bulk – Council officers concur that the terraced/balcony areas along the northern elevation of the proposed development may result in an unreasonable level of visual bulk and mass when viewed from the adjoining properties. As discussed in the previous section of this report, it is considered that these areas should be modified and offset from the site’s northern property boundary to minimise the visual impact associated with the proposed development, along with the stepping in of Dwelling 7’s master bedroom to provide further articulation, and deletion of that dwelling’s northern oriented balcony.
The original concept which was forwarded to Council for pre-application comments provided a continuous built form along the length of the site, with no variation in the roof or first floor walls. Following feedback from Council officers, the application which was subsequently lodged amended the plans to provide a mix of hipped and flat roof forms and break in massing between Dwelling’s 9 and 10, along with improvements to material selection and overall articulation, helping to alleviate concerns regarding the designs responsiveness to abutting properties. Subject to the recommended alterations which have been discussed, it is considered that the proposal will achieve an adequate degree of articulation and breaks in the presentation of visual bulk.
Waste Management Issues – The applicant has submitted a proposed waste management collection plan for the proposal. However, Council’s Waste Management Coordinator believes that Council’s waste contractor would be able to adequately cater for waste collection from the subject site and there should be no issues in terms of the placement of bins along Station Street on collection day.
Overlooking – the objectors have raised some concerns regarding overlooking, particularly those residents that directly adjoin the subject site to the north (side) and south (side). All upper floor level balconies and habitable room windows would be installed with screening devices, in accordance with Standard B22 (Overlooking) of ResCode, with fence heights also preventing unreasonable overlooking at ground level.
Overshadowing/loss of sunlight – overshadowing will occur primarily within the site, where it does occur, this is mainly to the property at No. 432 Station Street, however this dwelling’s private open space will receive the required minimum five (5) hours of sunlight to at least 75% of the rear yard, meeting the requirements of
177 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Standard B21.
The proposal will also be provided with adequate side setbacks to meet the requirements of Standard B19 – Daylight to Existing Windows and Standard B20 – North Facing Windows.
Overdevelopment–a number of the submissions received by Council raised concern in relation to the number of dwellings proposed as a part of the development. As outlined above, the proposal achieves a high level of compliance with the provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including relevant local residential policy, Municipal Strategic Statement and Clause 55. It is considered that the proposal represents an appropriate design solution for the site, and can be accommodated on the land, without adverse impact to abutting properties or the surrounding area. As such, the proposal is not considered to represent an overdevelopment.
15.0 CONCLUSION:
15.1 For reasons discussed within this report, it is submitted that the proposal be supported subject to the adoption of the recommended permit conditions to ensure that the proposed development achieves a high quality design, achieves good internal amenity as well as responding appropriately to the site and its immediate interfaces.
15.2 The proposed development is considered appropriate for the site as evidenced by: The design and siting of the proposed development to be compatible with the surrounding area; The proposal should not have a detrimental impact on surrounding properties (subject to appropriate conditions); and, The proposal generally satisfies the requirements of the Kingston Planning Scheme, including the MSS, Residential Development Policy (inclusive of the Neighbourhood Character Area Guidelines and the Designing Contextual Housing Guidelines), Residential 1 zoning and the Schedule to the zone, Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot and Residential Buildings and Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines (subject to appropriate conditions).
15.3 On balance and subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions, the proposal is considered reasonable and warrants support.
16.0 RECOMMENDATION:
That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued to develop the land for the construction of eleven (11) dwellings, subject following conditions: 1. Before the development starts amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted to Council on 29 June, 2011, but modified to show:
178 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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: xv. 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; xvi. 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; xvii. 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; xviii. a range of plant types from ground covers to large shrubs and trees, species must comprise a minimum 80% coastal species; xix. adequate planting densities (e.g.: plants with a mature width of 1 metre, planted at 1 metre intervals); xx. provision of one (1) suitable medium to large sized (at maturity) indigenous coastal canopy tree and three (3) small sized (at maturity) indigenous coastal canopy trees within the front setback of the property, with species chosen to be approved by the Responsible Authority; xxi. sustainable lawn areas and plant species taking current water restrictions into consideration; xxii. all trees provided at a minimum of two (2) metres in height at the time of planting; xxiii. medium to large shrubs to be provided at a minimum pot size of 200mm; xxiv. 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 all bicycle racks on the northern and eastern sides of the basement and the provision of wall mounted bike racks to the northern wall of the basement, with a minimum of eight (8) bicycle racks; c. storage spaces for each dwelling reduced to a maximum of three (3) cubic metres, with storage to be provided in cages above car bonnets with the exception of Dwelling 6 which must be provided with 6 cubic metres of storage within its private open space; d. the consolidation of waste and recycling bins to the eastern side of the visitor car spaces, utilising eleven (11) shared 240 litre bins, comprised of seven (7) bins for recycling and four (4) bins for general waste within a caged area; e. car spaces for dwelling’s 3, 4, 6 and 7 increased to 2.9 metres width;
179 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
f. the provision of a roller shutter grille and intercom secure entry to the basement, enclosing the entirety of the basement, including visitor parking spaces and the waste bin enclosure; g. the north-facing terraced private open space areas for Dwellings 1, 2 and 3 setback at least 400mm from the site’s north (side) property boundary; h. deletion of the north facing balcony of Dwelling 7 and the provision of a minimum of eight (8) square metres of balcony, with a minimum dimension of 2 metres oriented to the street (west); i. an additional 1.5 metre setback to Bedroom 1 of Dwelling 7 from the northern boundary, and any consequent internal layout changes to Bedroom 1, its ensuite and walk in robe; j. the provision of external fixed screening to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level to the north facing living room and Bedroom 2 windows of Dwelling 7, with no more than 25 percent (25%) transparency and projects approximately 400mm off the wall; k. the south facing bedroom window of Dwelling 11 deleted and a sliding window provided to the east, with fixed external screening that has no more than 25 percent (25%) transparency and projects approximately 400mm off the wall; l. the reduction of floor to ceiling heights from 2.7 metres to 2.5 metres; m. the provision of a full colour, finishes and building materials schedule (including cladding or weatherboard wall materials at the first floor) including samples, for all external elevations and driveways of the development with light colour tones where appropriate to be predominantly selected for the external facades of the building to increase heat reflection from those surfaces most exposed to heat loads, and where possible, the selection of applied finishes to the building’s façade to be of heat resistant properties; n. details of internal screening devices between each terrace/balcony area associated with each dwelling, in accordance with the requirements of Standard B23 (Internal Views) of the Kingston Planning Scheme; o. the provision of external clothes drying facilities for each dwelling, with the exception of Dwelling 7 which must be provided with internal clothes drying facilities; p. external security lighting within the basement car parking area and along the “boardwalk” access adjacent to the site’s south (side) property boundary; q. full details of proposed balcony screening, with this screening to be no more than 25 percent (25%) transparent and preventing downward views; r. a comprehensive detailed drainage strategy of the site incorporating Rainwater Tanks and Water Sensitive Urban Design Treatments to the satisfaction of Council; s. the basement ramp longitudinal section with grades;
180 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
t. adequate site distance provided to the Station Street access ensuring sightlines are maintained according to AS 2890.1:2004 Figure 3.3 Minimum Sight Lines For Pedestrian Safety; u. access to the site is to be constructed at 90 degrees from Station Street with any consequent modifications to Dwelling 1; v. the location of all required external stairs and landings; w. a notation on the plan stating “footpath and property boundary levels are not to be altered without the written consent from the Roads and Drains Department”; x. a 200mm offset installed between the property boundary and the back of footpath to the satisfaction of the Roads and Drains Department Authority; y. a notation on the plan stating that “the vehicle crossing is to be constructed to the satisfaction of the Roads and Drains Department in accordance with Kingston’s Standard Drawings”; z. details of all internal fencing and gates, where applicable, nominating the height, materials, finishes and colours, with these to be 1.8 metre in height; aa. the provision of natural light and ventilation into the basement car park; and bb. the provision of acoustic screening for all external heating/cooling units located within the proposed development. 2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. Prior to the endorsement of plans under Condition 1, an amended 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) Consolidation and sharing of bins for waste and recycling. c) Arrangements to facilitate Council collection of waste from the front of the site; 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. 4. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, the landscaping works as shown on the endorsed plans must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 5. 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. 6. The development of the site must be provided with stormwater works which incorporates the use of water sensitive urban design principles to improve stormwater
181 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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 bio retention system, rainwater tanks connected for reuse and a detention system. 7. 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.). 8. Stormwater works must be provided on the site so as to prevent overflows onto adjacent properties. 9. Stormwater outflow from the development to the Council drainage system should not exceed the predevelopment outflow of the site. 10. 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 and when approved shall thereafter be complied with. The CMP must specify and deal with the parking of vehicles during construction, delivery of materials, and containment of waste on site. 11. The obscure glazing to the windows 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. 12. All screens marked on the endorsed plan shall be maintained by the owner of the land to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 13. The developer/owner must contact the Responsible Authority and VicRoads and arrange traffic management plans and WORKS ZONE for any works that may affect traffic (both vehicular and pedestrian) or parking on Nepean Highway or any of the surrounding streets. Works vehicles will not be able to stop in the street fronting the property if they cannot provide at least 3 metres clearance for other vehicles to pass or if parking restrictions already apply. The developer will be responsible for the costs of arranging a WORKS ZONE and reinstatement of parking restriction signs, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 14. Any existing vehicular crossing not in accordance with the endorsed plan must be removed and the kerb reinstated in a manner satisfactory to the Responsible Authority and any proposed vehicular crossing must be fully constructed to the Responsible Authority’s standard specification. 15. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, all boundary fences must be repaired and/or replaced as necessary to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, at the cost of the applicant/owner. 16. Prior to the removal of the street tree from the site’s Station Street nature strip the Developer/Owner must pay to Council a compensation, removal and replacement fee
182 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
($270.00) (including GST) for the removal of the tree. The removal must be undertaken by Council, and the Developer/Owner must advise Council when the tree is required to be removed. 17. Construction on the site must be restricted to the following times: a. Monday to Friday 7:00am to 7:00pm; and b. Saturday 9:00am to 6:00pm. Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority in writing. 18. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted, areas set aside for parking vehicles, access lanes and paths as shown on the endorsed plans must be: a. Constructed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. b. Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans. c. Surfaced in accordance with the endorsed plans under this permit or in an all- weather coloured concrete seal-coat, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. d. Drained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Parking areas and access lanes must be kept available for these purposes at all times and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 19. 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. 20. 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. 21. 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. 22. Once the development has started it must be continued and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 23. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: The development is not started within two (2) years from the date of permit issue. The development is not completed within four (4) years from the date of permit issue. In accordance with section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the responsible authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires, or within three months afterwards.
Note: Prior to the commencement of the development you are required to obtain the necessary Building Permit.
183 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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: No parking permits will be issued to residents of 431 Station Street, Bonbeach.
OR
In the event that Council wishes to oppose the application, it can do so using the following grounds:
1. The proposal would prevent the orderly and proper planning of the zone.
2. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the amenity the adjoining properties to the north.
3. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site.
4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape.
Linda Morteson addressed Council on behalf of the Objectors. Peter Thomas addressed Council on behalf of the Applicant.
Crs Ronke/Moloney
That Council issue a Notice of Refusal to Grant a Permit to develop the land for the construction of eleven (11) dwellings on the following grounds: 1. The proposal would prevent the orderly and proper planning of the zone. 2. The proposal would have an adverse effect on the amenity the adjoining properties to the north. 3. The proposal constitutes an over-development of the site. 4. The proposal would detract from the visual amenity of the locality and the streetscape. 5. The proposal does not satisfy all of the requirements of Clause 55 of the Kingston Planning Scheme (ResCode) in particular Clause 55.02-1 Neighbourhood Character Objectives, Clause 55.03-8 Landscaping Objectives, Clause 55.03-9 Access Objectives, Clause 55.04-6 Overlooking Objective and Clause 55.06-1 Design Detail Objective Carried
184 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
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 1 Zone).
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? B1 Neighbourhood Character Yes The proposed development is Design respects existing generally consistent with the “major neighbourhood character or characteristics” identified within contributes to a preferred Profile Area No. 78 of Council’s neighbourhood character. Neighbourhood Character Guidelines, Development responds to features clarification is required to ensure that of the site and surrounding area. cladding or weatherboard wall materials are to be incorporated at the first floor.
Overall the proposed development is considered to be consistent with the emerging character of the area and has included characteristics such as hipped roof forms that can be found in the locality. B2 Residential Policy Yes The subject site is located within an Residential development is area designated for “increased housing consistent with housing policies in diversity”. See report. 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. B3 Dwelling Diversity Yes The proposed building would Encourages a range of dwelling comprise a combination of one, two sizes and types in developments of and three bedroom dwellings. ten or more dwellings. B4 Infrastructure Yes, subject to The site has access to adequate Provides appropriate utility conditions road and drainage infrastructure. services and infrastructure without The development will need to overloading the capacity. make application to the appropriate suppliers for water, sewerage, electricity, gas and phone services. Given surrounding developments, it is not expected that this development will unreasonably overload the
185 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? capacity of those services. Council’s Drainage Engineer’s have advised that standard drainage conditions should be placed as conditions on any permit issued, including the need for water sensitive urban design principles in stormwater management.
B5 Integration with the Street Yes The proposed residential building Integrate the layout of would be orientated towards Station development with the street Street, with views achieved from habitable room windows. An identifiable main pedestrian gate provides a sense of legibility and pedestrian link to the three lobby entries. The proposed 1.6 metre high front fence would not enclose all of the front boundary and is considered appropriate in this instances. B6 Street Setback Yes Complies. The proposed building The setbacks of buildings from a meets the average minimum setback of street respect the existing or 7.2 metres required under this preferred neighbourhood character Standard. and make efficient use of the site. B7 Building Height Yes Maximum: 9 metres Building height should respect the Proposed: 8.6 metres existing or preferred See report. neighbourhood character. B8 Site Coverage Yes Maximum: 60% Site coverage should respect the Proposed:56.4% existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site. B9 Permeability Yes At least: 20% Reduce the impact of stormwater Proposed:27.8% run-off on the drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration. B10 Energy Efficiency Yes The site is generally orientated in an Achieve and protect energy east/west direction. Each POS area efficient dwellings and residential would be located on the north side of buildings. the proposed development. It is Ensure orientation and layout recommended that the south facing reduces fossil fuel energy use and window to a bedroom of dwelling 11
186 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? makes appropriate use of daylight is re-oriented to the east to maximise and solar energy. daylight. B11 Open Space N/A Integrate layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development. B12 Safety Yes Surveillance opportunities within the Layout to provide safety and development are somewhat limited by security for residents and property. the need to screen windows to prevent overlooking. The development is proposed to be provided with a secure entry to the front of the site which is considered satisfactory. Security lighting should be required as a condition of any permit issued, to be provided along the length of the proposed “boardwalk” access and within the basement. A security roller shutter door is proposed to the basement and is considered satisfactory – however its location is recommended to be moved to enclose the entire basement including visitor car spaces and the new location for bicycle racks. This will ensure that visitors also have access to the stairwells to get to upper floors, rather than having to walk out of the basement using the ramp which is considered unsafe. B13 Landscaping Yes No significant vegetation would be To provide appropriate removed from the subject site. landscaping. Council’s Vegetation Management To encourage: Officer has advised that the submitted Development that respects the landscape plan is suitable for landscape character of the endorsement as a part of any permit neighbourhood. issued for the proposal.
Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.
The retention of mature vegetation on the site.
187 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? B14 Access Yes The existing single vehicle crossover Ensure the safe, manageable and would be removed with the nature convenient vehicle access to and strip replaced and reinstated. A new from the development. double crossover is proposed to be Ensure the number and design of constructed along the site’s Station vehicle crossovers respects Street frontage and does not exceed neighbourhood character. the permitted 40% width of the frontage. The location of the crossover would reduce on-street parking by one car space, however the provision of visitor parking within the basement meets ResCode requirements. All vehicles should be able to egress the site in a forwards direction. The basement layout is recommended to be amended to provide for better circulation – see report. B15 Parking Location Yes Parking spaces are conveniently Provide resident and visitor located within the basement and vehicles with convenient parking. accessed via three (3) stairwells. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments. B16 Parking Provision Yes, subject to Required: Fourteen (14) Ensure car and bicycle parking conditions Proposed: Fourteen (14) meets the needs of residents and visitors. A small number of car spaces are not Accessways should be practical, provided with widths that comply with attractive and easily maintainable. the Standard, however this is recommended to be rectified by a condition of any permit issued. See Report for further discussion.
B17 Side and Rear Setbacks Yes Minimum setback required where Ensure the height and setback ground floor wall heights reach a respects the existing or preferred maximum of 3.8 metres is 1.02 metres, neighbourhood character and and at the first floor where wall limits the amenity impacts on heights reach a maximum of 7.3 existing dwellings. metres, a setback of 2.39 metres is required. Required setbacks at ground and first floor are exceeded.
188 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? B18 Walls on Boundaries Yes No walls are proposed to be Ensure the location, length and constructed along any of the site’s height of a wall on a boundary property boundaries. The balustrade respects the existing or preferred to the balcony of Dwelling 4 would be neighbourhood character and located on the boundary with the limits the amenity impacts on maximum height being 3.13 metres, existing dwellings. and an average of 2.83 metres. B19 Daylight to Existing Yes Existing windows will be provided Windows with appropriate setbacks. Complies. Allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows. B20 North Facing Windows Yes Existing north facing windows will be Allow adequate solar access to provided with appropriate setbacks. existing north-facing habitable Complies. room windows. B21 Overshadowing Open Space Yes Most of the shadow likely to be Ensure buildings do not generated by the proposed dwelling significantly overshadow existing would be cast within the subject site. secluded private open space. The shadow that is case will affect the adjoining south property at No. 432 Station Street, however the private open space of that property will receive the required minimum 5 hours of sunlight to at least 40 square metres of private open space, meeting the requirements of this Standard. B22 Overlooking Yes All upper floor level habitable room Limit views into existing secluded windows and balconies would be fitted private open space and habitable with a combination of highlight room windows. windows and obscured glazing in accordance with the requirements of this Standard. Balconies would also be provided with screening to a height of 1.7 metres. Overlooking from ground floor windows is proposed to be addressed by high fencing, in particular 2 metre high boundary fencing and to one section of the north side boundary, 2 metre palings with a 0.4m high trellis extension.
189 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? B23 Internal Views No Details regarding internal screening Limit views into existing secluded between each of the terraced and private open space and habitable balcony areas have been omitted. See room windows of dwellings and report for further discussion. residential buildings within the same development. B24 Noise Impacts Yes Acoustic screening is recommended to Protect residents from external be provided for the external A/C units noise and contain noise sources in located on the terrace/balcony areas. developments that may affect existing dwellings. B25 Accessibility No If required, ground floor dwellings Consider people with limited could be modified for people with mobility in the design of limited mobility (not in wheelchairs), developments. however overall accessibility for people using wheelchairs would be difficult as no lifts are proposed within the development.
B26 Dwelling Entry Yes The development would be provided Provide a sense of identity to each with four (4) separate entries, with one dwelling/residential building. entry to Dwelling 1 and the remaining three entries to access other dwellings. The proposal is provided with a secure pedestrian entry at the front of the site, with a clear pedestrian link to the three lobby entries. Whilst this design is not optimal in regard to a definable main entry point it is considered adequate, with the design providing a legible connection between the frontage and lobby entries. B27 Daylight to New Windows Yes New windows are provided with Allow adequate daylight into new adequate daylight. North facing habitable room windows. ground floor windows would have first floor balconies over them; however the recessed first floor from the foot print of the floor below, would enable adequate daylight to these windows, and in turn allow some shading from northern sun.
190 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? B28 Private Open Space Yes Required: 8m2 for each dwelling, Provide reasonable recreation and with a minimum dimension of 1.6 service needs of residents by metres. adequate private open space. Proposed: Each dwelling would be provided with a minimum of 8m2 with a minimum dimension of 2.5 metres to the ground floor and 1.8 metres to the first floor, and all with convenient access from a living area.
B29 Solar Access to Open Space Yes The location of first floor balconies Allow solar access into the over the ground floor balconies will secluded private open space of still enable adequate solar access due new dwellings/buildings. to the recessing of the first floor. B30 Storage Yes 6 cubic metres of externally accessible Provide adequate storage facilities storage area is nominated for each for each dwelling. dwelling within the proposed basement car parking area, however it is recommended that these storage areas are reduced in size to 3 cubic metres, and that storage areas are relocated to above car bonnets for all dwellings (with the exception of Dwelling 6). 3 cubic metres is considered adequate for apartment style dwellings where demand for storage can be considered to be less, particularly where the need for gardening equipment is less – however it is recommended that an external storage shed is provided to the private open space of Dwelling 6. B31 Design Detail No The amount of visual bulk and mass Encourage design detail that likely to be presented to the adjoining respects the existing or preferred properties to the north should be neighbourhood character. minimised. See report for further discussion. B32 Front Fences No A 1.6 metre high front fence would be Encourage front fence design that constructed along a section of the respects the existing or preferred site’s Station Street frontage. See neighbourhood character. report.
191 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Complies with Title and Objective Requirement and Proposed Standard? B33 Common Property Yes The layout and design of the proposed Ensure car parking, access areas development should not result in any and other communal open space is future management difficulties for the practical, attractive and easily respective body corporate maintained. management. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas. B34 Site Services Yes, subject to An amended Waste Management Plan Ensure site services and facilities conditions is recommended to be required as a can be installed and easily condition of any permit issued to show maintained and are accessible, that Council collection will occur, adequate and attractive. Avoid along with amendments to consolidate future management difficulties in the bin storage area and relocate close common ownership areas. to the entry to the ramp. Eleven (11) x 240 litre bins would be required for the dwellings, in a shared arrangement.
192 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 194 Application for Amendment to Planning Permit pursuant to Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987
APPLICANT Tenpin Bowl Mentone ADDRESS OF LAND 1-9 Balcombe Road, MENTONE VIC 3194 PROPOSAL Section 72 Amendment to LIQUOR LICENCE PLANNING OFFICER Christopher McInnes REFERENCE NO. KP-1143/2008 ZONE Clause 32.04 – Mixed Use Zone OVERLAYS Clause 44.05 – Special Building Overlay (SBO) Clause 45.03 – Environmental Audit Overlay (EAO) PARTICULAR Clause 52.27 – Licensed Premises PROVISIONS ABORIGINAL No HERITAGE CULTURAL SENSITIVITY DATE AMENDMENT 20 June 2011 RECEIVED CONSIDERED PLAN 12 August 2011 REFERENCES/ DATE RECEIVED
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. An application to amend planning permit KP1143/2008 under Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 was received by Council on the 20th June, 2011.
1.2. This Report provides a detailed planning assessment of the proposed changes sought by the Permit Holder, which include both changes to the planning permit and plans required to be endorsed to the Permit.
1.3. Prior to delving into the body of this Report, the planning consideration before the Council is to determine whether the proposed amendments sought are “reasonable” and “acceptable”, having regard to the planning consideration sections provided within this Report, applicable policies, decision guidelines and all relevant provisions of the Kingston Planning Scheme.
1.4. Applicable to the deliberation of this amended permit application, the following must be noted:
Consideration must solely relate to the proposed changes before Council and, therefore, not relate to any other component of the previously approved development or any other planning application(s) sought on the Land.
2. RELEVANT HISTORY
193 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.1. Planning Permit KP-1143/2008 was issued on the 6th February, 2009, for an on- premises liquor licence for the existing food and drink premises/café.
2.2. The plans endorsed under Planning Permit KP-1143/2008 were amended under the provisions of Secondary Consent on the 2nd September, 2009, which reduced the red line area within the centre at the request of Liquor Licensing Victoria.
3. SITE & SURROUNDS
3.1. The subject site is currently used and developed for the Mentone Tenpin Bowling Centre, and is located to the south-west corner of the Intersection between Balcombe Road, Warrigal Road and Nepean Highway, Mentone. The subject site is an irregular shaped block with a property frontage of approximately 52.58 metres to Childers Street, a frontage of approximately 37.73 metres to Warrigal Road and a frontage of approximately 78.5 metres to Balcombe Road. The overall area of the subject site is approximately 4427m2.
3.2. The site does not contain any significant vegetation.
3.3. The site is encumbered by an easement running roughly east to west through the centre of the site, between the building envelope and the car park.
3.4. The surrounding area typically comprises of commercial and residential development, as well as a primary school on the opposite side of Childers Street.
3.5. There are no restrictions listed on the certificate of title lodged with the application
4. PROPOSAL
4.1. This Section 72 Amendment is to allow changes to the red line plan endorsed under the Permit. The applicant seeks to have the red line area on the plan increased to include the seating areas behind the bowling lanes, as well including the party and conference rooms near the entrance to the centre. The applicant is requesting these changes in order to better accommodate corporate functions, as well as to provide a better amenity to patrons.
5. LEGISLATION PROVISIONS
5.1. The amendment has been requested pursuant to Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (the Act).
5.2. Section 72 of the Act states:
(1) A person who is entitled to use or develop land in accordance with a permit may apply to the responsible authority for an amendment to the permit:
194 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
(2) This section does not apply to-
(a) a permit issued at the direction of the Tribunal; or (b) a permit issued under Division 6.
(3) In this section a reference to a permit includes any plans, drawings or other documents approved under a permit.
5.3. The original permit KP-1143/2008 issued on the 6th February, 2009, was not issued at the direction of the Tribunal or issued under Division 6 of the Act.
5.4. Section 73 of the Act states that Sections 47 to 62 of the Act apply to the amendment application. This allows the Responsible Authority to apply the abovementioned sections of the Act to the amendment application as if it was an application for a permit.
5.5. Accordingly, the relevant sections will be addressed in this report.
6. PLANNING SCHEME PROVISIONS
6.1. The planning scheme requirements relating to the subject site and the current amendment have changed since the issuing of planning permit KP-1143/2008. The subject site was zoned Business 3 at the time of the original application and subsequent approval, but re-zoned later in 2009 as Mixed Use. Provided below are the relevant planning controls and policies.
Zoning
Mixed Use Zone 6.2. Pursuant to Clause 32.04 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is not required for an on-premises liquor licence.
Overlays
Environmental Audit Overlay 6.3. Pursuant to Clause 45.03 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is not required for an on-premises liquor licence.
Special Building Overlay 6.4. Pursuant to Clause 44.05 of the Kingston Planning Scheme, a Planning Permit is not required for an on-premises liquor licence.
Particular Provisions
Licenced Premises
195 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.5. Pursuant to Clause 52.27 of the Kingston Planning Scheme – Licensed Premises, a Planning Permit is required to use land to sell or consume liquor if a license is required under the Liquor Control Reform Act 1998.
7. ADVERTISING
7.1. The amendment was advertised by sending notices to adjoining and opposite property owners and occupiers and by maintaining a notice on site for fourteen (14) days. Fourteen (14) objections to the proposal were received. The valid grounds of objection raised are summarised as follows:
Possibility of an increase in noise and/or anti-social behaviour Parking and traffic concerns The proposal may violate existing Council strategic policies
7.2. The following objections raised are either not valid planning considerations, or cannot be considered in the context of a Section 72 amendment to an existing permit:
The appropriateness of a liquor licence being issued for the site in the first place, and associated concerns that the location of the primary school and a child care centre in close proximity means the no liquor licence should be granted Objections to the multi-unit development on the adjoining site to the west, and associated concerns about the developer also owning the bowling centre site Rumours that the bowling alley is to be demolished in the future Concerns that the existing liquor licence could be transferred to a new development if the building housing the current bowling alley is demolished in the future Mentone, and the bowling alley, is a ‘family area’ and the serving of alcohol sets a bad example to children That a similar application was refused at Council 40 years ago The amendment will result in the violation of United Nations Convention for the Rights of a Child The gardens adjacent to the Mentone Railway Station could be damaged Devaluation of property The amount of litter in the street will increase Other civil matters
7.3. Importantly, it should be noted that the vast majority of objections raised were related to the appropriateness of a liquor licence being issued for the site in the first instance. This point of objection cannot be considered, as the applicant is seeking to amend an existing licence, and not obtain a new licence.
196 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
8. PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
8.1. A preliminary conference was held on the 6th October, 2011, with the relevant Planning Officer, a Ward Councillor, the Permit Applicant and seven (7) objectors in attendance. The above-mentioned issues were discussed at length.
8.2. Some of the above concerns were resolved at the conference, namely the appropriateness of serving liquor around children, and reassuring objectors that any existing liquor licence cannot be simply transferred to a new building in the bowling centre is demolished sometime in the future. The applicant offered to exclude the Centre’s entrance and children’s party rooms from the red line area, in order to alleviate concerns about liquor consumption being visible to children, and the objectors present strongly supported this idea. However, no objections to the application have since been withdrawn.
8.3. It should also be noted that a number of objectors present at the preliminary conference did not lodge formal objections to the amended application.
9. REFERRALS
9.1. The amended application was not required to be referred to any internal or external referral authorities.
10. APPLICATION ASSESSMENT AND ISSUES
10.1. The Permit applicant claims that the Mentone Bowl is one of the few bowling centres in Melbourne that does not allow patrons to consume liquor in the seating areas directly behind the bowling lanes, and notes that the Moorabbin Bowl, which is also located within the municipal boundary, does allow patrons to consume liquor in the abovementioned seating areas without any problems. The applicant also claims that his inability to serve liquor in the function rooms due to current licence restrictions makes the centre less appealing to corporate clients who may consider hiring the facility for functions and events.
10.2. Two (2) of the valid grounds of objection were that the amendment could cause an increase in anti-social behaviour, as well as an increase in traffic around the venue. It is considered that any increase in traffic generated as a result of this amendment would be negligible, as the amendment is primarily being sought in order to provide a better level of amenity to existing users of the Centre, and not as a way of generating a significantly higher number of patrons to the venue. Similarly, it is doubtful that the increase in area contained within the red line plan will cause any significant rise in levels of anti-social behaviour in the local area, as the venue is a bowling centre and not a hotel, and therefore is not a venue that is likely to attract patrons who purely want to drink and not participate in bowling activities.
197 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
10.3. One objector cited a paragraph of a strategic policy from Council’s Community Safety Strategy 2009-2012 within their formal objection, and again at the preliminary conference meeting, which supports the provision of leisure, recreation, entertainment, social activities and fundraising that does not rely on, or encourage, alcohol consumption. It is considered however, upon reviewing this document, that the objector has misunderstood the context of this paragraph, as it appears to relate to the operation of not-for-profit sporting clubs and not to commercial indoor recreation facilities.
10.4. Importantly, it should also be noted that many objectors were not even aware that the Centre had a current and existing liquor licence, and therefore misunderstood the intent of the application, assuming that the Bowling Centre was applying for an entirely new license. It can therefore be reasonably assumed that the existing license causes a negligible impact, if any, on the immediate area. It is therefore considered that any changes to the red line plan are not likely to change existing conditions in the local area in any significant way.
11. CUMULATIVE IMPACT
11.1. The decision guidelines of clause 52.27 also require consideration of:
The cumulative impact of any existing and the proposed liquor licence, the hours of operation and number of patrons, on the amenity of the area.
11.2. In the absence of any benchmarks within the Scheme to measure cumulative impact, Council relies on the assessment methodology for cumulative impact in the VCAT decision Swancom Pty Ltd v Yarra CC (Red Dot) [2009] VCAT 923 as an appropriate methodology for the assessment of this proposal.
11.3. The assessment methodology has three key considerations:
1. What is the density of licensed premises in the area? 2. What is the mix and type of licensed premises in the area? 3. What are the existing amenity levels of the area?
11.4. Depending on the nature of the application and specifics of the liquor licence being sought, however, consideration of an application using the Tribunal’s methodology will not always be warranted. The matrix of risk outlined below, has been devised by Officers and can be used as a guide to inform Council as to whether or not a cumulative impact assessment is warranted.
Type of Premise Risk Factor Café / Restaurant 0 Bar / Restaurant / Café 1 Bar 3 Hotel / Tavern 3 Night Club 3 Place of Assembly 2
198 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Size of Premise Risk Factor 0 – 49 patrons 0 50 – 99 patrons 1 100 – 199 patrons 2 200+ 3
Closing hours Risk factor 11pm 0 12am 1 1am 2 2am 3 3am 3 After 3am 4
11.5. Applying the matrix of risk, a reasonable consideration would suggest a score of 1-3 would be no risk, higher than 3 would be a potential risk.
11.6. Specific to this proposal, the use is existing and operates as a bar and café which operates ancillary to the primary use of an indoor recreation centre. Accordingly, the proposal achieves a score of 1 in the above matrix, and is therefore considered to be of a very low risk. As such, a cumulative impact assessment is not considered to be warranted in this instance.
11.7. Further, and as discussed in section 10.4 above, it should be noted that many objectors to the amended application were not even aware that the Centre had a current and existing liquor licence. It can therefore be assumed that the existing license has a negligible impact, if any, on the immediate vicinity, and that the changes being proposed to the red line plan will similarly have little or no impact on the surrounding area.
12. CONCLUSION
12.1. As identified initially in this report, it seeks a resolution of Council regarding an application made pursuant to Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 for modifications to Planning Permit KP1143/2008, including the plans relevant to the Permit. Therefore, the consideration before Council is limited to the matters where the Planning Permit Holder has sought amendments.
12.2. Based on the above report, the proposed amendment is considered to substantially comply with the relevant planning policy and therefore should be supported.
12.3. Further, given the amendment is considered acceptable, Section 74 of the Act requires that an amended permit must be issued.
199 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
13. RECOMMENDATION
13.1. That a Notice of Decision to Grant an Amended Planning Permit be issued to use the land for the sale and consumption of liquor in association with the existing food and drink premises at 1-9 Balcombe Road Mentone, subject to the list of conditions detailed below, and the revised plans be endorsed to form part of this approval.
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 20th June, 2011, but modified to show: a) the exclusion of the reception desk and the children’s party rooms adjacent to the main entrance, from the red line plan.
2. The use as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. 3. The liquor license is to be restricted to the following times: Monday to Sunday: 12.00pm (midday) – 12.00am (midnight) Or otherwise as approved by the Responsible Authority. 4. Once the use has started it must be continued to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. 5. The amenity of the area must not be detrimentally affected by the development and/or use, through the: a. Transport of materials, goods or commodities to or from the land. b. Appearance of any building, works or materials. c. Emission of noise, artificial light, vibration, smell, fumes, smoke, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste products, grit or oil. d. Presence of vermin. 6. No goods or packaging materials shall be stored or left exposed outside the building so as to be visible to the public from a road or other public place. 7. Advertising signage to encourage patrons to depart the premises quietly in the evening must be displayed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. 8. In accordance with section 68 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, this permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies: The use is not started before two (2) years from 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.
200 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Note: Prior to the commencement of the use as a licensed premises, a liquor license must be obtained from Liquor Licensing Victoria.
Note: Prior to the commencement of the development or use you are required to obtain the necessary Council Health Department approvals.
Cr Ronke left the meeting at 9.45pm Cr Ronke returned to the meeting at 9.47pm
Warren Stewart addressed the meeting on behalf of the Applicant.
Crs West/Dundas
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
Cr Peulich left the meeting at 9.50pm Cr Peulich returned to the meeting at 9.54pm
Procedural Motion
Crs Staikos/West That the meeting be extended a further 30 minutes to 10.30pm. The Motion was Carried.
201 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 195 Proposed Amendment C121 to the Kingston Planning Scheme - Moorabbin Activity Centre Zone
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: John Somers, Senior Strategic Planner Rosa Zouzoulas, Team Leader Strategic Planning
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed Amendment C121 and obtain approval for a request be made to the Minister for Planning to implement permanent planning controls into the Kingston Planning Scheme to replace the interim planning scheme provisions. The proposed amendment seeks to delete the current interim DDO19 and introduce Schedule 3 to the Activity Centre Zone on a permanent basis to implement the objectives of the adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 2 – A Sustainable Environment Strategy 2.2 – Striving a balance between development and amenity
Proposed Schedule 3 to the Activity Centre Zone seeks to implement the adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan. The proposed planning scheme provisions seek to achieve a liveable environment, enhance the retail and commercial nature of the centre, diversify housing in the Moorabbin area, and improve connectivity and access to public transport.
3. Background In 2006, Council undertook the ‘Prosperous Liveable Accessible Neighbourhoods’ Study (PLAN) which provides a sustainable land-use and development framework for the activity centre corridor; combining principal, major and neighbourhood activity centres from Moorabbin to Mordialloc. After extensive consultation, the strategy was adopted in 2008 and formed the basis of applying interim design and height controls whilst further structure planning work was completed for the major activity centres of Mentone, Cheltenham and Moorabbin.
The interim controls were approved in the form of Design and Development Overlay as part of Amendment C100, and have recently been extended to April 2013.
The proposed Schedule to the Activity Centre Zone is based on the adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan. Over the past year, Council has undertaken structure planning for the Moorabbin Activity Centre. The Structure Plan was adopted in May 2011. The Structure Plan seeks to improve the amenity of the centre, reduce the rat run through the centre, improve linkages and open space in the centre, and invigorate the centre through mixed use development and an improved railway station entrance.
202 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
4. Summary and Conclusion Interim structure planning controls provide an opportunity for Council to implement controls into the Kingston Planning Scheme immediately. Amendment C100 provided interim protection for the Moorabbin Activity Centre and has allowed Council to develop permanent controls to replace the interim planning scheme provisions relating to Moorabbin.
The Activity Centre Zone provisions are relatively new in the Victoria Planning Provisions with only Manningham City Council having applied the zone to its Doncaster Principal Activity Centre. The drafted permanent Activity Centre Zone Schedule for the Moorabbin Activity Centre has been developed to reflect the intent of the adopted structure plan for Moorabbin. The Activity Centre Zone significantly reduces the need for multiple planning controls in the scheme, and more importantly to private properties in the activity centre, eliminating confusion.
The drafted permanent controls seek to replace interim planning scheme controls.. It is therefore appropriate that a request be made to the Minister for Planning to begin a planning scheme amendment to the Kingston Planning Scheme to introduce the Activity Centre Zone for the Moorabbin Major Activity Centre.
5. Consultation The adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan was developed and tested by the community through significant consultation undertaken over the past couple of years. Consultation included, mailouts, public meetings, displays in the activity centre with Council Officers present to answer questions, information on Council’s website, and at all libraries and customer service centres, media releases in all locally circulating newspapers and Council’s KYC paper and telephone enquiries.. . Should Council seek to begin an amendment to introduce a permanent Schedule to the Activity Centre Zone into the Kingston Planning Scheme for Moorabbin, a further detailed consultation process is required to be undertaken as part of the amendment process. This will enable all stakeholders to re-engage with Council to test the zone objectives and strategies and the design and development provisions.
6. The proposed Amendment The proposed amendment seeks to: Introduce Schedule 3 to proposed Clause 37.08 (Activity Centre Zone) to include planning scheme provisions in a permanent nature for the Moorabbin Activity Centre; Rezone all land in the Moorabbin Activity Centre (as defined by the Moorabbin Activity Centre Structure Plan) to the Activity Centre Zone; Delete Design and Development Overlay 19 from Clause 43.02 of the Kingston Planning Scheme;
203 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Insert the Public Acquisition Overlay over land in accordance with the Moorabbin Structure Plan; and Modify relevant clauses of the Municipal Strategic Statement and give recognition to the objectives for the future of Moorabbin as contained in the adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan, 2011.
The amendment does not seek to rezone Precinct D as highlighted in the adopted structure plan at this point in time. In accordance with the council resolution that adopted the structure plan, further work is required to provide specific guidance on urban design and associated economic advice to assist with the transition of this precinct over time.
Council officers have recently met with the Department of Planning and Community Development with regard to the drafting of Schedules to the Activity Centre. Advice received indicates they are supportive of the use of the Activity Centre Zone to implement the adopted Structure Plan.
7. Policy Consideration 7.1 State Planning Policy Framework The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the State Planning Policy Framework. In particular, the amendment gives effect to the following objectives: Clause 11 – ‘Settlement’ by implementing the objectives and strategies to build up activity centres as a focus for high quality development, activity and living for the whole community. Clause 15 – ‘Built Environment and Heritage’ by encouraging the development of well- designed urban environments that are safe, functional with a sense of place and ensuring that development positively contributes to the character and amenity of a place through sound design guidance and energy efficient provisions.
Clause 16 – ‘Housing’ by increasing the supply and diversity of housing in activity centres close to services and transport, and that responds to community need.
7.2 Local Planning Policy Framework The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework. In particular, this amendment gives effect to the following objectives:
Clause 21.05 – ‘Residential land use’ by ensuring new residential development respects the character and identity of the centre, is of a high standard, has a positive impact on the amenity of existing areas and is of a scale and intensity in keeping with adopted structure plans relevant for the centre.
Clause 22.11 – “Residential Development Policy’ by encouraging new development through appropriate design and siting provisions to respond positively to the character of the area having particular regard to the character elements identified by the Moorabbin Structure Plan.
204 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Clause 21.06 – “Retail and Commercial Land Use” by Consolidating food related retailing around the existing supermarket by providing for a mixed use reinvestment and encouraging a substantial new residential population within the centre.
Clause 21.12 – ‘Transport’ by promoting safe, efficient and convenient road networks through improved pedestrian linkages and bicycle paths, and maximising access to public transport by non car based travel.
8. Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental The draft Schedule to the Activity Centre Zone for Moorabbin seeks to introduce strategies and objectives that influence the built and natural environment as outlined in the adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan and encourage greater use of public transport through new and improved links.
Social The draft Schedule to the Activity Centre Zone for Moorabbin seeks to introduce provisions to enhance the centre and create new meeting places for social interaction. The Schedule further identifies opportunities for mixed use outcomes thereby enhancing the Centre’s vitality.
Financial The draft Schedule to the Activity Centre for Moorabbin seeks to implement provisions that allow for substantial investment to be made to the centre over the coming decade which will improve the amenity and retail/commercial competitiveness of the centre.
205 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
9. Recommendation That Council resolve to request the Minister for Planning to authorise the preparation of Amendment C121 to the Kingston Planning Scheme to:
1a. Introduce Schedule 3 to proposed Clause 37.08 (Activity Centre Zone) to include the Moorabbin Activity Centre Schedule provisions in a permanent nature; b. Delete Design and Development Overlay 19 from Clause 43.02 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; c. Modify relevant clauses of the Municipal Strategic Statement and give recognition to the objectives for the future of Moorabbin as contained in the Moorabbin Structure Plan, 2011; d. Insert the Public Acquisition Overlay over part 382-384 South Road, Moorabbin in accordance with the Moorabbin Structure Plan; and e. rezone all land in the Moorabbin Activity Centre apart from Precinct D to the Activity Centre Zone.
2. That once authorisation is granted by the Minister, Council as Planning Authority, prepare and place Amendment C121 on public exhibition pursuant to Section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Attachments: Draft Schedule 3 of the Activity Centre Zone: Moorabbin Activity Centre
Crs Athanasopoulos/Staikos
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
206 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
--/--/20-- SCHEDULE 3 TO THE ACTIVITY CENTRE ZONE
Shown on the planning scheme map as ACZ3.
MOORABBIN ACTIVITY CENTRE
1.0 Moorabbin Activity Centre Framework Plan
--/--/20--
C121
207 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.0 Activity centre land use and development objectives to be achieved
--/--/20-- . To create a centre which acts as a gateway into the City of Kingston that C121 provides a vibrant focus for the surrounding community in terms of housing, employment, recreation, social gathering, community services and entertainment; . To enable a safe, pedestrian focused centre, providing ease of access for all users including public transport, cycles and private vehicles; . To ensure Moorabbin continues to function as a sustainable centre, which applies best practice sustainable design principles in order to address interfaces between adjoining land uses and environments.
Land Use
. To provide for a mixture of land uses through the Activity Centre to support and strengthen its employment role . To strengthen and expand Moorabbin Activity Centre’s retail, and mixed use areas where it can best facilitate sustainable retail expenditure throughout the centre. . To provide for a high level of activity in an attractive and safe urban environment that increases opportunities for social interaction and community life . To provide for increased density development which provides for a mix of uses to enable residential living opportunities within the centre which capitalise on access to public transport, open space and retail opportunities. . To identify and provide dedicated locations for car share and for future requirements for electric car charge stations. . To encourage active ground floor uses with upper level residential accommodation to activate street frontages along main roads
Built Form & Height
. To maintain upper level setbacks above street level. . Ensure developments deliver an improved architectural quality for the centre which deliver innovative building forms and material detailing that provides a renewed built outcome. . Encourage generous balcony space for sites with a northerly aspect. . Respect residential interfaces to ensure sunlight is maintained and overshadowing of private open space is minimised. . Ensure new development protects and enhances significant buildings and significant trees. . Encourage the addition of urban, public open spaces which address the street.
208 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. To achieve appropriate transitions in height and form from established buildings and those where an increased building scale may occur, both within the activity centre, adjoining heritage places and to surrounding neighbourhoods . To encourage contemporary architecture and urban design treatments at gateway locations identified in the Framework Plan
Transport, Movement and Access
. To encourage walking as the most desirable option of travel towards and within Moorabbin. . To facilitate the interchange between modes of transport including buses, railway station, commuter drop off points, and bike locker facilities . To support the creation of enhanced walkways between and through the centre to provide strong east/west connections . To provide a rational approach to private vehicle and traffic access through, to and within Moorabbin. . To facilitate safe pedestrian movement, connectivity and access in future works which cater for a diversity of users and abilities. . To consolidate and simplify vehicular access points to off-street car parking facilities. . To improve traffic circulation in the centre through new road connections and road treatments . To rationalise car parking into key strategic locations in close proximity to the railway line . To encourage new commercial and residential development to provide facilities for the needs of cyclists. . To strengthen bicycle connections between precincts and surrounding activity centres
Urban Design
. To ensure that design is a central consideration during all stages of project development. . To reinforce the form and land use function of identified precinct areas that will strengthen the image of Moorabbin as a commercial and community hub. . To reinforce the form and land use function of identified precinct areas through the development of contemporary urban forms which respect the unique characteristics, heritage assets and environmental qualities of Moorabbin.
209 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. To ensure a high level of material detailing and façade articulation along commercial street walls to maintain a traditional shopfront appearance. Repetition in the presentation of the building should be avoided.
Open Space and Landscaping
. To connect the activity centre to adjacent open spaces . To provide a diverse range of contemporary outdoor meeting places for those working, living or shopping in Moorabbin . To maximise the use of the topography of the land and showcase historic features, significant landscaping and build on key views and vistas . To provide a network of paths to link open spaces throughout the centre to ensure a safe pedestrian environment . To maximise opportunities for landscaping and public art . To introduce and enhance landscaping along key main roads to create improved visual connections and appealing streetscapes; and . To achieve development that provides accessible, safe, attractive and functional private and public open space opportunities which are well connected and integrated within a permeable urban environment . Encourage high quality landscapes to soften the built form and to maintain an open street setting
Environmental Setting and Sustainable Design
To ensure Australian Best Practice environmentally sustainable design is met in relation to building energy management, water sensitive urban design, construction materials, indoor environment quality, waste management and transport. Maximise opportunities for on-site renewable energy generation, alternative energy and sharing of energy resources, as well as water capture and re-use. Development to provide a minimum 5 star/green star energy rating.
3.0 Table of uses
--/--/20-- Section 1 - Permit not required
USE CONDITION
Accommodation (other than Camping & Except in Precinct 3, must not be located caravan park, caretaker’s house, at ground floor level, except for entry
210 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
corrective institution & Dwelling) foyers; and must be in conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2;
Caretaker’s house
Dependant person’s unit Must not be located in Precincts 1, 2 or 5
Dwelling In Precincts 1, 2, and 5 any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 metres.
Education Centre In Precincts 1, 2 and 5 any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 10 metres and access must not exceed 10 metres and access must not be shared with a dwelling (other than a caretaker’s house) A primary school or secondary school must not be located in Precincts 1, 2, 3, or 4
Electoral office May be used for only 4 months before an election and 2 weeks after an election
Food and Drink Premises (other than Must not be located in Precinct 3 Hotel and Tavern) Must be in conjunction with a use in section 1 or 2 Must be located at ground floor level, but is not limited to ground floor level
Home occupation Must meet the requirements of Clause 52.11
Medical Centre Must not be located in Precinct 1 or 3 Any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 meters.
Minor utility installation
Natural systems
Office (other than Medical Centre or Must not be located in Precinct 3 electoral office) Must be in conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2 Any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 meters, unless the office is a bank, real estate agency, travel agency or any other office where the floor space adjoining the street frontage is a customer service area accessible to the public
Postal Agency
Railway
Search for stone Must not be costeaning or bulk sampling.
Shop (other than Adult sex bookshop) Must not be located in Precinct 3
211 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Any use listed in Clause 62.01 Must meet the requirements of Clause 62.01
Section 2 - Permit required USE CONDITION
Adult Sex Bookshop Must be at least 200 metres (measured by the shortest route reasonably accessible on foot) from a residential zone, business zone, land used for a hospital, primary school or secondary school or land in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquired for hospital, primary school or secondary school
Commercial display area Must not be located in Precinct 3
Food or drink premises (other than Hotel and Tavern) – if Section 1 condition is not met
Hotel and Tavern Must not be located in Precinct 3 Must be in conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2.
Leisure and recreation (other than Open Must not be located in Precinct 3 Sports Ground, Restricted recreation facility, Major sports and recreation facility, and Motor racing track)
Nightclub Must not be located in Precincts 3
Office (other than Medical Centre) – if the Section 1 condition is not met
Place of assembly (other than Carnival, Must not be an Amusement Parlour located in Circus, Drive-in theatre and Nightclub) Precinct 3
Restricted recreation facility Must not be located in Precinct 3
Retail premises (other than food and drink Must not be located in Precinct 3 premises, postal agency and shop) Must be in conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2 Must be located at ground floor level, but is not limited to ground floor level In Precinct 4, any uses under Retail premises must provide evidence which shows that the use does not undermine the role of the core retail area of Precinct B.
Service industry Must not be located in Precinct 1 or 3 Motor repairs or car wash must not be located in Precincts 1, 2, or 3
Shop (other than Adult sex bookshop) - if section 1 condition is not met
212 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Any other use not in Section 1 or 3
Section 3 – Prohibited
USE Agriculture (other than Apiculture)
Airport
Brothel
Corrective institution
Drive-in theatre
Extractive industry
Industry (other than Service industry and Research and development centre)
Major sports and recreation facility
Warehouse (other than a Commercial display area)
4.0 Centre-wide provisions --/--/20--
4.1C121 Use of Land
--/--/20--A permit is not required to use land:
for the purpose of Local Government or education providing the use is carried out by, or on behalf of, the public land manager.
4.2 Subdivision and Consolidation or Land
--/--/20-- Applications for subdivision that do not support the objectives promoted by this Scheme for Moorabbin Activity Centre are discouraged.
Consolidation of land to facilitate the creation of development sites that assist to achieve the development objectives for the Activity Centre are encouraged.
4.3 Buildings and works
--/--/20-- A permit is required to construct or carry out works. C121 This does not apply to:
An alteration to an existing building façade provided: o The alteration does not include the installation of an external roller shutter. o At least 80 percent of the building façade at ground floor level is maintained as an entry or window with clear glazing.
213 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
An awing that projects over a road if it is authorised by the relevant public land manager.
4.3 Design and Development
Building Height
Precinct 1, 2, and 3
Buildings and Works should not exceed the Building Height set out in the Precinct Requirements to this Schedule for Precinct 1, 2, or 3.
For the purposes of this Schedule, where the precinct table specifies mandatory height controls, planning permission cannot be granted to vary this height due to the special circumstances which exist.
For the purposes of this Schedule, the Building Height does not apply to service equipment, including plant rooms, lift overruns, solar collectors, and other such equipment provided that the following criteria are met: . No more than 50% of the roof area is occupied by the equipment . The equipment is located in a position on the roof so as to minimise additional overshadowing of neighbouring properties and public spaces . The equipment does not extend higher than 3.6 metres above the Maximum Building Height as specified in the precinct provisions at Clause 5 of this Schedule . The equipment is designed and screened to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
Building Setbacks
Terraces, balconies and roof terraces may be located within the building setbacks specified in the precinct requirements to this Schedule, unless otherwise specified. Minor buildings and works such as verandas, architectural features, balconies, sunshades, screens, artworks and street furniture may be constructed within the setback areas specified in the precinct provisions of this Schedule provided they are designed and located to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
214 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.0 Precinct provisions
6.1--/--/20-- Precinct 1 – Moorabbin Cultural and Transit Precinct
6.1-1--/--/20-- Precinct Map
C121 --/--/20--
215 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.1-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . To strengthen and reinforce the role of Precinct 1 as the gateway entrance to the City of Kingston, as well as the Moorabbin Activity Centre.
. To regenerate existing public transport modes of bus and railway into a 21st Century transit centre interchange.
. To encourage contemporary architectural responses which retain important view lines to/from heritage buildings and significant trees within and beyond the precinct.
. To promote land use which enables the development of the Railway Station airspace which will reinforce the cultural and transit aspirations of the precinct.
6.1-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20-- C121
PRECINCT BUILDING HEIGHT SETBACKS (EXCLUDING BASEMENT)
1a. 1 Station St, Moorabbin 23 metres (7 storeys)
1b 358 South Road, No additional height Moorabbin with the exception of domestic services normal to a dwelling
6.1-4 Precinct guidelines --/--/20-- . Ensure development adjoining and surrounding this precinct conserves and enhances its role as a place of cultural significance . Maintain the fine grain shopfront patterns along Station Street to reflect the existing shopfront character opposite; . Encourage a robust street frontage of 4 storeys along Nepean Highway and 3 storeys along South Road to reinforce the precinct’s prominence along the two major arterial roads; . Ensure that heritage buildings and significant trees are protected throughout any developments occurring; . Encourage active ground floor frontages which address key interface areas along Station Street, South Road and Nepean Highway.
216 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Promote land use which enables a series of detached multi-use buildings of a maximum 7 storeys tall with substantial areas of open space between the buildings.
6.2 Precinct 2 – Retail Core
6.2-1 Precinct Map --/--/20--
C121 --/--/20--
217 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
218 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.2-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . To ensure building responses to adjoining and existing significant places focus on enhancing views and respect the significance of the visual focal point of the Tuck Street Significant Tree and surrounding heritage buildings with the precinct;
. To provide mixed use, commercial and residential opportunities within the precinct with street level active commercial premises and non active office and residential uses located within the upper floors of the development.
. To enhance existing and to create new key linkages within the precinct to enable better transport connectivity and walkability of the centre.
6.2-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20-- C121 Precinct Building Setback Height 2a.
360-372 South Road 14 metres (4 Any 3rd storey must be setback a (Even No’s), & 4 (part) - storeys) minimum of 5 metres from the frontage 54 Station Street (Even subject to to enable a robust two storey building No’s) appropriate form with a maximum building height of site 8 metres at station Street. Balconies may consolidation encroach within the 3rd storey setback but must be setback 2.8 metres from the frontage and be of an open appearance.
Any 3rd storey must be setback a minimum of 3 metres from a laneway building edge
For buildings with a frontage to South Road, any 4th storey must be setback a minimum of 5 metres from the frontage to enable a robust three storey building form with a maximum building height of 11 metres at South Road.
Balconies may encroach within the 4th storey setback but must be setback 2.8 metres from the frontage and be of an open appearance.
219 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Precinct Building Setback Height
2b.
5-17 Taylor Street (Odd 14 metres No’s) & 11 Central (4 storeys) Avenue, Moorabbin subject to appropriate site consolidation 2c.
Area bounded by 20 metres South Road, Taylor (6 storeys) St, Central Ave and Redholme St, Moorabbin 2d.
2 & 10 Central Ave; & 17 metres (5 2, 4 (part) -10 Tuck storeys) Street (Even No’s), subject Moorabbin To appropriate site consolidation 2e.
21 Tuck Street & 1003 23 metres (7 Nepean Highway, Storeys) Moorabbin.
6.2-4 Precinct guidelines --/--/20-- . Encourage a robust street frontage along Nepean Highway to reinforce the gateway along Nepean Highway into the Activity Centre;
. Ensure development fronting Central Avenue provides a clear sense of address and active street frontage to reinforce the role of this key east- west linkage;
. Protect heritage assets and important trees within and adjoining this precinct in the design of new development which should address public spaces and incorporate adequate setbacks.
220 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Ensure development addresses laneways, and contributes to active, pedestrian scaled thoroughfares
. Building edges abutting laneways shall integrate adequate measures to enable clear sight lines for vehicles and pedestrians using the laneway.
. Developments shall contain a level of façade articulation and material detailing that distinguishes the lower floors from the upper floors to maintain a robust and traditional 2 storey street wall façade; except along South Road where a 3 storey street wall is permitted.
. Encourage a robust street facade of 3 storeys along South Road and street facade of 2 storeys to Taylor Street and Central Avenue.
. Ensure upper 4 storeys, as they present to Redholme Street are light weight in appearance and read differently to the street wall façade to reduce building bulk.
. Development must ensure a suitable transition in height to surrounding residential areas
221 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.3 Precinct 3 – Increase Residential Area
6.3-1 Precinct Map --/--/20--
C121 --/--/20-- C121
222 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.3-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage new, contemporary residential building form within quality landscaped settings that responds to the residential focus of the precinct
6.3-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
Precinct Building Height Setback
3a. Land bounded by 7.5 metres (2 Storeys) Development must be setback a South Road, Healy (sites of 1000Sqm or less minimum of 5 metres from the front Street, Central with a street frontage of 30 property boundary which should be metres or less). Avenue and landscaped. Redholme Street, Moorabbin; and 11 metres (3 Storeys) All habitable room windows and (consolidated sites of balconies of development above greater than 1000Sqm and Land bounded by ground level must be setback 4.5 with a street frontage of metres from side or rear boundaries. Central Avenue, more than 30 metres). Redholme Street, Tuck Street and Healey Street, Moorabbin; and
20-44 Healy Street (Even no’s), and 412-414 South Road (Even No’s)
3b. Moorabbin Police 11 metres Station (1009-1013 (3 storeys) Reinforce 3 storey edge along Nepean Nepean Highway, highway Moorabbin); and 1007 Nepean Hwy, Moorabbin
6.3-4 Precinct guidelines
--/--/20-- . On sites of 1,000sqm or less with a frontage of 30 metres or less building and works should not exceed a maximum of 2 storeys and development should be limited to additions to existing detached dwellings.
. On sites (comprising one or more lots) of greater than 1,000sqm and with a frontage of greater than 30 metres buildings and works cannot exceed a maximum height of 3 storeys. Development should provide a mix of dwelling options in an apartment format rather than villa units or townhouses.
223 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Car parking spaces be provided optimally in basements rather than at ground level, accessed via a single entry onto the site, in order to maximise the opportunity to use ground level areas for landscaping, and open space.
. Reinforce a robust 3 storey street edge to reinforce the precinct’s prominence along South Road.
. Prevent vehicular access for new development directly from South Road.
224 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.5 Precinct 4 – Mixed use Commercial precinct
6.5-1--/--/20-- Precinct Map --/--/20--
225 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.5-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage new, contemporary commercial building forms within quality landscaped settings that responds appropriately to the Nepean Highway frontage and maintains the commercial, and community focus of the precinct
6.5-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
Precinct Maximum Building Setback Height
4. Area bound by Exley 17 metres (5 Storeys) Drive, Nepean Hwy, and the railway line, Moorabbin
6.5-4 Precinct guidelines
--/--/20-- . Ensure development provides a 3 storey edge to Nepean Highway and a gradual shift in building scale from the low rise residential properties and heritage buildings to the taller buildings on the periphery of the Retail Core in Precinct 3.
. Create landmark building outcomes, particularly with a frontage to the Nepean Highway;
. Encourage the consolidation of land parcels to provide a regional hotel/convention facility;
. Encourage the retention of existing community facilities in new built form;
. Retain the Moorabbin Bowl building and oblique views to the place through use of appropriate building setbacks and contemporary architecture;
. Retain and enhance existing pedestrian connections across the railway line to the centre’s Retail Core
. Provide vehicular access to the precinct from Exley Drive via the creation of rear laneways
226 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
7.0 Application requirements
--/--/20-- In addition to the application requirements set out at Clause 37.08-7, an application to construct a building or construct or carry out works must be accompanied by the following information, as appropriate to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:
. A Traffic and Transport plan which provides:
Details on existing traffic conditions including available on street parking allocation.
Anticipated traffic generation and distribution as a consequence of the proposal.
How any implications associated with the traffic generated or additional requirements for parking will be appropriately mitigated.
Where appropriate, how pedestrians and cyclists are accommodated in relation to access to the proposal and facilities on its periphery.
Means in which the construction of the development will be managed to reduce implications on the existing road network.
. A Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) which: . Addresses matters of building energy management, water sensitive urban design, construction materials, indoor environment quality, waste management, and transport.
. Demonstrates the application of Australian best practice rating tools and design principles; use of emerging technology; and a commitment to ‘beyond compliance’ throughout the construction period and subsequent operation of the development.
. Identifies statutory obligations and documented sustainability performance standards from Government and other authorities.
. Specifies key performance indicators, to an agreed level, to measure the achievement of objectives and initiatives identified in the Plan.
. Identifies responsibilities and a schedule for both implementing and monitoring the Plan over time.
The individual components of the SMP should address: . Building Energy Management . Water Sensitive Urban Design . Construction Materials . Indoor Environment Quality . Waste Management . Quality of Public and Private Realm
227 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Transport . Demolition and Construction
8.0 Notice and review
--/--/20-- An application to use land, construct a building or construct or carry out works is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act in accordance with Clause 37.08-8 of the Activity Centre Zone.
An application that exceeds the specified preferred maximum building height listed at Clause 5 of this schedule is not exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act.
9.0 Decision guidelines
--/--/20-- Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause C121 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:
. The objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 54 for residential development of one dwelling and with a height of four stories or less . The objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 55 for residential development of two or more dwellings and with a height of four stories or less
Use
. The adaptability of the proposal to be transitioned in the future to alternative though complementary land uses.
Design and built form
. Whether the proposed development ensures that all roof plant and equipment is sufficient screened or hidden from view.
Access
228 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Incorporates provisions for pedestrians, cyclists, and people with a disability demonstrating how access needs are accommodated
. Provides vehicular access to buildings fronting key roads off side streets or via rear access
10.0 Advertising signs
--/--/20-- Advertising Signage requirements at Clause 52.05 of the Planning Scheme are applicable as follows:
Precinct 1 is Category 2; Precinct 2 & 5 are Category 1; Precinct 3 is Category 4;
11.0 Reference documents
--/--/20-- Retail and Commercial Development Strategy, 2009
Moorabbin Activity Centre Structure Plan, May 2011
P.L.A.N. Study, 2008
229 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 196 Proposed Amendment C123 to the Kingston Planning Scheme - Parkdale Activity Centre
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: John Somers, Senior Strategic Planner Rosa Zouzoulas, Team Leader Strategic Planning
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed Amendment C123 which amends the current interim Design and Development Overlay 17 (DDO17) in order to apply permanent controls for height and design within the eastern half of the Parkdale Neighbourhood Activity Centre.
This report seeks approval for a request be made to the Minister for Planning to authorise the preparation of the amendment under Section 9(2) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and proceed with exhibition if authorisation is granted.
2. Council Plan It is considered that the proposed amendment meets the following Planned Outcomes of the Council Plan:
Planned Outcome 2 – A Sustainable Environment Strategy 2.1: Insightful, intergenerational planning and delivery by reviewing local planning and processes; Strategy 2.2 – Striving a balance between development and amenity
The development of the Parkdale Design and Development Overlay Schedule seeks to implement the work undertaken as part of PLAN and further urban design analysis to achieve an enhanced retail and commercial nature of the centre, diversify housing in the Parkdale area, improve connectivity and access to public transport and encourage the character and heritage of the centre to be enhanced and retained.
3. Background In 2006 Council prepared the Mordialloc to Moorabbin Structure Plan (PLAN). This study sought to identify the preferred future design and built form outcomes for the Centres between Moorabbin to Mordialloc. Substantial urban design analysis was undertaken in each of the Centre’s existing characteristics, and the potential for future development and its future form. PLAN was subsequently consulted with the community to test the assumptions and proposed development outcomes. The consultation that was undertaken was extensive, and included public meetings, displays in the Centres and at customer service points, media and Council’s website. This work, following its adoption, was used to strategically justify an amendment to the Kingston Planning Scheme to introduce planning scheme provisions on an in interim basis to guide decision making until permanent planning scheme provisions were prepared and included into the Scheme.
230 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Council has since reviewed the work undertaken as part of PLAN to critically analyse the assumptions, the urban design analysis and strategic planning basis. The review has been undertaken by Council’s City Strategy Department and has sought to build on the objectives of PLAN rather than substantially alter their vision.
4. Summary and Conclusion Interim structure planning controls provide an opportunity for Council to implement controls into the Kingston Planning Scheme immediately. Amendment C100 has provided interim protection for the Parkdale Activity Centre and has allowed Council to further refine its urban design analysis of the neighbourhood centre, and develop permanent controls to replace the interim planning scheme provisions relating to Parkdale which expire 30 April 2013.
Now that the further urban design analysis of the centre has been undertaken, it is appropriate that a request be made to the Minister for Planning to begin a planning scheme amendment to the Kingston Planning Scheme to introduce permanent Design and Development Overlay provisions for the Parkdale Neighbourhood Activity Centre.
5. The proposed Amendment The proposed amendment seeks to replace Design and Development Overlay 17 (Attachment 1) from Clause 43.02 of the Kingston Planning Scheme with a revised and new Design and Development Overlay Schedule 17 (Attachment 2).
The main changes to the interim overlay, is the deletion of design and development controls over Section A, which currently covers land to the west of Como Parade West. Officers consider that the removal of Section A is appropriate, given that the land is already covered by DDO1 (Urban Coastal Height Control Area) and by the Heritage Overlay, which provide sufficient guidance for new development in that part of the Centre.
6. Policy Consideration 6.1 State Planning Policy Framework The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the State Planning Policy Framework. In particular, the amendment gives effect to the following objectives:
. Clause 11 – ‘Settlement’ by implementing the objectives and strategies to build up activity centres as a focus for high quality development, activity and living for the whole community.
. Clause 15 – ‘Built Environment and Heritage’ by encouraging the development of well- designed urban environments that are respectful of their heritage, safe, functional with a sense of place and ensuring that development positively contributes to the character and amenity of a place through sound design guidance and energy efficient provisions. . Clause 16 – ‘Housing’ by increasing the supply and diversity of housing in activity centres close to services and transport, and that responds to community need.
231 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6.2 Local Planning Policy Framework The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework. In particular, this amendment gives effect to the following objectives:
. Clause 21.05 – ‘Residential land use’ by ensuring new residential development respects the character and identity of the centre, is of a high standard, has a positive impact on the amenity of existing areas and is of a scale and intensity in keeping with the centre.
. Clause 22.11 – “Residential Development Policy’ by encouraging new development through appropriate design and siting provisions to respond positively to the character of the area having particular regard to the heritage and cultural character as noted by the Heritage Overlay.
. Clause 21.06 – “Retail and Commercial land use” by ensuring the development of the Parkdale activity centre is consistent with the neighbourhood character and local function of the centre, and promotes a wider mix of uses.
. Clause 21.12 – ‘Transport’ by promoting safe, efficient and convenient road networks through improved pedestrian linkages and bicycle paths, and maximising access to public transport by non car based travel.
7. Public Exhibition Council is required to give notice of an amendment under section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Accordingly, this report recommends that Council place the proposed amendment on public exhibition, if authorisation is received from the Minister for Planning, to prepare and proceed with the amendment. It is envisaged that the amendment would be placed on public exhibition for a period of 4 weeks once authorisation is received with the following consultation to be undertaken:
. Amendment documentation available at Council’s offices and website. . Notices placed in the Government Gazette and local paper. . Direct notification to landowners and occupiers.
8. Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental The draft Schedule to the Design and Development Overlay for Parkdale seeks to introduce strategies and objectives that influence the built and natural environment as outlined in the recent urban design work, PLAN and the existing interim Schedule to the Design and Development Overlay.
Social The proposed provisions of the Overlay for Parkdale seek to build on the Centre’s social role by providing improved amenity for social interaction, and encouraging mixed use outcomes for greater social interaction and behavoir.
232 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Financial The draft Parkdale Overlay provisions seek to implement provisions that allow for investment to be made to the centre that will improve the visual amenity and retail/commercial competitivenss of the centre.
9. Recommendation
1. That Council resolve to request the Minister for Planning to authorise preparation of an amendment under Section 9 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to replace the interim Schedule 17 of the Design and Development Overlay with a new Schedule 17 to the Design and Development Overlay to introduce planning scheme provisions to the Kingston Planning Scheme in a permanent nature.
2. That once authorisation is granted that the amendment be placed on public exhibition in accordance with Section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Attachments: Attachment 1: Existing Schedule 17 to the Design and Development Overlay Attachment 2: Draft Schedule to the Design and Development Overlay
Crs West/Dundas
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
233 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
ATTACHMENT 1 – Current Interim DDO17
SCHEDULE 17 TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
Shown on the planning scheme map as DDO17
PARKDALE ACTIVITY CENTRE
1.0 Design objectives - General
. To reinforce the urban form, character and streetscape of the Parkdale Activity Centre. . To achieve responsive and sensitively designed development that is of a high architectural quality and urban design standard. . To achieve appropriately designed development that is consistent with the built form outcomes and heights envisaged by this Overlay. . To ensure development has proper regard for the established streetscape and development pattern in terms of building design, height, scale, and siting. . To preserve solar access to adjoining residential zones, dwellings, public and private open space and pedestrian paths. . To protect and enhance key views, vistas and landmarks. . To protect and enhance the cultural heritage significance of the Parkdale shopping precinct.
Design objectives – Built Form
. Ensure a consistent and robust 2 storey street edge to commercial street frontages . Encourage new development to include both vertical and horizontal articulation to maintain the fine grain shop front appearance. . Respect residential interfaces to ensure sunlight is maintained and overshadowing of private open space is minimised. . Ensure new development and additions in Precinct A, are compatible with the architectural design and aesthetic characteristics of the heritage precinct, and be visually recessive to support the visual dominance of the significant elements of the heritage precinct. . Ensure new development and additions in Precinct A adopt an understated character to minimise the visual dominance over the heritage precinct in terms of size, height or bulk. . Ensure new development and additions in Precinct A repeat the particular rhythm, spatial characteristics and character of heritage places in a heritage precinct. . Ensure new development and additions in Precinct A relate to and uses as reference points the materials, front and side setbacks, roof form, colours, and details of adjacent buildings and the surrounding precinct.
2.0 Buildings and works
Height
Precinct A
Buildings and works must not exceed the maximum overall building height set out in the Table to this Schedule for Precinct A.
A permit cannot be granted to vary the maximum overall building height set out in the Table to this Schedule for Precinct A unless it seeks to replace an existing building
234 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
which prior to the approval date exceeds the maximum height. In such instances, a permit cannot be granted for a building which exceeds 2 storeys.
Precinct B
Buildings and works should not exceed the maximum overall building height set out in the Table to this Schedule for Precinct B.
A permit may be grated to exceed the height limit in circumstances where it can be demonstrated that the Design objectives and Design standards can be satisfied.
Setbacks
Buildings and works should not exceed the minimum building setback set out in the Table to this Schedule for Precinct A.
A permit may be granted to vary the setback requirements for Precinct A in the Table to this Schedule in circumstances where it can be demonstrated that the Design objectives and Design standards can be satisfied.
Table to Schedule 17
Height Control Area as Maximum Design Standard shown on the plan to Overall Schedule 17 Building Height
Buildings must be setback a minimum of 3 Precinct A metres from the title boundary that 2 storeys directly abuts existing residential areas. 194-350A Como Parade Maintain the existing low scale, fine grain West, and 66-68 Parkers (8 metres) shopfront pattern across all storeys. Road, 79-85 Parkers Road, Ensure new additions and development demonstrate contemporary architectural 31 and rear of 25 Heslop detailing and form and fenestration which Street, Parkdale responds to the heritage characteristics of the precinct. Building edges abutting laneways shall integrate adequate measures to enable clear sight lines for vehicles and pedestrians using the laneway.
Encourage the street facing upper storey to Precinct - B be light weight in appearance and read 3 storeys differently to the street wall façade. 141-187 Como Parade East Encourage the upper storey facing and 131-149 Parkers Road, (11 metres) residential interfaces to be light weight in Parkdale appearance and contain a suitable level of design expression and material detailing to reduce building bulk.
235 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.0 Decision guidelines
Before deciding on this application, the responsible authority must consider:
. The design objectives of this Schedule and the design guidance provided through the reference document. . The site analysis and urban context report. . The visibility of the building form and height on the scale and character of Como Parade West. . Whether opportunities exist to avoid the building being visually obtrusive by the use of alternative building designs and staggered building forms. . The architectural style and detail of the building, and whether it will make a positive statement. . Whether the proposed siting, height, design and building setbacks will adversely affect the significance of the heritage precinct. . Whether the architectural style and detail of the building and works will adversely affect the significance of the heritage precinct. . The amenity impacts on any adjoining land, particularly with respect to overshadowing, privacy and visual bulk. . The use of materials, finishes and colour. . The visual impact of any balcony or roof deck and associated access when viewed from the street and surrounding area. . Whether the third storey is visually intrusive when viewed from the street and surrounding area. . Whether appropriate surveillance of open space links and open space and public areas is achieved through building design and placement. . Whether the proposed siting, height, and design is in keeping with the preferred built form outcome and height. . The potential for underdevelopment of sites through buildings that achieve a significantly lower built form outcome than encouraged.
4.0 Expiry
This Schedule does not apply after 30th April 2013.
5.0 Reference Documents
PLAN Moorabbin to Mordialloc Integrated Framework Plan, July 2008
236 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Kingston Planning Scheme – Schedule to DDO17
237 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
APPENDIX 2 – Proposed DDO17
SCHEDULE 17 TO THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY
Shown on the planning scheme map as DDO17
141-187 COMO PARADE EAST AND 131-149 PARKERS ROAD, PARKDALE
1.0 Design objectives - General
__/__/__ . To reinforce the urban form, character and streetscape of the Parkdale Activity Centre. . To achieve responsive and sensitively designed development that is of a high architectural quality and urban design standard. . To achieve appropriately designed development that is consistent with the built form outcomes and heights envisaged by this Overlay. . To ensure development has proper regard for the established streetscape and development pattern in terms of building design, height, scale, and siting. . To preserve solar access to adjoining residential zones, dwellings, public and private open space and pedestrian paths. . To protect and enhance key views, vistas and landmarks. . To ensure development does not affect the significance of the adjacent heritage precinct in Como Parade West.
Design objectives – Built Form
. Ensure a consistent and robust 2 storey street edge to commercial street frontages . Encourage new development to include both vertical and horizontal articulation to maintain the fine grain shop front appearance. . Respect residential interfaces to ensure sunlight is maintained and overshadowing of private open space is minimised.
2.0 Buildings and works
__/__/__ Height C Precinct A
Buildings and works should not exceed the maximum overall building height set out in the Table to this Schedule.
A permit may be granted to exceed the height limit in circumstances where it can be demonstrated that the Design objectives, Performance Criteria and Design standards can be satisfied.
Setbacks
238 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
A permit may be granted to vary the setback requirements for Precinct A in the Table to this Schedule in circumstances where it can be demonstrated that the Design objectives, Design standards and Performance Criteria can be satisfied.
Table to Schedule 17
Height Control Maximu Design Standard Performance Area as shown m Criteria on the plan to Overall Schedule 17 Building Height
Active commercial frontages must be Active commercial Precinct - A located at the ground floor of 141-187 frontages must be 3 storeys Como Parade East located at ground Encourage the street facing upper floor; (11 storey to be light weight in appearance Opportunities to and read differently to the street wall 141-187 Como metres) continue the 2 storey Parade East and façade. edge between Parkers Encourage the upper storey facing Road and Como 131-149 Parkers residential interfaces to be light weight Parade East are Road, Parkdale in appearance and contain a suitable encouraged level of design expression and material detailing to reduce building bulk; The third level of any development (excluding balconies) must be setback 5 meters from Como Parade East façade, Parkers Road and laneway facades. A zero lot setback shall apply to all front, rear and side boundaries at ground floor. Development must reinforce the two storey (8metres) edge along Como Parade East and Parkers Road Access to properties along Como parade East should be from the rear laneway
6.0 Decision guidelines
__/__/__ Before deciding on this application, the responsible authority must consider:
. The design objectives of this Schedule and the design guidance provided through the reference document. . The site analysis and urban context report.
239 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Whether opportunities exist to avoid buildings being visually obtrusive by the use of alternative building designs and staggered building forms. . The architectural style and detail of the building, and whether it will make a positive statement. . The amenity impacts on any adjoining land, particularly with respect to overshadowing, privacy and visual bulk. . The use of materials, finishes and colour. . The visual impact of any balcony or roof deck and associated access when viewed from the street and surrounding area. . Whether the third storey is visually intrusive when viewed from the street and surrounding area. . Whether appropriate surveillance of open space links and open space and public areas is achieved through building design and placement. . Whether the proposed siting, height, and design is in keeping with the preferred built form outcome and height.
7.0 Reference Documents
__/__/__
C PLAN Moorabbin to Mordialloc Integrated Framework Plan, July 2008
240 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Kingston Planning Scheme – Schedule to DDO17
241 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
242 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 197 Proposed Amendment C124 to the Kingston Planning Scheme - Mentone Activity Centre Zone Amendment
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: John Somers, Senior Strategic Planner Rosa Zouzoulas, Team Leader Strategic Planning
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed Amendment C124 which seeks to delete the current interim DDO18 in order to apply permanent controls within the Mentone Major Activity Centre in the form of Schedule 4 to the Activity Centre Zone.
The Report seeks approval for a request be made to the Minister for Planning to implement the attached permanent planning controls into the Kingston Planning Scheme to replace the interim planning scheme provisions.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 2 – A Sustainable Environment Strategy 2.2 – Striving a balance between development and amenity
The development of the proposed amendment for the Mentone Activity Centre seeks to implement the adopted Mentone Structure Plan. The proposed Activity Centre Zone seeks to achieve a liveable environment, enhance the retail and commercial nature of the centre, diversify housing in the Mentone area, improve connectivity and access to public transport.
3. Background In 2006, Council undertook the ‘Prosperous Liveable Accessible Neighbourhoods’ Study (PLAN) which provides a sustainable land-use and development framework for the activity centre corridor; combining principal, major and neighbourhood activity centres from Moorabbin to Mordialloc. After extensive consultation, the strategy was adopted in 2008 and formed the basis of applying interim design and height controls whilst further structure planning work was completed for the major activity centres of Mentone, Cheltenham and Moorabbin.
The interim controls were approved in the form of Design and Development Overlay as part of Amendment C100. Council has recently been granted an extension to the expiry date for the interim controls to allow for an amendment to be undertaken to the Kingston Planning Scheme to implement permanent planning scheme provisions.
Council prepared, consulted and adopted the Mentone Structure Plan. The structure plan was adopted in April 2011. The structure plan builds on the work undertaken as part of PLAN, outlined above, and identifies public realm improvements, transport and
243 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011 parking initiatives and social improvements to compliment the design and development built form outcomes. Significant community consultation was undertaken throughout the structure plan as outlined below. 4. Summary and Conclusion Interim structure planning controls provide an opportunity for Council to implement controls into the Kingston Planning Scheme immediately. Schedule 18 to the Design and Development Overlay introduced on an interim basis, and due to expire later this month, has provided protection for the Mentone Activity Centre whilst allowing Council to develop permanent controls relating to Mentone and in accordance with the adopted structure plan.
The Activity Centre Zone provisions are relatively new in the Victoria Planning Provisions with only Manningham City Council having applied the zone to its Doncaster Principal Activity Centre. The drafted permanent Activity Centre Zone controls have been developed to accurately reflect the intent of the adopted structure plan for Mentone. The Activity Centre Zone significantly reduces the need for multiple planning controls in the scheme, and more importantly to private properties in the activity centre, eliminating confusion.
The draft permanent controls seek to replace the existing interim planning scheme controls. It is appropriate that a request be made to the Minister for Planning to begin a planning scheme amendment to the Kingston Planning Scheme to introduce the Activity Centre Zone schedule for the Mentone Major Activity Centre.
5. Consultation The adopted Mentone Structure Plan was developed and tested by the community through the consultation process undertaken. Consultation on the objectives and strategies sought through the structure plan was lengthy, and detailed and included public meetings, in centre displays and Officer attendance to answer questions, information at customer service centres, libraries and on Council’s website, mailouts, meetings with key groups including the Chamber of Commerce, media releases in locally circulating newspapers and Council’s KYC newspaper, and telephone enquiries. Should Council seek to begin an amendment to introduce the Activity Centre Zone into the Kingston Planning Scheme for Mentone, a further detailed consultation process is required to be undertaken as part of the amendment process. This will enable all stakeholders to re-engage with Council to test the zone objectives and strategies and the design and development provisions.
6. The proposed Amendment The proposed amendment seeks to: Introduce Schedule 4 to proposed Clause 37.08 (Activity Centre Zone) to include the Mentone Activity Centre Schedule provisions on a permanent basis; Rezone land in the Mentone Activity Centre (as defined by the Mentone Activity Centre Structure Plan) to the Activity Centre Zone;
244 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Delete Design and Development Overlay 18 from Clause 43.02 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; Place a Public Acquisition Overlay over land part of land at 105-111 Balcombe Road, part of 107-111 Mentone Parade, part of 97 Mentone Parade, and 11 Remo Street, Mentone in accordance with the Mentone Structure Plan; and Modify relevant clauses of the Municipal Strategic Statement and give recognition to the objectives for the future of Mentone as contained in the adopted Mentone Structure Plan, 2011.
7. Policy Consideration 7.1 State Planning Policy Framework The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the State Planning Policy Framework. In particular, the amendment gives effect to the following objectives: Clause 11 – ‘Settlement’ by implementing the objectives and strategies to build up activity centres as a focus for high quality development, activity and living for the whole community. Clause 15 – ‘Built Environment and Heritage’ by encouraging the development of well- designed urban environments that are safe, functional with a sense of place and ensuring that development positively contributes to the character and amenity of a place through sound design guidance and energy efficient provisions.
Clause 16 – ‘Housing’ by increasing the supply and diversity of housing in activity centres close to services and transport, and that responds to community need.
7.2 Local Planning Policy Framework The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the Local Planning Policy Framework. In particular, this amendment gives effect to the following objectives:
Clause 21.05 – ‘Residential land use’ by ensuring new residential development respects the character and identity of the centre, is of a high standard, has a positive impact on the amenity of existing areas and is of a scale and intensity in keeping with adopted structure plans relevant for the centre.
Clause 22.11 – “Residential Development Policy’ by encouraging new development through appropriate design and siting provisions to respond positively to the character of the area having particular regard to the character elements identified by the Moorabbin Structure Plan.
Clause 21.06 – “Retail and Commercial Land Use” by Ensuring the development of the Mentone activity centre encourages entertainment/ restaurant uses and where continuous active frontage is not undermined.
245 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Clause 21.12 – ‘Transport’ by promoting safe, efficient and convenient road networks through improved pedestrian linkages and bicycle paths, and maximising access to public transport by non car based travel.
8. Triple Bottom Line Checklist
Environmental The draft Activity Centre Zone Schedule for Mentone seeks to introduce strategies and objectives that influence the built and natural environment as outlined in the adopted Mentone Structure Plan. Moreover the Schedule highlights improvements to encourage more sustainable modes of transport, new housing in the activity centre, and greater efficiencies in built form outcomes.
Social The draft Activity Centre Zone schedule for Mentone seeks to introduce provisions to enhance the centre and create new meeting places for social interaction.
Financial The draft Activity Centre Zone Schedule for Mentone seeks to implement provisions that allow for substantial investment to be made to the centre over the coming decade which will improve the amenity and retail/commercial competitiveness of the centre.
9. Recommendation That Council resolve to submit a request to the Minister for Planning to authorise the preparation of Amendment C124 to the Kingston Planning Scheme to:
1a. Introduce Schedule 4 to proposed Clause 37.08 (Activity Centre Zone) to include the Mentone Activity Centre Schedule provisions in a permanent nature; b. Delete Design and Development Overlay 18 from Clause 43.02 of the Kingston Planning Scheme; c. Modify relevant clauses of the Municipal Strategic Statement and give recognition to the objectives for the future of Mentone as contained in the Mentone Structure Plan, 2011; d. Apply the Public Acquisition overlay over part of land at 105-111 Balcombe Road, part of 107-111 Mentone Parade, part of 97 Mentone Parade, and 11 Remo Street, Mentone in accordance with the Mentone Structure Plan; and e. Rezone land in the Mentone activity centre to the Activity Centre Zone in accordance with the adopted Mentone Structure Plan.
2. That once authorisation is granted by the Minister, Council as Planning Authority, prepare and place Amendment C124 on public exhibition pursuant to Section 19 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.
Attachments:
246 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Draft Schedule 4 of the Activity Centre Zone: Mentone Activity Centre
Crs Staikos/Ronke
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
247 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
SCHEDULE 4 TO THE ACTIVITY CENTRE ZONE --/--/20-- Shown on the planning scheme map as ACZ4.
MENTONE ACTIVITY CENTRE
1.0 Mentone Activity Centre Framework Plan
--/--/20--
248 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
2.0 Activity centre land use and development objectives to be achieved
--/--/20-- . To promote Mentone as a 21st Century centre that provides a vibrant C124 focus for visitors and the surrounding community in terms of housing, employment, social gathering, community services and entertainment. . To reinforce Mentone as a destination and recognise the strong relationship between the activity centre, the foreshore and heritage buildings.
Land Use
. To provide for a mixture of land uses through the Activity Centre to support and strengthen its employment role . To strengthen and expand Mentone Activity Centre’s retail and mixed use areas where it can best facilitate sustainable retail expenditure throughout the centre. . To provide for increased density development which provides for a mix of uses to enable residential living opportunities within the centre which capitalise on access to public transport, open space and retail opportunities. . To rationalise car parking into key strategic locations in close proximity to the railway line . To encourage active ground floor uses to activate street frontages along main roads;
Built Form & Streetscape
. To achieve appropriate transitions in height and form from established buildings and those where an increased building scale may occur, both within the activity centre, adjoining heritage places and to surrounding neighbourhoods . To encourage contemporary architecture and urban design treatments at gateway locations identified in the Framework Plan . To ensure development enables the interpretation and preservation of view lines of iconic Mentone buildings such as the former Coffee Palace, Mentone Railway Station, Abbott and Comber’s Building and Estate Agent building.
Heritage
. To protect and enhance early built fabric both within the public and private realm, including early buildings, landmarks, memorials and landscaping reminiscent of the development of Mentone.
Public Realm
249 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. To reinforce the form and land use function of identified precinct areas that will strengthen the intimate pedestrian scale of Mentone as a commercial and community hub. . To provide for a high level of activity in an attractive and safe urban environment that increases opportunities for social interaction and community life
Environmental Sustainability
To ensure Australian Best Practice environmentally sustainable design is met in relation to building energy management, water sensitive urban design, construction materials, indoor environment quality, waste management and transport. Maximise opportunities for on-site renewable energy generation, alternative energy and sharing of energy resources, as well as water capture and re-use. Ensure development provides for a minimum 5 star/green star energy rating.
Transport, Movement and Access
o To encourage walking as the most desirable option of travel towards and within Mentone, through the creation of safe pedestrian routes o To facilitate the interchange between modes of transport including buses, railway station, commuter drop off points, and bike locker facilities o To provide a rational approach to private vehicle and traffic access through, to and within Mentone. o To facilitate safe pedestrian movement, connectivity and access in future works which cater for a diversity of users and abilities. o To consolidate and simplify vehicular access points to off-street car parking facilities. o Maximise bicycle connections between activity centres and the foreshore by creating a new bike path along Mentone parade, and creating a north - south path between Cheltenham and Mentone o Activate and improve access to rear laneways to improve pedestrian connections within the Activity Centre
Open Space and landscaping
250 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Encourage the facilitation of new open spaces north of Balcombe Road . Encourage opportunities for consolidated and enhanced recreational open space in Brindisi Street . Maximise opportunities for new open space areas within the centre to provide for meeting points and improved amenity . To maximise opportunities for landscaping and public art . To achieve development that provides accessible, safe, attractive and functional private and public open space opportunities. . To maximise the use of the topography of the land and showcase historic features, significant landscaping and build on key views and vistas; 3.0 Table of uses
--/--/20-- Section 1 - Permit not required
C124 USE CONDITION
Accommodation (other than Camping & Must not be located at ground floor level, caravan park, caretaker’s house, except for entry foyers; and must be in corrective institution & Dwelling) conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2;
Caretaker’s house
Dependant person’s unit Must not be located in Precinct 1
Dwelling Must not be located in Precinct 7 In Precinct 1 any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 metres.
Education Centre In Precinct 1 any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 10 metres and access must not exceed 10 metres and access must not be shared with a dwelling (other than a caretaker’s house) A primary school or secondary school must not be located in Precinct 1, 2, 5 or 7
Electoral office May be used for only 4 months before an election and 2 weeks after an election
Food and Drink Premises (other than Must be in conjunction with a use in Hotel and Tavern) section 1 or 2 Must be located at ground floor level, but is not limited to ground floor level
Home occupation Must meet the requirements of Clause 52.11
Medical Centre Must not be in Precinct 1 or 7 In Precinct 2 or 5, any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 meters.
251 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Office (other than Medical Centre) Must be in conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2 Any frontage at ground floor level must not exceed 2 meters, and access must not be shared with a dwelling (other than a caretakers house), unless the office is bank, real estate agency, travel agency, or any other office where the floor space adjoining the street frontage is a customer service area accessible to the public
Postal Agency
Railway
Search for stone Must not be costeaning or bulk sampling.
Shop (other than Adult sex bookshop) Must not be located in Precinct 4 or 7
Any use listed in Clause 62.01 Must meet the requirements of Clause 62.01
Section 2 - Permit required USE CONDITION
Adult Sex Bookshop Must be at least 200 metres (measured by the shortest route reasonably accessible on foot) from a residential zone, business zone, land used for a hospital, primary school or secondary school or land in a Public Acquisition Overlay to be acquired for hospital, primary school or secondary school
Commercial display area Must not be located in Precincts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7
Food or drink premises (other than Hotel and Tavern) – if Section 1 condition is not met
Hotel and Tavern Must not be located in Precincts 1, 3, 4 or 7
Leisure and recreation (other than Open Must not be located in Precincts 1 or 2 Sports Ground, Restricted recreation facility, Major sports and recreation facility, and Motor racing track)
252 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Mineral, stone or soil extraction (other than Extractive industry, Mineral exploration, Mining and Search for stone)
Nightclub Must not be located in Precincts 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7
Office (other than Medical Centre) – if the Section 1 condition is not met
Place of assembly (other than Carnival, Must not be an Amusement Parlour in Circus, Drive-in theatre and Nightclub) Precinct 2, 3, 4 or 5
Restricted recreation facility Must not be located in precinct 1 or 2
Retail premises (other than food and drink Must not be located in Precinct 3, 4 or 7 premises, postal agency and shop) Gambling premises and/or Motor Vehicle/ boat/ Caravan Sales must not be located in precinct 1, 3, 4, 6 or 7 Must be in conjunction with one or more other uses in section 1 or 2 Must be located at ground floor level, but is not limited to ground floor level
Service industry Must not be located in Precinct 2, 4, 5 or 6 Motor Repairs, Panel Beating or Car Wash must not be located in Precinct 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7
Shop (other than Adult sex bookshop)
Utility installation (other than Minor utility installation and Telecommunications facility)
Any other use not in Section 1 or 3
Section 3 – Prohibited
USE Agriculture (other than Apiculture)
Airport
Brothel
Corrective institution
Drive-in theatre
Extractive industry
Industry (other than Service industry and Research and development centre)
Major sports and recreation facility
253 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Warehouse (other than a Commercial display area)
4.0 Centre-wide provisions --/--/20-- Use of Land
A permit is not required to use land:
for the purpose of Local Government or education providing the use is carried out by, or on behalf of, the public land manager.
4.1 Subdivision and Consolidation or Land
--/--/20-- Applications for subdivision that do not support the objectives promoted by this Scheme for Mentone Activity Centre are discouraged.
Consolidation of land to facilitate the creation of development sites that assist to achieve the development objectives for the Activity Centre are encouraged.
4.2 Buildings and works
--/--/20-- A permit is required to construct or carry out works.
Other than on sites with a Heritage Overlay, this does not apply to:
An alteration to an existing building façade provided: o The alteration does not include the installation of an external roller shutter. o At least 80 percent of the building façade at ground floor level is maintained as an entry or window with clear glazing. An awing that projects over a road if it is authorised by the relevant public land manager.
4.3 Design and Development
Building Height
Development should not exceed the building height set out in the precinct requirements to this schedule.
For the purposes of this Schedule, where the precinct table specifies mandatory height controls, planning permission cannot be granted to vary this height due to the special circumstances which exist.
254 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
For the purposes of this Schedule, the Building Height does not apply to service equipment, including plant rooms, lift overruns, solar collectors, and other such equipment provided that the following criteria are met: . No more than 50% of the roof area is occupied by the equipment . The equipment is located in a position on the roof so as to minimise additional overshadowing of neighbouring properties and public spaces . The equipment does not extend higher than 3.6 metres above the Maximum Building Height as specified in the precinct provisions at Clause 5 of this Schedule . The equipment is designed and screened to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
Building Setbacks Terraces, balconies and roof terraces may be located within the building setbacks specified in the precinct requirements to this Schedule, unless otherwise specified. Minor buildings and works such as verandas, architectural features, balconies, sunshades, screens, artworks and street furniture may be constructed within the setback areas specified in the precinct provisions of this Schedule provided they are designed and located to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.
Roof Terraces
A roof terrace should:
. Be set back a minimum of 2 metres from the roof edge on all sides to minimise the visual impact on the street, and adjoining properties. . Not include any structures or elements that exceed a height of 1.7 metres, apart from an access structure with a maximum height of 2.1 metres. A permit may be granted to construct a roof terrace which is not in accordance with these requirements.
255 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.0 Precinct provisions
5.1--/--/20-- Precinct 1 – Mentone Retail Core
5.1-1--/--/20-- Precinct Map
C124 --/--/20--
256 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.1-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . To provide a zero lot alignment to the street frontage, and encourage buildings to physically address the street through entrances and fenestration;
. To provide mixed use, commercial and residential opportunities within the precinct with street level active commercial premises and non active office and residential uses located within the upper floors of the development.
. To ensure building responses to adjoining and existing heritage buildings enhance and protecting heritage buildings including associated view lines.
. To enable streetscape improvements, particularly laneways, and paving and landscaping improvements to main thoroughfares such as Como parade West and Mentone Parade
5.1-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
C124
PRECINCT BUILDING SETBACK HEIGHT (EXCLUDIN G BASEMENT) 1a. rd 156 - 118 (Even 11 metres (3 . Any 3 storey should be setback a minimum of 5 Numbers) storeys) metres from the frontage to enable a robust 2 Balcombe Road, storey building form with a maximum building Mentone height of 8.5 metres at Balcombe Road. rd Balconies may encroach within the 3 storey setback but should be setback 2.8 metres from the frontage and be of an open appearance. rd . Any 3 storey should be setback a minimum of 5 metres from a laneway building edge. 1b. th 114 & 116 Mandatory . Any 4 storey should be setback a minimum of 5 Balcombe Road, height of 14 metres from the frontage to enable a robust 3 Mentone metres storey building form with a maximum building height of 11 metres at Balcombe Road. Balconies (4 storeys) rd may encroach within the 3 storey setback but should be setback 2.8 metres from the frontage and be of an open appearance. rd . Any 3 storey should be setback a minimum of 5 metres from a rear building edge where the property abuts established residential areas. . Buildings should be setback a minimum of 3 metres from the title boundary that directly abuts existing residential areas.
257 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
PRECINCT BUILDING SETBACK HEIGHT (EXCLUDIN G BASEMENT) 1c. The following applies to all buildings:- rd Rear portion of . Any 3 storey should be setback a minimum of 8.5 metres to a 3 metres from a laneway building edge. 2-34 (Even mandatory No’s) Como . Encourage zero setbacks at front and side height of 14 Pde West, boundaries to facilitate equal access to open metres (4 space for shop-top development. Mentone storeys)
dependant In addition to the above, the following applies:- 85 - 99 (odd upon location . For Land to the rear of 47-57 Florence Street No’s) Balcombe (odd no’s), Mentone:- Road, Mentone For 9 Old o Any 3rd storey must be setback a 97-121 (odd Bakery Lane, minimum of 5 metres from the no’s) Mentone and rear of 47 frontage to enable a robust 2 storey Parade, & 81 - Florence St, building form with a maximum 93 odd no’s) Mentone, these Mentone Pde, building height of 8.5 metres. buildings must Mentone Balconies may encroach within the remain 3rd storey setback but must be unaltered 9 Old Bakery setback 2.8 metres from the Lane, Mentone frontage and be of an open appearance.
. For 36-42 Como Pde, Mentone & 139- 149 Mentone Parade, Mentone:- o Any 3rd storey must be setback a minimum of 10 metres from the frontage to enable a robust two storey building form with a maximum building height of 8.5 metres at Como Parade West. o Balconies may encroach within the 3rd storey setback but must be setback 7 metres from the frontage and be of an open appearance. rd o Any 3 storey must be setback a minimum of 7 metres from the Florence Street frontage to enable a robust 2 storey building form with a maximum building height of 8.5 metres at Florence Street. o Balconies may encroach within the rd 3 storey setback but must be setback 4.8 metres from the Florence Street frontage and be of
258 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
PRECINCT BUILDING SETBACK HEIGHT (EXCLUDIN G BASEMENT) an open appearance. rd o Any 3 storey must be setback a minimum of 3 metres from a rear building edge abutting a major pedestrian thoroughfare.
. For 44 Florence St, Mentone, Any 3rd storey must be setback a minimum of 12 metres from the frontage to enable a robust two storey building form with a maximum building height of 9.8 metres at Florence Street. Balconies may encroach within the 3rd storey setback but must be setback 9 metres from the frontage an be of an open appearance. o Any 2nd storey must be setback a minimum of 3 metres from the rear building edge.
. For 47-57 Granary Lane, and Land to the rear of 47-57 Granary Lane, o Any 3rd storey must be setback a minimum of 5 metres from the frontage to enable a robust 2 storey building form with a maximum building height of 8.5 metres at Florence Street. o Balconies may encroach within the 3rd storey setback but must be setback 2.8 metres from the frontage and be of an open appearance. 1d
48 Como Parade Mandatory West, Mentone height of 8.5 & metres (2 1 - 21 Como Storeys) Except Parade West, for 48 Como Mentone Parade West which is restricted to single storey
259 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.1-4 Precinct guidelines
--/--/20-- . Promote land use and development that reinforces the presence of and enhances heritage buildings. . Encourage consolidation of sites to enable desired built form outcomes and activate rear laneways. . Encourage new additions and development that demonstrate contemporary architectural detailing but where the form and fenestration responds to the village characteristics of the precinct. . In circumstances where building height exceeds 3 storeys, ensure reasonable sunlight penetration to the south side of Balcombe Road. . Encourage a robust street wall of 3 storeys to reinforce the north axis of Como Parade. . Buildings of heritage significance to remain unaltered. . Ensure development addresses laneways and enables an improved and active pedestrian scaled thoroughfare. . Upper 2 storeys to be light weight in appearance. Designs shall contain a level of façade articulation and material detailing that distinguishes the lower floors from the upper floors to maintain a robust and traditional 2 storey street wall façade. . Ensure new upper storey additions are recessive and the existing 2 storey facade remains dominant. . Maintain low scale setting along the railway line and the existing heritage building at 48 Como Parade West.
260 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.2 Precinct 2 – Contemporary Redevelopment
5.2-1 Precinct Map --/--/20--
--/--/20--
261 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.2-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage new, contemporary residential building form within quality landscaped settings that responds to the residential focus of the precinct
5.2-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
Precinct Building Setback Height (excluding basement) 2.
Land south of 100-108 Mandatory . Ensure development is Collins Street (even height of 14 setback 9 metres from no’s), Mentone & 5 metres (4 established residential Swanston Street, storeys) interfaces Mentone
68 - 74 Balcombe Road (Even No’s), Mentone
101 – 111 Balcombe Road (Even No’s), Mentone
2 – 4 Davies St, (Even No’s) Mentone
29 – 45 Florence Street (Odd No’s), Mentone.
38 – 44 Florence Street (Even No’s), Mentone
25-31 Brindisi Street (Odd No’s), Mentone
5.2-4 Precinct guidelines --/--/20-- . Encourage opportunities which activate the Granary and Old Bakery laneways and provide improved pedestrian and bicycle linkages . Encourage gateway buildings in specified locations on the Precinct Plan.
262 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
. Development should recognise heritage elements adjoining the precinct
. Encourage consolidation of land to enable desired built form outcomes
. Development on car parking areas must provide the equivalent replacement car spaces, as well as provide an appropriate amount of car parking to cater for the development.
. Ensure buildings provide a zero lot alignment to the street frontage and physically address the street through permeable fenestration and points of entry. For the two areas north-east of the railway line, adjoining Balcombe Road and Swanston Street a maximum podium of 3 storeys is to be presented to Swanston Street and Balcombe Roads, with the forth storey appropriately setback from the frontage. . On larger lots, encourage space throughout upper levels to reduce bulk and provide private/communal open space opportunities. . Ensure development addresses laneways by encouraging setbacks to reduce the sense of enclosure and enables an improved and active pedestrian scaled thoroughfare. . Preserve the two storey edge along Florence Street with a maximum of 4 storeys, with the upper two storeys setback from the street frontage.
263 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.3 Precinct 3 – Increased Residential Density
--/--/20--5.3-1 Precinct Map C124
--/--/20--
C124
5.3-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage new areas public open space
. Ensure any new development is contemporary in design and set within quality landscaped surrounds that respond to the established residential nature of the precinct
5.3-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
Precinct Building Height Setback (excluding basement)
3. 101 – 103 Collins 11 metres Street, Mentone (3 storeys)
264 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.3-4 Precinct guidelines
--/--/20-- . Encourage the consolidation of lots in order to provide desired building and open space outcomes of the Mentone Structure Plan. . Development must provide a suitable transition in height to adjoining existing residential areas
265 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.4 Precinct 4 – Existing Residential Areas --/--/20-- 5.4-1 Precinct Map
--/--/20--
C124
266 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.4-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage residential development which provides for a high quality of design and a transition in scale from the Retail Core of Precinct 1 to the residential areas beyond the Activity Centre boundary.
5.4-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20-- Precinct Building Setback Height (excluding basement)
4. 5 – 23 Brindisi Street (Odd No’s), 7.5 -11 metres (2- Mentone 3 storeys) 20 – 34 (Even No’s) Florence Street, Mentone 80 – 98 Mentone Parade (Even No’s), Mentone 158 – 196 Balcombe Road (Even No’s), Mentone 2 - 6 Elizabeth St (Even No’s), Mentone 75 – 93 Collins Street (Odd No’s), Mentone 2 – 10 Salmon Street, Mentone
5.4-4 Precinct guidelines --/--/20--
. Ensure development provides a gradual shift in building scale from the low rise residential properties outside the centre to the taller buildings on the periphery of the Retail Core in Precinct 1.
. Provide for a high quality designed residential environment which reinforces the proximity and connectivity to the Activity Centre
. Development should consist of new medium density housing comprising a variety of housing types and layouts which responds to the established, but evolving urban character
267 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.5 Precinct 5 – Railway Precinct --/--/20-- C124
6.5-1 Precinct Map
--/--/20--
268 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.5-2 Precinct Objectives --/--/20-- . Encourage new, contemporary residential building form with active frontages within quality landscaped settings that responds to the prominent location and gateway entrance to the station, and residential focus of the precinct
. Encourage new contemporary multi level development for car parking fronting Balcombe Road
. Encourage building form that preserves and enhances important heritage buildings and view lines.
5.5-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
C124
Precinct Building Height Setback (excluding basement)
5. 1 – 7 Station Street (Odd No’s), Mandatory height of 4 Mentone, Storeys (14 Metres) 53 – 77 Balcombe Road (Odd No’s), Mentone Railway carpark west of 1-7 Station St and west of 53 – 77 Balcome Road, Mentone.
5.5-4 Precinct guidelines --/--/20-- . Ensure the equivalent number of commuter car spaces are maintained with opportunities sought to provide more commuter parking as well as cater for the parking needs of the development.
. Ensure development provides a gradual shift in building scale from the low rise residential properties adjacent to the Precinct.
. Opportunities to enhance accessibility to the entrance of the station and to the Activity Centre are encouraged
. Provide for a high quality designed residential environment with an active ground floor frontage which reinforces the proximity and connectivity to the Activity Centre
. Land consolidation is necessary in order to achieve built form to the maximum building height.
269 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.6 Precinct 6 – Former Coffee Palace
5.6-1 Precinct Map --/--/20--
C124 --/--/20--
C124
270 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.6-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage sensitive development within quality landscaped settings that responds to the heritage and institutional focus of the precinct.
5.6-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
PRECINCT BUILDING SETBACK HEIGHT (EXCLUDING BASEMENT) 6. 68 – 74 Como Parade 3 storeys (11 . Any 3 storey development to areas of the West, Mentone metres) precinct away from the original historic building should be setback 1.2 metres 106 – 112 Mentone from the Mentone Parade title boundary Parade, Mentone and 3 metres at the Como Parade West 1 – 11 Commercial title boundary. Road, Mentone . Buildings should be setback a minimum of 3 metres from the title boundary adjoining existing residential areas. rd . Any 3 storey should be setback a minimum of 7 metres from the building edge adjoining existing residential areas. .
5.6-4 Precinct guidelines
--/--/20-- . Ensure the retention of the existing former Coffee Palace building and works be limited to maintenance. . Ensure development is sensitively designed and respects and enhances the heritage buildings in this precinct. . Ensure development provides substantial improvements and access to public areas . Encourage uses to the south of the precinct that strengthen the institutional focus of the precinct . Ensure new upper storey additions are recessive at the residential interface and that new street facing facades respect the existing robust 2 storey facades of the existing buildings. . Ensure no new development, alterations or additions are undertaken to the original corner building at the corner of Florence St and Mentone/Como Parade.
271 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.6 Precinct 7 – Community Activity
5.6-1 Precinct Map --/--/20--
C124 --/--/20--
C124
272 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.6-2 Precinct Objectives
--/--/20-- . Encourage community, open space, sports and recreational based uses which provide and strengthen the community and civic focus of the precinct.
5.6-3 Precinct requirements
--/--/20--
PRECINCT BUILDING SETBACK HEIGHT (EXCLUDING BASEMENT) 7a. 34 Brindisi St, Mentone 8.5 metres (2 storeys) 7b. 1-11 Remo Street, Mentone 8.5 metres (2 Storeys)
5.6-4 Precinct guidelines
--/--/20-- . Encourage development that enhances and strengthens the provision of C124 community services and supports adjoining sport and recreational facilities. . Encourage community centred development which provides better utilisation of community buildings and provides a hub for community and recreational centred events. . Ensure buildings are contemporary in architectural form and include use of light weight materials, and provides areas of publicly accessible open space which provides connections to the activity centre and adjoining recreation ground . Ensure buildings are only erected where they are integral to the functioning of a sport or recreational facility
273 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
6.0 Application requirements
--/--/20-- In addition to the application requirements set out at Clause 37.08-7, an application to
C124 construct a building or construct or carry out works must be accompanied by the following information, as appropriate to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority:
. A Traffic and Transport plan which provides:
Details on existing traffic conditions including available on street parking allocation.
Anticipated traffic generation and distribution as a consequence of the proposal.
How any implications associated with the traffic generated or additional requirements for parking will be appropriately mitigated.
Where appropriate, how pedestrians and cyclists are accommodated in relation to access to the proposal and facilities on its periphery.
Means in which the construction of the development will be managed to reduce implications on the existing road network.
. A Sustainability Management Plan (SMP) which: . Addresses matters of building energy management, water sensitive urban design, construction materials, indoor environment quality, waste management, and transport.
. Demonstrates the application of Australian best practice rating tools and design principles; use of emerging technology; and a commitment to ‘beyond compliance’ throughout the construction period and subsequent operation of the development.
. Identifies statutory obligations and documented sustainability performance standards from Government and other authorities.
. Specifies key performance indicators, to an agreed level, to measure the achievement of objectives and initiatives identified in the Plan.
. Identifies responsibilities and a schedule for both implementing and monitoring the Plan over time.
The individual components of the SMP should address: . Building Energy Management . Water Sensitive Urban Design . Construction Materials . Indoor Environment Quality . Waste Management . Quality of Public and Private Realm . Transport . Demolition and Construction
274 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
7.0 Notice and review
--/--/20-- An application to use land, construct a building or construct or carry out works is not C124 exempt from the notice requirements of Section 52(1)(a), (b) and (d), the decision requirements of Section 64(1), (2) and (3) and the review rights of Section 82(1) of the Act in accordance with Clause 37.08-8 of the Activity Centre Zone
8.0 Decision guidelines
--/--/20-- Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:
. The objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 54 for residential development of one dwelling and with a height of four stories or less . The objectives, standards and decision guidelines of Clause 55 for residential development of two or more dwellings and with a height of four stories or less Use
. The adaptability of the proposal to, in the future, be transitioned to alternative though complementary land uses;
Design and built form
. Whether the proposed development ensures that all roof plant and equipment is sufficient screened or hidden from view.
Access
. Incorporates provisions for pedestrians, cyclists, and people with a disability demonstrating how access needs are accommodated
. Provides vehicular access to buildings fronting key roads off side streets or via rear access
9.0 Advertising signs
--/--/20-- Advertising Signage requirements at Clause 52.05 of the Planning Scheme are applicable as follows:
Precincts 1 is Category 1; Precinct 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 are Category 3; Precinct 7 is Category 4;
275 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda 28 November 2011
10.0 Reference documents
--/--/20-- Retail and Commercial Development Strategy, 2009
Mentone Activity Centre Structure Plan, 2011
P.L.A.N. Study, 2008
276 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 198 Moorabbin Arts Link
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: Aidan Mullen, Place Manager Activity Centres
1. Purpose The report seeks approval for Capital Works funding for the Moorabbin Arts Link project to supplement the application for funding to the Department of Justice (DoJ) under the Community Safety Infrastructure Grants Program and a possible contribution from the Department of Transport.
2. Council Plan This report relates to the Council Plan 2009-2013, in particular;
Planned Outcome 1: Infrastructure for a Safe and Active Community. 1.5 Safe environment and a positive sense of security The project aims to make the existing pedestrian link between the Moorabbin train Station and the Kingston Arts Centre a safer connection, particularly at night.
Planned Outcome 2: A Sustainable Environment. 2.2 Striving for a balance between development and amenity The project aims to improve the amenity around the Trains Station and Bus Interchange to encourage the use of public transport.
Planned Outcome 3: healthy, Strong and Connected Communities. 3.2 Strong, cohesive and engaged communities The project aims to heavily integrate art which reflects the Moorabbin community and provide the Kingston Arts Centre an outdoor exhibition space.
3. Background This project provides an improved safe pedestrian link between the Kingston Arts Centre and the Moorabbin Station, and has been identified as a priority and achievable project for Moorabbin in the short term.
4. Summary and Conclusion A well integrated concept design for the Moorabbin Arts Link response has been developed and provided to Councillors. This report seeks approval to allocate part of the Structure Plans Capital funding the project.
The concept design will also to be used for funding applications and in discussions with VicTrack. The concept has been developed with the aim to complete the works within this financial year. The project will continue to be managed by the Activity Centres team with close consultation with the relevant internal teams.
277 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5. Consultation This project has been identified as appropriate for the Public Safety Infrastructure Fund Grants Program and a grant application, which has been lead by the Community Engagement team. Property Services is leading discussions with VicTrack to gain a licence on their land for these works. As there is an existing pedestrian link and these works aim to improve that link, it is expected there will not be any issues with gaining a licence. Where artwork is proposed to be projected onto or located on adjacent buildings the owners agreement will also be sought.
Input has also been sought from other teams including, Arts & Cultural Services as well as Arts, Planning, Festivals & Events who have been and will be involved to ensure that the project adds to the strong art presence in Moorabbin. Infrastructure and Parks & Operations have also been involved to ensure works align with Council standards.
6. Issues This site is located at the intersection of Nepean Highway and South Road Moorabbin to the rear of Kingston City Hall and alongside the train line at Moorabbin train station.
With the Kingston Arts Centre and an increased number of people living in this precinct, pedestrian access to the train station is critical. There is a pathway that presently runs alongside the train track, however there are significant environmental and design issues which contribute to public perceptions that this is an unsafe area.
The project will improve the area with better lighting, materials and installation of furniture to facilitate a better ‘sense of pride’ within the area. There are also two main art installations which aim to improve safety through lighting and night time activation. These art pieces try to improve safety through positive improvements, rather than relying on the installation of CCTV alone. This integrated art approach relates well to the local art community in Moorabbin.
There are three key components to this proposal:
Area 1 - Station Entrance, includes upgraded pavements, lighting, planting, fencing and furniture installation. Estimated Cost - $180,720
Area 2 - Pedestrian Connection, includes installation of furniture and lighting and light art treatments and upgraded pavement works. Estimated Cost - $222,540
Area 3 - Bus interchange, includes upgraded pavements, furniture, lighting and fencing. Estimated Cost – $50,580.
Victoria Police are supportive of the proposed infrastructure work to discourage crime and enable them to more easily police the area and protect the public.
While this project is not specially identified in the adopted Moorabbin Structure Plan, it does successfully align with its objectives, including:
To create a contemporary station entry
278 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011 To provide for better connections to key recreational spaces and provide new spaces that are pleasant and safe to use To return Moorabbin to a place where pedestrian activity is thriving To encourage and prioritise the use of sustainable modes of transport to and from the centre, especially walking, cycling and public transport; and To encourage buildings that demonstrate architectural and environmental excellence.
As well as meeting these objectives, the proposed works should act as a catalyst for the proposed future Axispace (above railway) development, demonstrating how the railway interface can become an exciting and safe pedestrian realm.
The Concept proposes two visual art projections at the rear to the Kingston City Hall. The installation cost and 4-year maintenance cost has been included in the estimated cost.
An opportunity exists for a third projector to be located to project onto the Clock Tower. Given the likely location of this third projector would be on the roof of the Hall, the additional cost for the third projection would be in the vicinity of $15,000 for installation.
Based on the experience at the Northcote Town Hall (using 5 year old technology), a conservative maintenance cost for one projector is in the vicinity of $5,000 a year. It is recommended that an annual maintenance budget of $15,000 be provided to service the three projectors.
7. Funding & Delivery A funding application has been made to the Department of Justice requesting $169,000 for the implementation of safety improvements within the Moorabbin Arts Link project.
Council’s Capital Works Budget has an allocation of $595,200 for the implementation of Structure Plans of Moorabbin & Mordialloc for the 2011/12 financial year. It is proposed that $284,550 of this allocation is put towards the delivery of the Moorabbin Arts Link improvements.
Areas 1 & 2 (Station Entrance & Pedestrian Connection) could be delivered through a combination of DoJ funding and Council’s Capital Works budget, at a total cost of $403,260. An option for an additional $35,000 would provide for the installation of a Clock Tower projection.
It is proposed that the delivery of Area 3 Bus Interchange is contingent upon Department of Transport funding being obtained.
It is expected that construction of this project will be completed by May 2012.
It is recommended that an annual Arts Centre maintenance budget of $15,000 be provided to service the three projectors.
279 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011 8. Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental the concept design has taken into account the impact on the environment. The work has been developed according to Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles and will contribute to a much more pleasant physical environment for residents and visitors to Moorabbin.
Social The proposed infrastructure work will improve safety for the Moorabbin community across Kingston generally and more specifically for the residents who live and work and use the amenities around the identified locations. The work will also improved community perceptions of safety.
Financial The estimated costs for the project and proposed funding sources are outlined in the report.
9. Recommendation That Council resolve: 1. To allocate $284,550 of Council’s 2011/12 Capital Works Budget of $595,200 for Structure Plan Implementation stream for the delivery of the Moorabbin Arts Link project plus a projector for the Clock Tower. 2. That progression of this project to be subject to a successful funding application to the Department of Justice.
Attachments: Attachment A - Moorabbin Arts Link Concept Proposal (TRIM No: 11/118241).
Crs Peulich/Athanasopoulos
That consideration of this matter be deferred pending -Further details of costs -Consultation with the Arts and Advisory Committee -Information regarding the application for funding to the Deptartment of Justice Carried
280 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 199 Urban Growth Boundary Anomalies Submission
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: Rosa Zouzoulas, Team Leader Strategic Planning
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval to submit the attached letter as Kingston’s response to the Review of the Urban Growth Boundary Anomalies being undertaken by an Advisory Committee for the State Government.
2. Council Plan Council’s response to the State Government’s process to review the UGB anomalies relates to Planned Outcome 2 of the Council Plan, ‘A Sustainable Environment’ which has a key strategic action ‘reviewing the non-urban area in collaboration with the State Government’.
3. Background On 1 August 2011, Council received a letter from the Planning Minister, the Hon Matthew Guy MLC about a State Government review to consider Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) anomalies. The letter invites councils to review the UGB and propose changes to address any significant anomalies. Submissions must include an assessment of proposed changes and the views of affected land owners as set out in the terms of reference. The due date for submissions is 28 November 2011.
When the State Government’s invitation for a submission was received, the City of Kingston was and is still in the midst of preparing its Green Wedge Plan. At the Ordinary Council meeting in August 2011, Council resolved to seek an extension of time for a submission and to update the Minister on the status of its Draft Green Wedge Plan. On 26 August and 6 October 2011, Council sent a letter to the Minister for Planning to this effect. Since sending the letter, Council’s General Manager Environmental Sustainability has made contact with senior representatives of the Department of Planning and Community Development to discuss the likelihood of Council’s request being granted. While discussions with a representative from Knox indicated they had received verbal advice that they would get an extension of time, the only advice Kingston has received is that the “matter is under consideration by the Minister”.
4. Summary and Conclusion Unfortunately, Council has not heard back to its request to the Minister for Planning for an extension of time to lodge a submission to the Advisory Committee on possible UGB anomalies. With the closing date for submissions being 28 November 2011, Council may wish to resolve to put forward a submission which is essentially an update on the development of the Green Wedge Plan and seek the ability for Council to put forward a more detailed submission following the completion and adoption of its Green Wedge Plan.
281 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5. Submission The attached draft submission to the Advisory Committee undertaking the review of Urban Growth anomalies seeks to highlight that Council is currently in the process of preparing a detailed Green Wedge Plan and that a more detailed submission consistent with the terms of reference will be forwarded following the completion of Plan.
The terms of reference clearly state that all submissions must be made consistent with the standards and decision criteria. As mentioned earlier, Council is in the process of preparing its Green Wedge Plan and has just completed its second round of consultation with the community. Council believes that any submission made with respect to the Urban Growth Boundaries anomalies, must be done following a detailed process of review and consultation to ensure an open and transparent process and to ensure informed decision making on strategic developed documents and justification.
6. Recommendation That Council resolve to submit the attached letter as its formal submission to the Advisory Committee considering the review of the Urban Growth Boundary, and that following the completion and adoption of the City of Kingston Green Wedge Plan submit an approved detailed submission to the Advisory Committee should the need arise.
Attachments: Letter seeking Council’s submission to UGB anomalies review (TRIM 11/81559) Draft submission to the Advisory Committee reviewing UGB anomalies
Note: Refer to Procedural Motion on pg 4 of the minutes.
The matter was not considered as an item of business given the decision of the Minister for Planning to not approve Council’s request for an extension of time to lodge a submission.
282 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Mr John Ginivan Acting Executive Director Planning Policy and Reform Department of Planning and Community Development GPO Box 2392 Melbourne VIC 3001
Dear Mr Ginivan,
ADVISORY COMMITTEE – URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY ANOMALIES OUTSIDE GROWTH AREAS
On behalf of Council I formally submit this letter as the City of Kingston’s submission to the Advisory Committee for the review of the Urban Growth Boundary Anomalies outside growth areas.
As you may be aware, the City of Kingston wrote to the Minister for Planning on 26 August 2011 and again on the 6 October 2011, seeking an extension of time to respond to the Advisory Committee review on the urban growth boundary. Officers have made several enquiries with your Department regarding the status of our request. Department representatives have advised that the request is still under consideration. Accordingly please accept this letter as the City of Kingston’s initial submission. A more detailed submission will be forwarded following the completion of the Green Wedge Plan. That detailed submission will incorporate the feedback of the community as required by the terms of reference set out in your letter to Council on 1 August 2011.
The adopted Green Wedge Plan may identify anomalies. Should the adopted Plan do so, Council would like to be given the opportunity to present to the Advisory Committee a detailed submission in accordance with the terms of reference at a hearing early next year as indicated in Attachment 2 to your letter ‘Summary of Process’. That detailed submission, Council believes will be soundly based on a strategically justified Plan that has involved significant community consultation.
Should you have any queries, please contact John Nevins, Chief Executive Officer on 9581 4706.
Yours sincerely
Cr Ron Brownlees MAYOR
283 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 200 Construction of Lilliput Lane, Edithvale via a Special Charge Scheme Intention to Declare Scheme
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: Brian Trower, Team Leader Roads & Drains
1. Purpose To obtain a decision from Council to declare their intention to levy a special charge for the construction of Lilliput Lane, Edithvale.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 1 – Infrastructure for a Safe and Active Community Strategy 1.1 – Sustaining Kingston’s Assets
Construction of Lilliput Lane contributes to the goal of providing infrastructure and assets that are safe, functional and fit for purpose. Currently the surface is uneven and drainage is poor and contributes to erosion and siltation in Lilliput lane and on the foreshore.
3. Background Lilliput Lane runs from Nepean Highway to the Foreshore over a length of 160 metres and is 3.66 metres wide. It is currently unpaved consisting of natural sand and some crushed rock which has been placed over the surface to fill up low spots. As the laneway is a Private Road (right of way), the cost of constructing the lane to Council standards has traditionally been borne by the property owners who abut or who would receive a benefit from its construction.
On 28th February, 2011 Council resolved to proceed with the development of a “Special Charge” scheme for the construction of Lilliput Lane.
This follow up report identifies the proposed cost to be apportioned against each abutting property owner, the manner of making repayments, and the statutory requirements that need to be declared as part of this process.
Statutory Process Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) enables Council to recover the cost of constructing a private road or lane. The following process is recommended to ensure that Council complies with the requirements of the Act:
(i) Council resolves to declare its ‘Intention to Levy a Special Charge’ together with the
associated statutory requirements and manner of repayments. (ii) Explanatory letters to be sent to property owners and a public notice placed in the local newspaper outlining the ‘Notice of Intention to Levy a Special Charge’. Property owners would then have fourteen (14) days in which to make a written submission. (iii) A future report to Council would then discuss any written submissions and recommend whether or not to proceed with or alter the proposed scheme.
284 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
(iv) Subject to Council approval, further explanatory letters to be sent to property owners outlining Council’s confirmation to ‘Levy a Special Charge’. (v) Property owners would then have one (1) month in which to make a written submission to the Victorian Civil & Administration Tribunal (V.C.A.T) requesting a review of Council’s decision.
If no further submissions are received, tenders for the construction of the lane would be sought and accounts sent to property owners following the commencement of works.
Apportionment Details Lilliput Lane is currently bordered by six (6) properties as shown on the attached site plan. Six of these properties require access to Lilliput Lane as its only road abuttal. Another one property abuts Lilliput Lane and therefore has legal rights of access, however they can utilise alternate access from an easement across their neighbour's property to the north, leading from Somme Parade.
Apportionment has been calculated based on the area of each property; the distance from Nepean Highway; how each property benefits from the use of the laneway; and the length of their Lilliput Lane frontage.
Based on this apportionment model and a preliminary estimate of $130,992.40 for the works, contributions for individual properties will range from $1,679 to $13,227. Total resident contributions represent 49% of the cost of construction with council paying the balance.
4. Summary and Conclusion A special charge scheme is proposed for the construction of Lilliput Lane. Initial consultation has been undertaken with residents and there is general support for the scheme to proceed. The proposed scheme involved a Council contribution of 51% of the construction costs. This contribution level was based on the broad community benefit of the works, being a public footway leading to the foreshore, balanced against the private benefit of the works to the adjoining properties..
In conjunction with the construction of Lilliput Lane, traffic flow improvements are proposed at the intersection with the Nepean Highway. The principal traffic management issues in Lilliput Lane relate to the inability of vehicles to pass when there is conflict with egress and access movement, and potential conflicts with pedestrian and cycle traffic due to restricted visibility. Improvements are proposed that would take possession of a carriageway easement at the intersection of Nepean Highway, effectively widening Lilliput Lane at the intersection.
The next key stage will be to advertise the scheme and to notify all allotted property owners by mail. This advertisement and notification will indicate Council’s intention to ‘declare’ a scheme in a month’s time and seeks submissions from affected property owners.
5. Consultation The residents have been consulted on a number of occasions over a lengthy period of time with general support for construction but with changing opinions on who should pay for the costs. There is currently majority support for the scheme. There is a general opinion that the
285 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011 cost of the scheme should fall more on the properties at the foreshore end. The proposed apportionment takes into account the distance from the Nepean Highway.
6. Issues Construction The construction of Lilliput Lane is warranted, mindful of the level of maintenance required and the number of residential abuttals to the roadway. A small number of the properties may be subject to further subdivision in the future.
Lilliput Lane is also a public access way to the foreshore, for pedestrian traffic only. It is considered appropriate that Council contribute to the construction of Lilliput Lane on the basis of the broader community benefit of having a sealed access way to the foreshore. Therefore a contribution of 49% is considered appropriate. A previous Council had supported such a contribution. This report seeks affirmation by the current Council, on that apportionment.
The proposed construction treatment is an asphalt surface with a brick band edge. Drainage will also be upgraded in the form of soakage pits to avoid constructing another drainage outfall across the foreshore. A section of the road pavement is to be constructed with pervious pavers to improve stormwater quality to help protect the foreshore environment.
It is also proposed to upgrade the water hydrant supply to improve CFA access to water. One house was destroyed by fire a number of years ago and is being replaced.
Traffic Issues Lilliput Lane is only 3.66m wide and has seven properties with direct abuttal. Midway along the lane there is a turnout section which allows for opposing vehicles to pass.
There is a challenge however at the intersection with Nepean Highway where the current width of 3.66m does not accommodate opposing vehicles. It is understood that there is a general understanding amongst residents that a vehicle entering Lilliput Lane will be provided with priority. That is a vehicle exiting laneway will reverse back to the turnout section.
Intersection Widening An earlier subdivision of the property on the northwest corner of Lilliput Lane and Nepean Highway (309 Nepean Highway) provided for a carriageway easement in favour of Council of 1.5m width over a distance of 7m, with a view of providing a widened entrance. This easement is still fenced within the relevant property; however it could be used for the purposes of widening the entrance. Costs will be incurred moving a small local telecommunications pit and a power pole.
On the south-west corner in Nepean Highway there is a large telecommunications pit which significantly compromises any benefit cost consideration for any effective widening on this side.
286 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
7. Options Option 1 That Council levy a special charge for the construction of Lilliput Lane, Edithvale, as per apportionments based on the following benefit factors:
The area benefit is calculated by dividing the area of each property with the sum of all area values as shown in column 3 of the apportionment. The distance down the lane benefit is calculated by dividing the distance down the lane by the total length of the lane as shown in column 4. The relative benefit is based on whether the property has access only from the laneway or utilizes alternative access from another road. Multiplication of these three benefits gives a “weighted benefit” which is used to determine the estimated cost that the owners of each property will be liable for. This apportionment is calculated by dividing each individual property weighted benefit by the total weighted benefit and multiplying this by the total estimated cost.
Advantage: The proposal includes Council contributing 51% of the total cost with the abutting owners contributing the other 49%. Long term savings on maintenance and grading. Disadvantage: The initial Capital expenditure will have a negative impact on Council’s Infrastructure budget.
Option 2 That Lilliput Lane remains unconstructed.
Advantage: Nil cost to Council Disadvantage: Ongoing cost to Council for maintenance and grading
Option 3 That Lilliput Lane is constructed at total cost to Council.
Advantage: Construction of Lilliput Lane will improve social and environmental impact in the area. Disadvantage: The precedence will be set for construction of unconstructed roads at cost to Council. Kingston currently has approx 16.8kms of unconstructed road/laneways.
8. Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental – The construction of Lilliput Lane using sections of pervious pavers will have a positive environmental impact by reducing the quantity of silt and sand washed onto the foreshore by erosion of laneway surface during storms. The section of pervious pavers will also improve the quality of water which makes its way underground to the beach. Social – Construction of Lilliput Lane will improve the amenity and safety of the streetscape for the residents. Financial – The proposal includes Council contributing 51% of the total cost with the abutting owners contributing the other 49%. Initial Capital investment will result in longer term savings in future years due to reduced maintenance and grading.
287 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
9. Recommendation That in accordance with Section 163 of the Local Government Act 1989 (the Act) and every other power thereunto, that Council resolve to declare their intention to levy a Special Charge for the purpose of constructing Lilliput Lane, Edithvale as outlined in the details below:
1) Declare their intention to levy a special charge for the purpose of defraying the expenses in relation to the construction of the right of way known as Lilliput Lane (between Nepean Highway and the Foreshore) which Council considers is or will be of benefit to the persons required to pay the special charge being the owners of the land described in columns 1 & 2 of the apportionment. 2) Specifies the areas and criteria on which the special charge is declared as No’s 1, 2, 3, 1/4, 2/4 & 9 Lilliput Lane, No’s 5 & 20 Somme Parade and No. 309 Nepean Highway, Edithvale. 3) Specifies the manner in which the special charge will be assessed and levied as the product of the “area” benefit, the “distance down lane” benefit and the “relative” benefit (i.e. access property from the laneway or another road). 4) Specifies the period for which the special charge remains in force as five (5) years from the date that the special charge is adopted by Council. 5) Declares that the special charge shall, subject to any further resolution by Council, be due and payable not earlier than fourteen (14) days from the date of issue of the notice requiring payment. This notice will be issued following the commencement of construction works. 6) Specifies that payment may be made in full or if elected by the person liable, by twenty (20) equal quarterly instalments. 7) Specifies that any amount outstanding in excess of one (1) month from the date of issue of the notice requiring payment in full or one (1) month from the date that an instalment is due, shall accrue interest at the same rate as specified for overdue rates. 8) Directs that the money received from the special charge be applied for the following: (a) the purpose for which the special charge was made including the purchase of any material required for that purpose and; (b) maintenance of and repair of the works, management, advertising or security and; (c) any expenses relating to anything mentioned in paragraph (a) and (b) or the declaration or levying of the charge. 9) Directs that notices be sent to the persons who are the owners of the lands referred to in columns 1 & 2 of the apportionment sheet relating to this declaration advising of Council’s declaration and intention to levy a special charge, the grounds upon which submissions in relation to the proposal can be made and that submissions will be considered in accordance with Section 223 of the Act. 10) Authorises the General Manager, Corporate Services to give public notice of this declaration, in accordance with sections 182(b) and 223 of the Act and to carry out the administrative procedures to enable Council to carry out its functions under section 223 of the Act.
Attachments: Attachment A – map of Lilliput Lane Attachment B – Apportionment sheet Attachment C - Drawings
288 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Crs Ronke/Shewan
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
289 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 201 Beach Road Corridor Strategy and No Stopping Trial
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environment Sustainability
Author: Peter Bain, Manager Infrastructure
1. Purpose To make specific recommendations arising from the Beach Road Strategy undertaken by Kingston and Bayside Councils in conjunction with Vic Roads and from the ‘No Stopping’ trial along Beach Road.
2. Council Plan 1.4 Traffic, parking and transport 1.4.3 Review and implement Community Road Safety Strategy and realign with State Government initiatives
1.5 Safe environment and a positive sense of security. 1.5.1 Provide a safe and secure environment for those that live, work and participate in community life.
The primary objective of the recommendations is to improve safety for all road users along Beach Road including, motorists, cyclists and pedestrians.
3. Background In October 2010 Council considered an invitation from Bayside City Council to participate in the Beach Road Corridor Strategy. Council accepted the invitation but only to participate in the technical studies component. The Strategy was viewed as an opportunity to work with VicRoads, Bayside, and community and cycling groups on common issues of road use and safety along Beach Road. A draft Strategy was issued in September 2011 and Bayside City Council made some immediate recommendations which are discussed below.
Kingston and Bayside also agreed to undertake a no-stopping trial coincident from November 2010 – November 2011.
The objectives of the Beach Road Corridor Strategy were to identify and prioritise a range of actions that will improve the overall safety for all users of Beach Road. The strategy looked at safety from three perspectives:
cyclist behaviour; motorist behaviour; and Engineering issues.
A number of surveys have been conducted however a full analysis of the impact on safety for road users is still in progress as not all accident statistics are yet available.
290 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The objective of the ‘No Stopping’ trial was to reduce the number of accidents between training cyclists and parked vehicles.
4. Summary and Conclusion When Council agreed to the ‘No Stopping’ trial, it reserved the right to remove the parking restrictions if an evaluation of the overall performance indicated that the trial was not successful in reducing accidents.
Preliminary study has been undertaken into several of the measures. Those preliminary studies indicate that the trial is successful in reducing accident rates. Crash statistics from Vic Roads and the results of the analysis of injuries by Sandringham Hospital will be available in March 2012. On the evidence, it is recommended that the weekend 6am to 10am ‘No Stopping’ signage should remain in place until these other safety measures can be assessed in 2012.
The draft report prepared as a result of the Beach Road Strategy study. The report makes a number of recommendations some of which are directly operational between the Councils, Vic Roads and Vic Police whilst other recommendations require further detailed investigations. In summary, the core recommendations are:
Develop a business case to put to Vic Roads to reduce the speed limit on Beach Road to 50 kph. This is aimed at reducing the differential speed between cars and cyclists. The nature of Beach Road in Kingston is mostly that of a wide, straight road which feels like a faster road. Treatments would need to be installed to change the perception of the ‘correct’ speed. Also a speed change may have a wider impact on other roads such as Warrigal Road which is currently 60 kph. For safety reasons outlined in the Beach Road Strategy, officers recommend this option be investigated in detail.
Negotiate with truck operators to extend the truck ban to include Saturday mornings. There are no principal destinations for trucks in this area of Kingston and extending the truck ban has clear benefits for cyclist and pedestrian safety.
Make physical changes:
o Remove the kerb extensions near Charman Road. Council officers do not support this change at this stage as any changes need to be considered in light of the recommendation to reduce the speed limit. o Improve the safety of cyclists near Charman Road. This is currently a pinch point between cyclists and cars but does result in slower traffic speeds. o Signalise Warrigal Road intersection. This is not supported by officers at this stage for the same reason as the first point. o Signalise the intersection between Main Street and Beach Road at Mordialloc. Council officers do not support this option but do recommend changes to help align and separate cyclists and vehicles.
291 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
In summary, it is recommended that Council consider:-
1. Continue participation in the Beach Road ‘No stopping’ trial until such time as the 2011 Crash Stats data and Sandringham Hospital cycling safety review are both available and a full review of the effectiveness of the trial can be undertaken.
2. With VicRoads and Bayside and Port Phillip Councils, review the proposals to:
a. Reduce the speed limit along Beach Road speed to 50km/hr; and b. Extend the Beach Road truck ban;
to determine what works would need to be implement such a proposal and the potential impacts of the proposal.
3. Officers to continue to work on possible design solutions with Vic Roads to improve safety at the intersections of Beach Road, with Charman Road Mentone and Main Street Mordialloc.
4. Officers to continue to work with Vic Roads on pedestrian safety issues at key points between existing pedestrian operated signals.
5. Issues Extensive discussions and detailed engineering assessments are required with Vic Roads. The Beach Road Strategy report provides reasons for each recommendation.
Some of the recommendations require substantial capital investment to be realised and since Beach Road is a State controlled road, funding would be substantially provided by the State.
6. Consultation Further consultation with residents along Beach Road will be required.
7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental – Not applicable. Social – The recommendations aim to provide improved safety measures for all users of Beach Road. A reduction in the amount of deaths and injuries sustained along Beach Road benefits the whole community. Financial – It is expected that Kingston will have some capital requirements to implement the recommendations; however this cannot be determined at this stage.
292 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
8. Recommendations That Council resolve to: a. Continue the Beach Road ‘No stopping’ trial until such time as the 2011 Crash Stats data and Sandringham Hospital cycling safety data analysis are both available and a full review of the effectiveness of the trial can be undertaken. b. Write to Bayside and Port Phillip Councils confirming support for a joint review with Vic Roads on the proposal to reduce the speed limit along Beach Road to 50km/hr. c. Write to Vic Roads supporting the proposal to extend the overnight truck ban on Beach Road to include Saturday mornings.
Crs West/Dundas
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
293 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 202 Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group – Appointment of Community and Councillor Representatives
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby, General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: Nigel Brown - Team Leader Sport and Recreation
1. Purpose To obtain decision from Council on the appointment of eight community representatives to the Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group and endorsement of two Councillors for the group.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 3 – Healthy, Strong and Connected Communities Strategy 3.2 – Strong, cohesive and engaged communities.
This appointment of eight community representatives to the Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group is consistent with Council’s aims for connected and engaged communities.
3. Background Council determined in April 2011 to establish a Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group. Terms of Reference were adopted (Attachment A) along with an expression of interest process for community representatives to be appointed to the group.
The expression of interest (EOI) and interview process has been completed and this report provides the outcomes of that process.
4. Summary and Conclusion Following the EOI process and subsequent assessment, Council officers have identified eight candidates to fill the eight community representative positions on the Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group.
The recommended candidates offer a diverse range of skills, cover the range of desired experiences and interests, and have a demonstrated commitment to community sport and recreation in Kingston.
Officers seek a decision from Council to appoint the candidates, (Attachment B).
5. Consultation Expressions of interest were called for in July 2011 with promotion of the opportunity through a media release, adverts in local papers, the Kingston website and direct mailouts to sport and recreation organisations in Kingston.
294 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
At the end of the EOI period, Council had received eighteen nominations. An initial assessment by officers against the selection criteria contained within the Terms of Reference was conducted and a shortlist of eleven candidates was developed. The shortlisted candidates were invited to interviews to further assess their suitability for membership of the group. During the interviews, officers were looking for a demonstration of individual commitment, an indication of potential group dynamics, and a diverse range of experiences to contribute to the group.
6. Issues The quality of the short listed candidates was very high, with all demonstrating an understanding of and commitment to community sport and recreation.
The final eight candidates recommended for appointment to the group represent the individuals who best demonstrated the required skills, represented a broad range of desired experiences and interests, and who will provide the best mix for the inaugural group.
As with all Council committees, any future appointment processes for this group should seek to engage with the broadest possible range of potential applicants during the nomination process. This will help support the membership of the group to be reflective of the diversity of sport and recreation participants within Kingston.
7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental – Not applicable Social – Endorsement of community representatives for the Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group demonstrates an effective and concentrated action by Council to engage with community on strategic sport and recreation issues. Financial – Ongoing facilitation of the group can be managed within existing Sport and Recreation unit resources.
8. Recommendation 1. That Council resolve to appointment the eight recommended community representatives to the Kingston Sport and Recreation Reference Group (Attachment B).
2. That Council resolve to appoint Cr Peulich as Chairperson and Cr Athanasopoulos to the KS& R Group as the two Councillor representatives.
Attachments: Attachment A: Kingston Sports and Recreation Reference Group - Terms of Reference Attachment B: Recommended Community Representatives
Crs Peulich/Ronke
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
295 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 203 Bring Forward Projects from 2012/13 Capital Program
Approved by: Rachel Hornsby - General Manager Environmental Sustainability
Author: Brian McNamara – Senior Asset Management Analyst
1. Purpose Bring Forward projects is an option utilised by Council to minimise end of year Carry Over enabling delivery of maximum community benefit from the Annual Capital Works Program.
To obtain Council approval to bring forward the delivery of some projects that are recognised and funded within Long Term Financial Plan and the Capital Forward Plan.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 1 – Infrastructure for a Safe and Active Community
Effective delivery of Annual Capital Works Program
3. Background Council has utilised Bring Forward projects for a number of years as a means of minimising end of year carry over and providing to the community maximum benefit from the Annual Capital Delivery Program. This typically occurred as part of the Mid Year Budget Review process, however this year there are several projects nominated that required earlier confirmation of funding to enable scheduling and delivery of works over Summer and Easter Holiday periods.
4. Summary and Conclusion The report identifies potential Bring Forward funding allocations acknowledged in the Capital Forward Plan for 2012/13 that are deliverable within the 2011/12 financial year.
Is it recommended that $1,260,000 of projects (identified in Section 6 of this report) be approved as Bring Forward expenditure. This will enable effective use of 2011/12 capital allocations, maximise community benefit and reduce end of year carry over.
Is should be noted this is not a request for additional budget, it is simply an opportunity to maximise the community benefits obtained from the 2011/12 Capital Program rather than carry over unspent allocations. A corresponding value of projects undeliverable in 2011/12 will be reallocated to 2012/13.
5. Consultation Bring Forward Projects have been nominated by relevant officers and confirmed by General Managers and the Corporate Leadership Group.
296 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
6. Projects for Bring Forward Consideration The following recommendations of total value $1,260,000 are nominated for Bring Forward.
$60,000 - Warm Season Grasses Allocation sourced from 2012/13 N0239 – Warm Season Grasses
Current 2010/11 allocation of $60,000, Proposed to increase available budget to $120,000 enabling delivery of sport field enrichment treatment to 5 sites. This is a seasonal project that can only be undertaken early summer. Sites to be treated include Keys Road Reserve, Chelsea Recreational Reserve, Edithvale Recreational Reserve, Regents Park and Ben Kavanaugh Res
$200,000 - Melaleuca Drive Community Centre Allocation sourced from 2012/13 Notional Building allocation
Current 2010/11 allocation of $350,000 will deliver required asset renewal works such as new roof, windows and entry foyer, along with asbestos removal, refurbishment of kitchen and full paint of the community centre.
The bring forward of $200,000 will enable completion of broader scope of works to improve the functionality of the facility as one project, minimising disruption to user groups and delivering one whole project rather than dividing it into staged delivery.
Additional benefits to be achieved from the broader scope of works include renovation of toilets to Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) compliant design, auto doors to entry, operable wall in main hall and remodelling front façade of the building. These additional works support the Strengthening Clayton Clarinda Project and the sites capacity to support multiple user groups.
A Tender is currently advertised including options for additional scope of works, closing 1 December 2011. Confirmation of funding will be required to enable engagement of contractor to commence works early 2012.
$350,000 Road renewal programs Allocation sources from 2012/13 Roads Renewal allocation
Council at its 10 October 2011 meeting resolved to reallocate up to $900,000 from Road & Drainage Allocations to purchase property at 81 Albert St. Mordialloc. The Springs Road drainage project was identified to be deferred to 2012/13 to facilitate this purchase.
Bring Forward will enable part funding of the Springs Road Project to be brought back into 2011/12. This will allow the Springs Road project to be tendered and a contractor engaged to commence works prior to end of financial year, spreading the cost of the project over two financial years.
297 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
$350,000 - Mordialloc Community Centre, painting programs and various kitchen improvements – Allocation sourced from 2012/13 N0027-Priority Works from Audit.
Current 2010/11 allocation is $310,000 which is fully commitment to programmed priority works. There are opportunities to take up options for addition works for trade activities over the Summer and Easter holiday periods, when the intended sites are essentially inactive and minimal distribution to users will occur.
The Bring Forward of $350,000 will enable additional priority works to be delivered earlier, including:
o Keeley Park East - kitchen renewal o Bricker Res Pavilion underpinning o Val Connor Pavilion, Aspendale – kitchen renewal o Turkish Assoc Building Mentone - Structural Repair o Painting of 6 Preschool and Maternal Child Heath Service buildings o Replacement of old electrical switchboards at 6 locations
Confirmation of funding is required to enable engagement of contractors to commence works early 2012 to ensure delivery within 2011/12 financial year.
$300,000 - Chelsea Senior Citizens Allocation sourced from 2012/13 Notional Building allocation
The current 2010/11 allocation is $180,000 with a further $180,000 grant application through the Chelsea Renewal Project. The initial scope of works is focused on renewal building works including re-roofing and renovation of toilets and kitchen.
Design plans make allowance for stage 2 development of the building to include remodelling of entry foyer & façade, creation of an office and installation of operable wall to facilitate the utilisation of this building as a multi purpose facility that will accommodate relocation of Chelsea Air Scouts and other potential users. This is a pilot project aligned with Community Services Aged Services review.
A Bring Forward of $300,000 from 2012/13 Notional Building Allocation will enable proposed works to be delivered as one project rather than in 2 stages, reducing disruption to building users and making possible the projects completion by June 2011.
7. Triple Bottom Line Checklist
Environmental – All building and road construction works are undertaken with due consideration to minimisation of waste and where possible use of materials with recycled content in accordance with Council policy.
Social – Bringing forward projects enables the early delivery of prioritized capital programs for the benefit of the community
298 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
o Melaleuca Drv facility is to have two stages merged into one, minimising disruption to current user groups and providing opportunities through functional design improvements to increase capability to accommodate additional users. These works are aligned to the objectives of the Strengthening Clayton Clarinda Project.
o Chelsea Senior Citizens facility is have two stages merged into one, minimising disruption to current user and provide capability to accommodate Chelsea Air Scouts and other additional potential groups. This is a pilot project aligned to objectives of Community Services Aged Services Review
Financial – Bringing forward projects is an effective financial management tool that facilitates achievement of optimal community benefit from the annual capital works allocation o End of year Carry Over is minimised. o Selected priority projects are delivered ahead of schedule. o There is no net budget increase required. o Competitive pricing advantages are achieved through single project delivery rather than staging over 2 or more years.
8. Recommendation That Council resolve to confirm Bring Forward projects to value of $1,260,000 as identified in Section 6 of this report.
Crs Peulich/Athaanasopoulos
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
299 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
10. Community Sustainability Reports
N 204 Individual Development Grant Application with Potentially Perceived Conflict of Interest.
Approved by: Mauro Bolin, General Manager Community Sustainability
Authors: Dominic McCann, Co-ordinator Community Wellbeing Catherine McGarry, Community Grants and Networks Officer
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to seek approval for funding under the Individual Development Grants component of the Community Grants Program 2011-2012 for an application received from a Council staff member.
2. Council Plan This report relates to the Council Plan 2009-2012 Planned Outcome 3 – Healthy, Strong and Connected Communities and in particular Strategy 3.2 – Promoting strong, cohesive and engaged communities.
3. Background
An application under Council’s Individual Development Grants component of the Community Grants Program 2011-2012 has been received from a Council staff member as follows:
André Solomons – Pepsi Challenge Basketball Tournament in USA.
(See Attachments A and B for further details of the application and supporting documentation).
There is a declared conflict of interest associated with this application as André Solomons is a member of staff in his capacity as a casual Vacation Care and Out of School Hours Care Worker.
Council’s Individual Development grants are available to individuals in the areas of arts and culture, sports and recreation, academic achievement, and environmental or humanitarian initiatives. Council received 91 applications in the 2010-2011 funding period. 89 of these applications were successful and shared in a total of $23,976. In the 2011-2012 funding period 70 applications have been received to date with 69 being successful and the remaining one still being processed. Successful applicants may receive up to $500 for an international activity. Holders of Commonwealth Health Care Cards are also entitled to an additional 20%. The current applicant, Andre, is an approved health care card holder and therefore he would qualify for a grant allocation of $600.
300 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.1. Process
Applications are initially assessed by Council’s Grants Officer and approved by the Coordinator Community Wellbeing against established criteria (Attachment C). In addition, applicants are required to submit supporting information including letters from the relevant organising authority in order to verify the event’s bona fide.
Assessment Criteria for the Application:
Criteria Compliant Comments Permanent resident of Dingley resident. Kingston Emerging or established Playing at a high standard in the sport of basketball. athlete Selection by Australian Basketball Services demonstrates high performance at a national level. Officially recognised Member of a post-graduate team from Australian competitive event that has a Basketball Services to participate in US tour. set of rules and a code of conduct at State, National or International level Participating as an individual Member of a post-graduate team from Australian or as part of a team or group Basketball Services. in the development activity
Able to demonstrate a record To be selected by Australian Basketball Services, the of achievement and practice player needs to display that they have the in their field of pursuit ability to compete against the high level teams involved in the competition. Players also need to show a desire to either play college basketball or use this tour to improve themselves and prepare for senior representative teams in Australia. Representing Selected by Australian Basketball Services to Victoria/Australia in a participate in a US tour in order to: recognised 1.Offer Australian players the opportunity to play at State/National/International the highest level and motivate and competition or that is encourage them with their sporting careers. recognised by a relevant 2. Provide opportunities for Australian players to professional body have exposure to US colleges in the hope of obtaining US College basketball scholarships.
As an additional measure, to ensure transparency and to maintain integrity of the process, all applications that present perceived conflicts of interest are presented to Council for its determination.
301 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
4. Summary and Conclusion There is a high proportion of Kingston Council staff members who are also residents of the City of Kingston, resulting in the likelihood that periodically there will be Individual Development Grant applications from residents who have a close association with Council.
An application has been received from a Council staff member as follows:
André Solomons – Pepsi Challenge Basketball Tournament in USA; with the selection process having been undertaken by Australian Basketball Services and drawing from advanced representative players in Australia.
To address any perceived conflict of interest and in alignment with Council guidelines, this application to the Individual Development Grants program is therefore presented to Council for its determination.
5. Consultation The application has been assessed for eligibility at officer level against the guidelines. The application meets the Individual Development Grants criteria. Assessing officers have declared no conflict of interest other than being aware that the applicant is a casual member of staff.
6. Issues Grant funds disbursed to staff members or their families may potentially be perceived by some rate payers as a conflict of interest. It is important that there is a transparent assessment processes to ensure that there is no opportunity for perceived conflicts of interest to have undue influence on the allocation of grants.
7. Recommended Options 7.1 Recommended That Council resolves to approve funding for the applicant via the Individual Development Grants as presented.
7.2 Alternative That Council does not approve the proposed recommendation for funding for the applicant as presented.
8 Triple Bottom Line Checklist Environmental – Not applicable.
Social – The Individual Development Grant demonstrates Council’s support and commitment to its stated values and to individual growth and development in the areas
302 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
of the arts and culture, sport and recreation, and humanitarian and environmental endeavours.
Financial – The 2011-2012 Council budget has an allocation of $24,696 for the Individual Development Grants component of the Community Grants Program. $22,225 of this budget has been expended to date. Successful applicants may receive up to $500 for an international activity. Holders of Commonwealth Health Care Cards are also entitled to an additional 20%. Therefore this applicant would qualify for a grant allocation of $600. There is sufficient budget for all current applications that have been received to date to be awarded.
9. Recommendation That Council approve funding of $600 to André Solomons as the applicant under the Individual Development Grants program.
Attachments: Attachment A - Individual Development Grant 2011 2012 Application –Andre Solomons Attachment B - Individual Development Grant 2011 2012 Application – Supporting Documentation Attachment C - Individual Grants Guidelines
Crs Peulich/Staikos
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
303 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
11. Organisational Development & Governance Reports
N 205 First Quarter Report to the 2009/13 Council Plan
Approved by: Elaine Sowerby, General Manager Organisational Development and Governance
Author: Linda Yeo, Organisational Planning and Performance Officer
1. Purpose To present the 2009-13 Council Plan First Quarter Report (July – September 2011).
2. Background The 2009/13 Council Plan was endorsed by Council on 16 June 2009 and updated in June 2011. The Council Plan sets out Council’s four year vision under five outcome areas, associated strategies and indicators. This quarterly report provides progress against each strategy in the Council Plan for the period July – September 2011.
3. Summary and Conclusion The attached quarterly report highlights achievements against the outcomes and strategies of the Council Plan for the first quarter of 2011/12. Of the 162 actions, 6 actions are completed, 137 actions are on track and 19 actions are expected to have delays or issues rectified by next quarter. No actions are delayed significantly.
4. Consultation Various Managers and Team Leaders are required to provide an update on the progress of actions against strategies in the Council Plan. This is done in consultation with their teams and relevant employees.
5. Issues Highlights and Challenges for July - September During the first quarter of 2011/12, significant progress has been made against the outcomes of the Council Plan. Progress is as follows:
Outcome 1: Infrastructure for a Safe and Active Community
Highlights 1.1.2 - Council has now integrated its Municipal Fire Prevention Plan into the Municipal Emergency Management Plan as an appendix and the stand alone plan no longer exists. Council has created a new joint Fire Management Committee with the City of Greater
304 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Dandenong. The Kingston Fire Management Committee reports directly to the municipal emergency management planning committee.
1.2.2 - The launch of the newly completed playground at Bald Hill Park was held on Tuesday 27 September. 1.2.2 – The Bald Hill Park new playground has been completed. Construction is well underway for Roy Dore Reserve and the consultation has been completed for Reg Marlowe Reserve, Racecourse Reserve.
Challenges 1.1.1 - Ongoing review and implementation of Lease Policy has been delayed due to multiple priorities for property department. It is now intended to go to CLG early 2012.
1.2.1 – The development of the Sportsground Infrastructure Policy paper has been deferred pending the outcome of the sportsground lighting audit information.
1.2.2 - No progress has been made on the Active Leisure Plan for this quarter.
1.2.2 - No progress has been made on the sports specific strategies, for example Kingston Tennis Strategy for this quarter.
Outcome 2: A Sustainable Environment
Highlights 2.1.1 - Second round of consultation currently being undertaken for the Green Wedge Management Plan. This will be incorporated into the final version of the plan.
2.1.3 - The development of the Water Cycle Strategy is near completion.
2.2.1 - Consultation for the Mordialloc Creek Masterplan has been undertaken.
2.3.3 - Revegetation works for Kingston's foreshores have been completed for the 2011 calendar year. Encroachment removals will take place over the summer months. The design phase of the Carrum Rock erosion control wall is expected to go to tender at the end of November 2011 with work commencing after summer in 2012.
Challenges No challenges have been identified for outcome 2
Outcome 3: Healthy, Strong and Connected Communities
Highlights 3.1.3 - Report with proposed future model/direction for The Kind 2 Mind Mental (K2M) Health Expo was presented to CLG/CIS and endorsement was given to outsourcing the delivery of the K2M program. A grant application process was undertaken with a successful applicant.
305 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
3.2.8 - The Arts and Cultural Strategy has been adopted by Council and priorities identified within are now being implemented. This is an ongoing process and will be reviewed annually.
3.2.12 - Community Engagement have recently established a Kingston Have Your Say Website - which is set up to be a central location where all Council's consultations will be listed. A growing database site will sit behind it so that residents and stakeholders are notified of their opportunity to have their say in any newly listed consultation.
Challenges 3.1.9 - No progress has been made to strengthen integration between community sport and health promotion for this quarter.
3.2.9 - Refurbishment of Shirley Burke Theatre has continued this quarter with a target opening date in April 2012 as planned. Benchmarking and development of the operational model for the theatre has been completed and listed for CLG in October 2011. Implementation will commence after the model is approved.
Outcome 4: A Prosperous, Innovative Business City
Highlights 4.1.1 - Implement improvements at Westall Shopping Centre as identified in the 2009 Precinct Condition Report of all neighbourhood and local strip shopping centres, Engineering design completed. Tender documents are being prepared. Work expected to start early 2012.
Challenges 4.1.5 - The Footpath Trading policy is yet to be developed.
Outcome 5: Community Inspired Leaders
Highlights 5.1.4 - Draft customer service strategy and action plan developed. A draft Customer Commitment document is currently out for comment from employees. This will be rolled out to the community with the new Telephony system in March 2012. A number of other customer service improvements are also underway including revision to Council's current website and use of Mobile Technology and Social Media to improve service interaction.
5.3.4 - Comprehensive OHS training Program completed in Library and Education Services (50 staff trained).
5.3.6 - Approval has been gained from CLG for the introduction of a centralised agency and temporary staff advisory brokerage service. 12-week implementation is scheduled to commence 11/11/2011 with meeting scheduled with Comensura and Managers and Team Leaders.
5.3.9 - Unqualified Audit report received for the 2010/11Standard Statements and Financial Statements in September 2011.
Challenges
306 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
5.3.1 - The Family and Children’s Strategy (Formerly the MEYP) will be launched in July 2012. There has been a hold up with this strategy due to policy changes from the Council of Australian Government which is out of our control. Once launched, the Family and Children’s Services Partnership will undergo a review of its purpose and consider any role it may have in the implementation of the strategy.
7 Triple Bottom Line Checklist The Quarterly Report to the Council Plan also notes triple bottom line indicators where a specific quarterly figure is available. By reporting our financial, environmental and social performance we are providing a solid foundation for measuring our progress in these areas.
During the September quarter there was 1.3 kilometres of road renewal and 1.8 kilometres of footpath renewal. There were 436 planning permit applications received and 52 buildings applications received this quarter and 6,176 volunteer hours donated by community members.
Environmental – not applicable Social – volunteers as above Financial – not applicable
8. Recommendation
That Council notes the first quarter report to the 2009/13 Council Plan. Attachment(s): 1. First Quarter Report to Council Plan September 2011 2. Quarterly Standard Statements Report September 2011
Crs Peulich/Ronke
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
307 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 206 Contract 11/48 – Provision of Planned & Ad-hoc Printing
Approved by: Elaine Sowerby, General Manager Organisational Development & Governance
Author: Rick Rigoni, Program Leader, Communications and Public Affairs
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the outcome of the Provision of Planned & Ad- hoc Printing tender and to seek Council’s approval to appoint a preferred supplier panel.
Approval is sought to appoint the panel for a period of two (2) years with options to extend the contract for two additional one (1) year periods at Council’s discretion.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 5 – Community Inspired Leaders Strategy 5.3 – Sound Governance and responsible financial leadership Action 5.3.6 - Establish the capability to achieve effectiveness and efficiency improvements in key organisational processes including: implement a centralised publishing advisory and brokerage service for the organisation
This report seeks to establish preferred supplier print panels for both Planned and Ad-hoc printing, a foundation that underpins the establishment of a successful centralised publishing advisory and brokerage service for the organisation. It will also lead to cost savings across the organisation and improved, consistent printed quality of publications.
3. Background In early 2011, Council bought its publication and design service in-house with the view to improving the consistency and quality of printed communications by developing a centralised publishing service for the organisation.
This also identified the opportunity to review print expenditure across the organisation and develop a system to reduce expenditure and effectively monitor Council’s printing requirements. Currently staff across the organisation liaise with a large number of different print suppliers, offering differing rates and outputs of variable quality.
The goal of the print tender is to appoint a panel of preferred supplier through which we can achieve best value in quality and cost for all print services. The benefits of having the panels of preferred print suppliers for Kingston will be:
streamlined print processes across the organisation cost savings for Council guarantee of consistent quality greater understanding of sustainable print practices that reduce our impact on the environment a wholistic understanding of Council’s print requirements and opportunities for further refinement.
308 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
4. Summary and Conclusion The tender was publicly advertised and attracted fifteen (15) submissions. After a thorough process involving a qualitative assessment of the tender submissions, detailed pricing analysis and reference checking, it is recommended that the following panel of suppliers for print be established (refer to the confidential Attachment A for full tender evaluation matrix):
Vega Press, Notting Hill, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Print Bound, Oakleigh South, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Prominent Press Pty Ltd, Shepparton, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Currency Communications, Brunswick, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Direct Mail and Marketing (DMM), Dandenong South, Victoria (ad-hoc only)
It is noted that the same four suppliers emerged the highest for both the planned and ad-hoc category, which illustrates the versatility and value for money offered by these suppliers. As such it is recommended that the one panel is appointed to cover both categories. A fifth supplier is recommended for the panel for Ad-hoc print jobs only as the bulk of Council’s print work falls in the ad-hoc category and an additional panel member offers extra flexibility during peak periods. It is proposed that the preferred supplier panel is appointed for an initial period of two (2) years, commencing 1 January 2012, with the option to extend the contract for two (2) additional one (1) year periods at Council’s discretion.
5. Issues
5.1 Scope Prior to commencement of the tender process, officers conducted an organisational-wide audit and identified a range of print requirements, some which were deemed out of scope for this particular tender:-
Ad-hoc printing – unplanned, inconsistent publications, often event or project based (eg invitations, fact sheets and posters for a consultation) Planned printing – ongoing, regular printing jobs (such as the six-weekly staff newsletter, Annual Report) Stationery – out of scope for this tender due to high volumes and specialised nature Council Agendas – out of scope as tender already being undertaken for this printing Kingston Your City – out of scope as contract already in place for this printing.
5.2 Assessment of Tender
The audit process identified the key areas across the organisation that would be required to utilise the preferred supplier panels and representatives from those areas were invited to be part of the Project Steering Committee. The role of the committee was to assist with the development of the tender specifications and assessment criteria (including weighting). Submissions were assessed against the following weighted criteria:-
Quality Assessment Demonstrated quality of work 25% Bona fides and past performance 15% Demonstrated environmental responsibility 15% Innovation and Technology 5%
309 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
TOTAL 60%
Price Assessment Tendered Price/Rates 40%
TOTAL 100%
Tenders were assessed by a subset of the Steering Committee including:-
Quality Assessment: Rick Rigoni, Program Leader, Communications & Public Affairs - Chair Person Darryn Paspa, Manager Procurement & Contracts - Panel Member / Probity Officer Kim Forbes/Fiona McQueen, Waves Leisure Centre - Panel Member
With specialist input and advice from: Emily Boucher, Team Leader, Environment Planning – Environmental Responsibility Mel Boomgardt, OH&S Contract Assessor, Governance & Performance Planning – OH&S Requirements
Price Assessment: Rick Rigoni, Program Leader, Communications & Public Affairs - Chair Person Darryn Paspa, Manager Procurement & Contracts - Panel Member / Probity Officer
The tender was publicly advertised on Saturday 6 August 2011 and closed on Thursday 1 September 2011. A total of fifteen (15) submissions were received.
Tenders were received from the following providers of print services: Print Bound, Oakleigh South, Victoria Prominent Press Pty Ltd, Shepparton, Victoria RB Print, Moorabbin, Victoria Copywise Pty Ltd, Victoria Camten Graphics, Rowville, Victoria Kenmore-dmp, Clayton North, Victoria CJM Graphics, Moorabbin, Victoria Mystique Printing, Rowville, Victoria Spectra Litho (Aust) Pty Ltd, Knoxfield, Victoria Vega Press, Notting Hill, Victoria Direct Mail and Marketing (DMM), Dandenong South, Victoria Currency Communications, Brunswick, Victoria Diplaris Print Image (DPI), Moorabbin, Victoria Complete Colour Printing, Cheltenham, Victoria Corporate Express, Alexandria, NSW
Paragraph 8.3 of the Tender Conditions explicitly stated that “Council is not interested in engaging print brokering firms to manage the process on its behalf, as it has specialist capabilities in-house.” During the initial qualitative assessment of the tender submissions, it was identified that four (4) tenderers were offering to supply Councils needs through brokering/third party arrangements and as such these tenders were excluded from further consideration.
310 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The four (4) tenders not considered further at this stage were: Corporate Express, Alexandria, NSW Copywise Pty Ltd, Victoria Kenmore-dmp, Clayton North, Victoria CJM Graphics, Moorabbin, Victoria
After a thorough process involving a qualitative assessment of the tender submissions, detailed pricing analysis and reference checking, it is recommended that the following print supplier panel be established (refer to the confidential Attachment A for full tender evaluation matrix):
Vega Press, Notting Hill, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Print Bound, Oakleigh South, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Prominent Press Pty Ltd, Shepparton, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Currency Communications, Brunswick, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) Direct Mail and Marketing (DMM), Dandenong South, Victoria (ad-hoc only)
6 Triple Bottom Line Review
6.1 Financial Based on information available and obtained during the initial audit process regarding the organisation’s current print requirements, it is estimated that the appointment of the panels will achieve worthwhile cost savings for Council. Initial estimates are in the order of $57,000, however with more accurate tracking savings are estimated to be much higher.
The appointment of the panels and implementation of print management system will allow officers to establish mechanisms to accurately track all print expenditure through panels from this point forward, providing opportunities for further analysis and refinement in the future.
Through Council’s planned and ad-hoc print tender we have established a matrix of pricing reflecting the bulk of Council’s print requirements. This matrix will serve as a reference point and will be used to monitor quotes from panel members, ensuring that pricing remains consistent. The tender process undertaken also ensures Council’s compliance with its Procurement and Purchasing Policy and both the requirements of s186 and the Best Value Principles of the Local Government Act 1989.
6.2 Social The outcome of the tender process will ensure that fair, equitable and appropriate use of the panel members can be achieved. Introduction of a panel will ensure quality expectations and brand compliance are easy to implement and manage.
6.3 Environmental The tender evaluation process included an assessment of the status of the Tenderers’ Environmental Management Systems to ensure that financial savings were balanced with environmental considerations. The use of the print panel will help gain a clearer picture of all Council’s print requirements with the view to being able to work towards continually reducing our print requirements in favour of more environmentally friendly digital formats.
311 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
7. Recommendation That Council: 1. Resolve to accept the tenders of the following suppliers to establish a preferred print supplier panel for planned and ad-hoc printing for a period of two(2) years with options to extend the contracts for two (2) additional one (1) year periods at Council’s discretion:
• Vega Press, Notting Hill, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) • Print Bound, Oakleigh South, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) • Prominent Press Pty Ltd, Shepparton, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) • Currency Communications, Brunswick, Victoria (planned and ad-hoc) • Direct Mail and Marketing (DMM), Dandenong South, Victoria (ad-hoc only)
2. That the CEO or delegate be authorised to exercise the available options to extend the contracts for two (2) additional one (1) year periods subject to review and further reports from the Manager Communications & Public Affairs.
Attachments (Confidential): TRIM 11/118130 Attachment A – Tender Evaluation Matrix
Crs Peulich/Staikos
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
312 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 207 Victorian Electoral Commission Draft Election Plan for Council Elections in 2012
Approved by: Elaine Sowerby – General Manager Governance and Performance Planning
Author: Phil DeLosa – Program Leader Governance
1. Purpose
The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) has released a draft Election Plan for the Council Elections in 2012. The Election Plan is open for consultation until 5 December 2011. This report details officer consideration of the Electoral Plan and a recommended response for Council consideration.
A copy of the draft Election Plan is provided as Attachment 2.
2. Council Plan
Planned Outcome 5 – Community Inspired Leaders The 2012 Election is an important event in promoting community leadership.
3. Background
The Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC) has conducted all Local Government elections in Victoria since 2004, including elections for all 79 councils in 2008. The VEC has been the sole provider of local council election services in Victoria during this period.
Following the conduct of the elections in 2008, the VEC conducted an extensive debriefing program and more recently has conducted workshops to consider the required election services for the conduct of the 2012 Local Government elections.
The VEC is planning on the basis that it will be required to conduct elections for all 79 councils in 2012, and has identified that preparation must commence now.
The VEC is confident that it can provide a high quality service to all councils in 2012 if required to do so.
The purpose of the draft Election Plan is to involve councils early in VEC planning for the October 2012 elections and to invite feedback to the VEC’s proposed strategy.
313 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The document outlines:
the VEC’s proposed timeline for election preparations, responding to tenders and negotiating contracts, the election period and post election period;
the opportunities that concurrent council elections provide, balanced with some challenges to be addressed;
a description of the service that the VEC proposes to offer councils; and where the VEC is proposing to change timelines/products from previous elections together with reasons why the change is suggested.
In providing this document to councils now, the VEC understands that it is making available what it proposes to offer councils in responding to tenders or requests for quotation. However, the VEC believes it is necessary to communicate this information to councils as early as possible to maximise cost, efficiency, quality and minimise risk.
4. Summary and Conclusion
The table in Attachment 1 outlines the issues presented in the draft Election Plan; includes comments on the issues by Council officers and actions required by Council and/or deadlines to be met.
Most of the issues presented by the VEC have been generally noted and supported, however any specific matters requiring Council attention are detailed in Section 6 of the report below.
5. Consultation
5.1 Presented to Councillors for their input as electoral representatives.
5.2 Consultation held with Rates & IT to understand parameters and needs of voters roll production.
6. Issues
6.1 Council to contract for the provision of electoral services.
Similarly to 2008, Council will be considering the appointment of the MAV to act as Council’s agent in the tendering of electoral services. A report regarding this matter will be presented to the December Ordinary Council Meeting.
This will provide early opportunity for a contract to be awarded to the preferred tenderer.
6.2 Roll Production
The issues associated with the production of the voters roll include: Maximising the quality of the Roll Software upgrades to be implemented by February 2012
314 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Ensuring at least 80% of CEO list records contain date of birth Nominating a person to resolve date issues
The Program Leader Governance will be the officer nominated to deal with these issues if the VEC were awarded the contract.
6.3 Method of Voting
The issue of postal versus attendance voting should be resolved by Council, this will be included in the December report.
6.4 Advertising and Communications Program
Section 4.3.9 of the draft Election Plan details optional requirements for a:
Reminder advertisement Multi language leaflet
These will be included in tender requirements.
6.5 Election Office
The location of the election office will be selected in consultation with Council.
A requirement of the VEC is that at least 400 square metres of office space is to be provided. The space would be required from July to November 2012.
Office space was provided in the Council Offices for the 2008 election. The space was provided as part of a lease agreement prepared by Council. The space was leased for $30,000.
Council has available space on the 5th floor at this stage. This would be a consideration in the awarding of the tender.
6.6 Counts to be conducted at Council Offices
This would be preferable and would be discussed further if the VEC was awarded the contract.
6.7 Declaration of the Result
At the 2008 elections, Council requested that the Declaration occur immediately once the result is known.
This would be included as a requirement in the tender and that the declaration to be conducted at the Council Offices in Cheltenham.
6.8 Compulsory Voting
Council is obliged to enforce the compulsory voting provisions of the Local Government Act.
315 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
It is recommended that this requirement be included in the tender document as a responsibility of the successful tenderer.
6.9 Cost of Contract
The contract for the 2008 Election was awarded to the VEC at a cost of $406,761.00. A similar amount will need to be provided in the 2012/13 Budget (depending on contract negotiations).
Payment of the contract was done in two stages in 2008: 95% of the fee after the declaration of the result 5% of the fee after completion of all obligations under the agreement.
7. Options
Nil
8. Triple Bottom Line Checklist
Financial: Budgetary provision is anticipated for the conducting of the Elections. Expenditure in the order of $400,000 plus GST occurred for the elections in 2008.
Social: Elected Councillors set strategic & policy directions for the community. Elections are an important part of the community’s democratic process.
9. Recommendation That Council note the Victorian Electoral Commission’s advice concerning their Draft Election Plan and acknowledges the early planning required for the 2012 Election.
Attachment 1: 11/116930 Council response to Victorian Electoral Commission Draft Election Plan Attachment 2: 11/120953 Draft Election Plan (VEC document)
Crs Staikos/Peulich
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
316 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 208 Assembly of Council Report
Approved by: Trish Smyth, Acting General Manager Organisational Development and Governance
Author: Nicola Wright, Governance Officer
1. Purpose This report provides copies of the Assembly of Council records in line with the Local Government Act amendments which came into effect on 24 September 2010 to support openness and transparency of Governance processes.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 5 – Community Inspired Leaders Strategy 5.3 – Sound governance and responsible financial leadership
The reporting of Assembly of Council meets the requirements of the Local Government Act.
3. Background An amendment to the Local Government Act now requires that Assembly of Council records are reported to the next possible Council Meeting. This amendment seeks to promote openness and transparency of Council decision making.
4. Summary and Conclusion Attached are the Assembly of Council records completed for the month in the lead up to the Council Meeting.
The report is provided in line with the Local Government Act section 80A which requires that the record of an assembly must be reported to the next practical ordinary Council meeting and recorded in the minutes of that meeting.
5. Issues The Chief Executive Officer must ensure that a written record is kept of every assembly of Councillors. These records must be reported to the next Ordinary Council Meeting
The written record only needs to be a simple document that records: - The names of all Councillors and staff at the meeting, - A list of the matters considered, - Any conflict of interest disclosed by a Councillor, and - Whether a Councillor who disclosed a conflict left the room.
A standard Assembly of Council form will generally be used as the record for the purposes of the Act. These form the attachment to the report. At times however to avoid duplication
317 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011 minutes of some meetings may be attached as the record of the Assembly if they include the required information, including disclosures.
The Act does not require details of a conflict of interest disclosure at an assembly to be recorded.
6. Recommendation That Council notes the contents of this report.
Attachments: Assembly of Council forms
Crs Staikos/Peulich
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
318 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
N 209 Expenditure of Ward Funds Schedule
Approved by: Elaine Sowerby, General Manager Organisational Development & Governance
Author: Nicola Wright, Governance Officer
1. Purpose The purpose of this report is to seek formal Council approval of the expenditure of Ward funds in accordance with the ‘Expenditure of Ward Funds Policy’.
2. Council Plan Planned Outcome 5 – Community Inspired Leaders Strategy 5.3 – Sound governance and responsible financial leadership
The reporting of Ward Fund Grants meets the requirements of the Local Government Act.
3. Background The Council, on 23 March 2009, adopted a revised policy for the expenditure of ward funds.
Each financial year during a Council term, Kingston Councillors are allocated $6,000 in ward funds for utilisation in accordance with the adopted policy. Part 2 of the policy, which outlines the limitations on the expenditure of ward funds, specifies that Councillors may propose that ward funds be allocated for initiatives that aim to:
“a) assist a recognised community group (including sporting/recreational body, arts/cultural group, charity, youth group, pre-school, playgroup, senior citizens club, historical society, friendship group, environmental group, trader organisation or toy library) which provides a service, program or activity used by or of benefit to Kingston residents;
b) assist an individual who is a resident of the City of Kingston to participate in a sporting, recreational or cultural activity, or other pursuit of a personal development nature, or who is in necessitous circumstances;
c) Support an event or activity which will be of benefit or interest to residents of the City of Kingston;
d) Support the key external themes of enhancement of the physical environment or the development of community well being, identified in the Council Plan.”
It should be noted that the policy also enables a Ward Councillor to propose that his / her ward funds be expended outside of the Councillor’s specific ward, provided that the ward funds are expended for the benefit of the Kingston community, and that one or more of the criteria set out above are met.
319 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
The table below lists the Councillor requests for the expenditure of ward funds received since the last Ordinary Council Meeting.
Table of Councillor requests:
Request Amount Councillor Ward Initiative Date $ Cr Arthur North Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Athanasoplouos Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Paul Peulich North Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Steve North Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Staikos Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Ron Central Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Brownlees Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Lewis Central Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Dundas Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Rosemary Central Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 West Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Daniel South Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Moloney Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr John Ronke South Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
320 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Cr Trevor South Mordialloc Rotary Club – LEEP 14/11/2011 $200 Shewan Program at Mordialloc Neighbourhood House (Purchase of flag)
Cr Steve North Cheltenham Secondary College – 21/11/2011 $235 Staikos Awards for Presentation Night
Cr Paul Peulich North Cheltenham Secondary College – 21/11/2011 $235 Awards for Presentation Night
Cr Arthur North Cheltenham Secondary College – 21/11/2011 $235 Athanasopoulos Awards for Presentation Night
Cr Steve North DVCA – Room Hire 23/11/2011 $300 Staikos
Recommendation
That Council approve the expenditure of ward funds in accordance with the table of Councillor requests.
Crs Peulich/Shewan
That Council approve the expenditure of ward funds in accordance with the table of Councillor requests including a further request from Cr Peulich for $1000 to the Moorabbin Senior Citizens. Carried
321 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
12. Corporate Services Reports
N 210 Investment Policy Report – September 2011 Quarter
Approved by: Paul Franklin, General Manager Corporate Services
Author: Bernard Byrden, Manager Finance
1. Purpose In accordance with Council’s adopted Investment Policy, the purpose of this report is to advise Council where Kingston’s working capital is currently invested. Kingston’s funds that are not immediately required for operating purposes are invested in accordance with the relevant legislative requirements and policy requirements, with consideration of risk and at the most favourable rate of interest available to it at the time, for that investment type, while ensuring that our liquidity requirements are being met.
2. Background Council’s Investment Policy that was adopted by Council in October 2008 requires Council to be updated on our investment portfolio each quarter and the General Manager Corporate Services to be updated monthly. This monthly report compares our investments as at 30th September 2011 compared to the overall portfolio limits specified in the Investment Policy.
3. Summary and Conclusion At the 30th September 2011 Council had a total of $31.2 million held in Cash and Investments. These funds were held in the following categories:
September 2011 September 2010 Category Amount ($’000) Amount ($’000) Unrestricted Cash / Working Capital 5,424 (3,746) Restricted Assets – Asset Development Reserve 6,661 5,617 Restricted Assets – Long Service Leave 6,900 6,600 Restricted Assets – Trust Funds and Deposits 12,697 14,027 Total 31,682 22,498
322 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
$60,000 CASH LEVELS
$50,000
$40,000 2011/12 Total 2010/11 Total $30,000 2011/12 Restricted 2010/11 Restricted $20,000 Amount $ ('000) Amount $10,000
$-
r r r e e e ry ry July b a to mb mb April May June August tember c ve March O o ce Janua ep N e Febru S D
4. Discussion Cash has been invested in the following ways:
September 2011 September 2010 Type of Investment Amount ($’000) Amount ($’000) Cash at Bank 6,682 3,748 Cash At Call 4,000 5,000 Funds Invested (Fixed term investments) 21,000 14,750 Total 31,682 23,498
Council had funds of $21.0 million invested as at 30th September 2011. The investments have been made for fixed terms periods from 3 month to 12 months. The interest rates achieved as at 30th September 2011 were in the range of 5.60% to 6.50% p.a.
The attached Investment Schedule details our investments by credit rating, by bank and by maturity and demonstrates compliance with the Investment Policy. The schedule shows that 76% of funds are invested in AA or AAA rated investments (Prescribed minimum is 75%). The majority of funds are invested as follows: Commonwealth Bank 33% and Westpac 29%. All are below the 60% maximum required by the Investment Policy. 100% of funds are invested for less than 1 year.
5. Portfolio Performance
323 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
AVERAGE INTEREST RATE 2011/2012
7.00%
6.00%
5.00%
4.00% Avg Interest Rate City of Kingston 3.00%
2.00% 90 Day Bank Bill Rate + 20pts INTEREST RATE INTEREST 1.00%
0.00%
y r r ry y er e e a ch ne Jul r pril u ugust tob mb ruary A Ma J e Ma A Janu Oc Feb September NovembDec
AVERAGE YTD MONTH
The average interest rate 30th September 2011 is 5.65% (Sep10 – 5.45%) which is 73pts ahead of the average 90 Day Bank Bill Rate of 4.92% (Sep10 – 4.80%) and 53pts ahead of the investment policy target of the average 90 Day Bank Bill Rate plus 20pts of 5.12% (Sep10 – 5.00%). The favourable rate variance is expected to reduce over the coming months as we invest in a lower rate environment.
YTD AVERAGE INTEREST RATE COMPARISON
5.80% 5.65% 5.60% 5.45% 5.40% 5.20% 5.12% 5.00% 4.92% 2010/11 5.00% 4.80% 4.80% 2011/12 4.60% 4.40% 4.20% Average Interest Rate City of 90 Day Bank Bill Rate + 20pts 90 Day Bank Bill Rate Kingston
The September 2011 YTD average interest rate of 5.65% is 20pts higher than Sep10 and the 90 Day Bank Bill Rate of 4.92% is 12pts is than last year.
324 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
INTEREST INCOME 2011/12 $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 Actual Interest $800,000 Received on Investments (YTD) MONTH $600,000 Budgeted Interest Received on $400,000 Investments (YTD) $200,000 $-
ly st r h il y e u u er r a J g b rc un tober mber nuary a Ap M J e M Au c Ja Oc e February Septembe Novem D AMOUNT
Interest Income received on investments at 30th September 2011 totals $436k, which is $80k favourable to the budget of $356k. Given recent movements in interest rates, interest income is expected to be on budget at the end of the 2011.12 financial year:
Average Weighted Interest Rate by Institution (Fixed Term Deposits)
6.60% 6.50% 6.45% 6.40%
6.20% 6.01% 6.00% 5.85% 5.88% 5.81% 5.80%
5.60%
5.40% Bank of Bendigo Westpac CBA NAB RaboBank Cyprus Bank
As at 30th September 2011 the average weighted interest rate per institution ranges from 5.81% to 6.50%. 5. Recommendation That Council note that funds at 30th September 2011 are being invested in line with the risk management profile prescribed in Council’s Investment policy.
Attachment: Investment schedule – TRIM 11/106982
325 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
Crs Peulich/Shewan
That the recommendation be adopted. Carried
326 City of Kingston Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes 28 November 2011
14. Urgent Business
Crs Staikos/Ronke That an item of Urgent Business relating to the confidential motion from the Special Meeting of Council on 14 November 2011 be considered as an item in camera. Carried
15. Items in Camera
Crs Staikos/Ronke
That in accordance with the provisions of section 89(2) of the Local Government Act 1989, the meeting be closed to members of the public for the following items - N 211 as it relates to a matter that would prejudice persons involved in the process - Urgent Business as it would prejudice the Council Carried
The meeting was closed to members of the public at 10.01pm
Crs Athanasopoulos/Peulich
That the meeting be opened to members of the public. Carried
The meeting was opened to members of the public at 10.08pm
There being no further business the meeting closed at 10.08pm
Confirmed……………………………………His Worship, The Mayor 19 December 2011
327