city of greater geelong of greater geelong agenda development hearings panel meeting no 542 to be...

CITY OF GREATER GEELONG

AGENDA

DEVELOPMENT HEARINGS PANEL

MEETING NO 542

TO BE HELD AT BROUGHAM STREET OFFICE (GROUND FLOOR)

100 BROUGHAM STREET, GEELONG ON THURSDAY, 20 APRIL 2017 AT 5.00 P.M.

1. Committee Members Present 2. Officers Present 3. Apologies 4. Confirmation of Minutes 5. Declaration of Interest 6. Matters for Consideration 7. Late Reports 8. Next Meeting Joanne van Slageren

Chair

20 April 2017 Committee Membership Distribution:

J van Slageren (Chair) Dr K Alexander, Administrator

H Griffiths L Gardner, Administrator

J Hurse P Dorling, Administrator

J Bryce P Bettess, Director - Planning & Development

G Russell - Communications and Marketing

M Nigido - Building Services

Town Planners

I N D E X Application No.

Subject Address: Proposed Use: Page No.

PP-86-1998/C 2/94-96 Pakington Street,

GEELONG WEST Use as a Tavern and Waiver of Car Parking - Amendment to Extend Liquor Licensed Area, Associated Further Reduction of Car Parking and Deletion of Condition 8

3

PP-1230-2016 79-119 Mitchell Street,

PORTARLINGTON Subdivision of Land into Two (2) Lots

23

Development Hearings Panel Meeting No. 542 Date: 20 April 2017

Application No: PP-86-1998/C

Applicant: Cloud 9 Bar & Lounge

Subject Land: 2/94-96 Pakington Street, GEELONG WEST

Owner: Mandy Jane Awramenko

Zone: Commercial 2 Zone

Overlays: Nil

Existing Use: Tavern

Proposed Use: Use as a Tavern and Waiver of Car Parking - Amendment to Extend Liquor Licensed Area, Associated Further Reduction of Car Parking and Deletion of Condition 8

2/96 PAKINGTON STREET, GEELONG WEST

Indicates

Objectors

Subject Site


Summary

The subject site is located on the east side of Pakington Street, across from the Pakington Strand complex in Geelong West. The business is known as Cloud 9 Bar and mostly caters for functions with finger food available.

The bar is located on a lot with two other premises arranged in a horseshoe shape with a central car park space serving all three businesses, accessed via a crossover to Pakington Street. Cloud 9 Bar has a front façade directly to the lot boundary in the south west corner of the lot, abutting the Pakington Street footpath. The entry to the bar is located facing to the internal car park. The bar has a maximum capacity of 150 patrons allowed under the current Liquor Licence issued by VCGLR.

The subject site and surrounding land along Pakington Street (east side) is located in the Commercial 2 Zone. Land to the east beyond this is located in the Neighbourhood Residential one, Schedule 3, and is predominantly developed with dwellings. To the west and north, the land is used commercially mostly for retail sales. No overlays affect the subject site although the surrounding land is covered by a variety of Heritage Overlays schedules.

The site was granted a permit for a Restaurant in 1998, to which this permit was amended in 2010 to change the preamble to allow use as a Tavern and a reduction of car parking that was not formally applied for under the 1998 assessment.

The amendment did not change the hours of operation, but made the addition of a waste management condition and a condition for the control of noise, to be in accordance with SEPP N-2.

The original (and then amended) permit also included a condition for car parking:

o 8. The areas set aside for car parking as shown on the endorsed plans shall be made available for such use and shall not be used for any other purpose to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

The application seeks approval for the extension of the extent of “Red Line” area to allow for the consumption of liquor outside the venue, in a portion of the existing car park. The operator seeks this extension to allow patrons who wish to smoke to be accommodated in an area within the property boundary and be able to consume alcohol, instead of standing on the footpath.

The proposed red line extension will remove four and a half car park spaces from the common car park area. The area is proposed to measure 5m x 10m with the space being delineated with café style street furniture and will include the use of tables and chairs in the space.

In this instance the application is seeking a further reduction of car parking under Clause 52.06, and an extension of the area for consumption of alcohol under clause 52.27 of the planning scheme.

The application was advertised by letters to adjoining and opposite owners and occupiers, and via a sign on the site. Three objections were received, those being from an adjoining owner/occupant, a fellow tenant of the complex, and from the complex owner.


The application was referred externally to Victoria Police, and internally to Community Development, Environmental Health, and Traffic. Concerns have been raised by the units and Police for the proposal given there is evidence that the existing amenity is being impacted by the function facility.

The reduction of car parking (and removal of condition 8) has been considered to be acceptable in the location where alternative car parking options exist in the evening hours.

The extension to the red-line area for outdoor smoking and consumption of liquor is considered to be likely to have a negative impact on the amenity of the area with the existing patron management at the site being poor. It is considered that introduction of an additional space for the consumption of liquor will not be the solution to the poor patron management that is resulting in existing amenity impacts.

This impact to the amenity of the area and the addition of the lack of approval from the land owner, and lack of support from Victoria Police results in the proposal being recommended for refusal.

Recommendation

That the Responsible Authority having considered all matters which the Planning and Environment Act, 1987, requires it to consider, decides to refuse to Grant a Planning Permit for the Use as a Tavern and Waiver of Car Parking - Amendment to Extend Liquor Licensed Area, Associated Further Reduction of Car Parking and Deletion of Condition 8 at 2/94-96 Pakington Street, GEELONG WEST VIC 3218 on the following grounds: 1. The proposal is not in accordance with the decision guidelines of Clause 52.27

and Clause 65.01 of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme for the consideration of the impact on amenity of the area and is consider a poor planning outcome. It is considered that the proposal will cause detriment to the amenity of the area, especially the residential area, through increased patron noise and current inadequate patron management.

Report

The Site & Locality

The subject site is located on the east side of Pakington Street, across from the Pakington Strand complex in Geelong West. The business is known as Cloud 9 Bar and mostly caters for functions with finger food available. The bar is located on a lot with two other premises being a small Asian supermarket and an “opportunity” shop. The premises area arranged in a horseshoe shape with a central car park space serving all three businesses, accessed via a crossover to Pakington Street. Cloud 9 Bar has a front façade directly to the lot boundary in the south west corner of the lot, abutting the Pakington Street footpath. The entry to the bar is located facing to the internal car park.


The internal layout of the bar is quite open with low seating and tables around the walls/frosted windows, with the bar and small kitchen located in the south-east part of the space. The endorsed layout plan of PP-86-1998/A indicates that there is one male, one female, and one disabled access toilet for the maximum capacity of 150 patrons allowed under the current Liquor Licence issued by VCGLR. The subject site and surrounding land along Pakington Street (east side) is located in the Commercial 2 Zone. Land to the east beyond this is located in the Neighbourhood Residential one, Schedule 3, and is predominantly developed with dwellings. To the west and north, the land is used commercially mostly for retail sales. No overlays affect the subject site although the surrounding land is covered by a variety of Heritage Overlays schedules. See planning scheme maps below.

Image 1: Zones and overlays to subject site and surrounding land


Image 2: Aerial of subject site

Image 3: Streetscape context of Cloud Bar. Site History The site was granted a permit for a Restaurant in 1998, to which this permit was amended in 2010 to change the preamble to allow use as a Tavern and a reduction of car parking that was not formally applied for under the 1998 assessment. The amendment did not change the hours of operation, but made the addition of a waste management condition and a condition for the control of noise, to be in accordance with SEPP N-2. The original (and then amended) permit also included a condition for car parking:

8. The areas set aside for car parking as shown on the endorsed plans shall be made available for such use and shall not be used for any other purpose to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


Chronology 86/1998 Change of Use to Restaurant. Permit issued 24/02/1998. 911/1999 Construct Alterations to Existing Restaurant. Permit issued. 1428/2006 Change of Use to Licensed Tavern and Waiving of Car Parking. Withdrawn. 86/1998/A Amend Restaurant permit to Tavern and formal Reduction of Car Parking. Permit Issued 18/11/2010. 86/1998/B Amend Redline Area and further reduction of car parking requirements.

Application Lapsed 18/07/2016. Proposal

The application seeks approval for the extension of the extent of “Red Line” area attributed to the tavern use, to allow for the consumption of liquor outside the venue, in a portion of the existing car park. The operator seeks this extension to allow patrons who wish to smoke to be accommodated in an area within the property boundary, instead of standing on the footpath, being outside the property boundary. It appears that the operator wishes to provide an outdoor smoking area where patrons can also consume liquor. The proposed red line extension will remove four and a half car park spaces from the common car park area. The area is proposed to measure 5m x 10m with a garden bed separating the space from the Pakington Street footpath. The operator has indicated that the space will be delineated with café style street furniture and will include the use of tables and chairs in the space.


Image 4: Red line extension submitted with the application.

Image 5: Area to be delineated with similar temporary barriers As such, the application seeks an extension of the licenced area, reduction of car parking requirements and the deletion of condition 8 from the permit, as the car park spaces set aside in the original endorsed plan will no longer be available for car parking.


Greater Geelong Planning Scheme

Definition and Nesting

The use of a Tavern is defined in Clause 74 as “Land used to sell liquor for consumption on the premises. It may include accommodation, food for consumption on the premises, entertainment, dancing, amusement machines, and gambling”. The use is nested under the heading of Retail Premises at Clause 75.11. Zone

The subject site is located within the Commercial 2 Zone. Purpose of zone is:

To implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

To encourage commercial areas for offices, appropriate manufacturing and industries, bulky goods retailing, other retail uses, and associated business and commercial services.

To ensure that uses do not affect the safety and amenity of adjacent, more sensitive uses.

Overlay

No overlays affect the land. Permit required clause and condition

Pursuant to Clause 52.06-3, a permit is required to reduce (including reduce to zero) the number of car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5.

Pursuant to Clause 52.27, a permit is required to use land to sell or consume liquor if the area that liquor is allowed to be consumed or supplied under a licence is to be increased.

Restrictive Covenant

No restrictive covenant or Section 173 Agreement applies to the land. Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) The Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007 specify the circumstances in which a Cultural Heritage Management Plan is required for an activity or class of activity. No CHMP is required for this proposal. Coastal Inundation and Erosion

Clause 13.01-1 of the SPPF requires the Responsible Authority to consider the potential coastal impacts of climate change. Strategies include:

In planning for possible sea level rise, an increase of 0.2 metres over current 1 in 100 year flood levels by 2040 may be used for new development in close proximity to existing development (urban infill).

Plan for possible sea level rise of 0.8 metres by 2100, and allow for the combined effects of tides, storm surges, coastal processes and local conditions such as topography and geology when assessing risks and coastal impacts associated with climate change.

Consider the risks associated with climate change in planning and management decision making processes.


This proposal does not require consideration under this clause. Landfill Gas Risk Assessment Before deciding on a Planning Permit application, a Responsible Authority is required to consider, amongst other things:

Any significant effects the responsible authority considers the environment may have on the use or development [S 60(1) of the PEA].

Clause 13.01-1 of The State Planning Policy Framework which aims to ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely.

This proposal does not require consideration under this clause. Officer Direct or Indirect Interest No Council officers have any direct or indirect interest in the matter to which this report relates, in accordance with Section 80 (C) of the Local Government Act. State Planning Policy Framework

The Objectives of Planning In Victoria Planning Schemes in Victoria must seek to achieve the objectives of planning in Victoria as set out in Section 4(1) of the Planning & Environment Act 1987. These objectives are:

To provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use and development of land.

To provide for the protection of natural and man-made resources and the maintenance of ecological processes and genetic diversity.

To secure a pleasant, efficient and safe working, living and recreational environment for all Victorians and visitors to Victoria.

To conserve and enhance those buildings, areas or other places which are of scientific, aesthetic, architectural or historical interest, or otherwise of special cultural value.

To protect public utilities and other assets and enable the orderly provision and coordination of public utilities and other facilities for the benefit of the community.

To facilitate development in accordance with the objectives set out in the points above.

To balance the present and future interests of all Victorians. Clause 17.01-1 Business Objective To encourage development which meet the communities’ needs for retail, entertainment, office and other commercial services and provides net community benefit in relation to accessibility, efficient infrastructure use and the aggregation and sustainability of commercial facilities.


Local Planning Policy Framework

Municipal Strategic Statement

Clause 21.07-3 Retail Objectives

To facilitate the development of vibrant and viable retail activity centres in accordance with the Geelong Retail Activity Centre Hierarchy included at Clause 21.07-8.

To ensure all major retail developments, and out of centre developments, provide a clear net community benefit.

To avoid the risk of exacerbating problem gambling. Local Planning Policies

There are no local policies for consideration. Particular Provisions Clause 52.06 - Car Parking

Purpose

To ensure that car parking is provided in accordance with the State Planning Policy Framework and Local Planning Policy Framework.

To ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the demand likely to be generated, the activities on the land and the nature of the locality.

To support sustainable transport alternatives to the motor car.

To promote the efficient use of car parking spaces through the consolidation of car parking facilities.

To ensure that car parking does not adversely affect the amenity of the locality.

To ensure that the design and location of car parking is of a high standard, creates a safe environment for users and enables easy and efficient use.

In accordance with the table at Clause 52.06-5, a rate of 0.4 car park spaces is required per patron permitted for the Tavern use. The current maximum patrons is 150 with the application not seeking any increase to this number, but is seeking to decrease the number of car park spaces available for communal use by the tenants at the site. The car parks proposed to be remove are also nominated in the endorsed plans for PP-86-1998/A as being set aside for the Tavern use approved by the permit, and this is reinforced by condition 8 of the permit that requires them to be available for use at all times. PP-86-1998/A (Sept 2010) previously granted a waiver (reduction) of car parking, stating:

Car parking for a tavern/bar is determined on the basis of the bar and lounge floor areas, with parking specified at the table at Clause 52.06-5 as: 60:100sq.m. of bar area 30:100sq.m. of lounge area Given the total lounge area proposed is 81sq.m. and the total bar area is 10sq.m., a total of 30 car spaces are required to be provided. Given the current use as a restaurant, a credit of 18 car parking spaces exists for the premises, and therefore 12 spaces are sought to be waived…..


Given today’s policy determines a rate of 0.4 spaces per patron, a total requirement under the scheme would be 60 spaces. The previous assessment waived 30 spaces, requiring a further 30 spaces to be waived (reduction of) in this application, where no car parking is to be supplied. It is noted that car park spaces are still available in the communal car park area, which in theory are allocated to the other tenants, but there is no specific line marking or signage determining which spaces are for which tenancy. Of note however, Cloud 9 Bar generally does not share the same operating hours as the other tenants, however there is some overlap with the convenience store who operate until 8pm. Clause 52.27 – Licensed Premises Purpose

To ensure that licensed premises are situated in appropriate locations.

To ensure that the impact of the licensed premises on the amenity of the surrounding area is considered.

Decision guidelines Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

The impact of the sale or consumption of liquor permitted by the liquor licence on the amenity of the surrounding area.

The impact of the hours of operation on the amenity of the surrounding area.

The impact of the number of patrons on the amenity of the surrounding area.

The cumulative impact of any existing licensed premises and the proposed licensed premises on the amenity of the surrounding area.

Clause 65 Decision Guidelines Because a permit can be granted does not imply that a permit should or will be granted. The responsible authority must decide whether the proposal will produce acceptable outcomes in terms of the decision guidelines of this clause. 65.01 Approval of an application or plan Before deciding on an application or approval of a plan, the responsible authority must consider, as appropriate:

The matters set out in Section 60 of the Act.


The purpose of the zone, overlay or other provision.

Any matter required to be considered in the zone, overlay or other provision.

The orderly planning of the area.

The effect on the amenity of the area. Referrals

INTERNAL


Environmental Health ISSUES/COMMENTS We are concerned about the possibility of this proposal to generate noise in an area that is noise sensitive, particularly of an evening when traffic and other noise in the vicinity has declined. The residents backing on to this site are very close noise receptors, and we have had concerns about noise emanating from this venue in the past. Care needs to be taken from management to ensure noise is well managed so that a nuisance is not caused by this premises. We are concerned that the nature of the noise may be particularly disruptive, as the applicant has indicated that patrons are often intoxicated, so may be more raucous than less inebriated people. As shouting and loud talking for example can be disruptive to residents trying to sleep, I believe that a permit to use the car park as an outdoor drinking / smoking area until 11pm is unreasonable. As a maximum this end time should be 10pm. The applicants remarks about current patron behaviour are concerning particularly in relation to the impact this would have to the amenity of the area. Ongoing issues with noise and destruction of property and the like could constitute a nuisance under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act and even a breach of our Local Law, so I would strongly encourage the applicants to ensure this is addressed. Given these remarks by the applicant, I am worried that allowing this outdoor smoking area could cause a nuisance or affect the amenity of the area. In 2017, there are new smoking bans coming into play that may affect these premises, where smoking will be banned in outdoor eating and drinking areas, which may again push patrons onto the footpaths to smoke so could be a consideration for Council as well as the applicant. Lastly, if the applicant plans to serve food or drinks in this area, they should discuss this prior with our department to ensure that their Food Act registration suitable covers this activity. Response The Environmental Health Unit have raised concerns for the protection of amenity in this location where residential uses are directly located to the rear of the site, and in some case within the Pakington Street area as shop top housing. Likewise, disruption to amenity can include unruly behaviour of patrons affecting other businesses operating in the area. The Unit have made their concerns known and this will be taken into consideration. Of note, impending changes to the smoking laws may render this proposal somewhat void if smoking is banned in outdoor areas set aside for consumption of food and drinks. Community Development This application raises some concerns regarding the effects this venue is having on the amenity of the area. By the applicants own admission in Planning Permit Application Section 7, the applicant indicates that they are already breaching their existing license by;


Serving patron until intoxication

Littering of the streets

Making noise in the street

Urinating in the street

Causing damage to property

The application raises the question: Should the smoking area be closed from 11pm where would the patrons go for the remaining hours of trade?

Recommended Permit Conditions The following planning permit conditions are recommended to be included (if one is issued). Considering that there are residents in close proximity (15 meters) to these premises, Community Development does not support the smoking area operating until 11.00pm. The potential impacts to the neighbourhood amenity by way of noise and nuisance would not be supported. Community Development would consider the external smoking area being utilised until 10.00pm The operation of the business from the premises must take all reasonable action such as not to impact on the amenity of the surrounding area as listed below. Amenity is defined as the quality that an area has of being pleasant and agreeable. The amenity of an area can be made worse by: • Unacceptable levels of patron noise, including music • Parking problems • Excessive traffic – hoon behaviour • Nuisance or vandalism • Build-up of rubbish • Indecent or offensive behaviour • Drunkenness on the street. The operators of the business have a legal responsibility to ensure the operation of the licence does not detract from the amenity of the area. Response The Community Development Unit have also noted concern with the proposal, echoing Environmental Health Units comments regarding protection of amenity and suggesting a maximum use time of 10pm. Community Development have offered conditions for any permit that might issue, which includes the installation of acoustic fencing to control noise associated with the use. Whilst the intent of the recommended condition is understood, it is impractical to apply given the temporary use of the space, which is proposed to be returned to car parking during daytime periods. Traffic Unit 1) Proposed Development The proposal is to modify a section of an outdoors private parking area and to use as a smoking area for existing Tavern. It is claimed by the applicant that consent is given by all affected parties. Consent must be provided in writing and be part of the permit documentation. 2) Car Parking Provision Existing parking allocated to the facility is proposed to be used for the outdoors smoking area and a waiver has been requested for the provision of the parking required.


Statutory Parking demand is 0.4 per patron permitted (0.4 x 150 = 60) carparking spaces for the existing patrons. The proposal does not include increase to patrons permitted. It proposes to use existing parking spaces allocated to the facility for an outdoors smoking area. A request for the waiver of the required parking is been submitted by the applicant. A Traffic Impact Assessment, has not been submitted by the applicant in support of the request. The applicant is claiming that there is no impact to the parking as the facility has been operating with 150 patrons for a number of years without adversely affecting existing parking conditions due to the opportunity for multiple purpose trips at this shopping strip location during regular business hours (9 am to 5pm), and the reduction of parking occupancy at existing parking areas after business hours. There is no indication as to the staff numbers at this venue. However, it is unlikely for patrons to make a dedicated trip to the area to visit the facility. It is more likely for customers already in the area for business to attend the venue. Patrons visiting the area to patronise this venue after business hours will have able parking at their disposal as parking occupancy decrease. Waiver of parking spaces to be used as an outdoors smoking area is supported provided that the proposed area is provided with appropriate safety protection for the patrons using the area. 3) Alfresco smoking area –Design Requirements As this is an active carpark area, the smoking area must be provided with vehicle impact protection. Vehicles using the area are expected to drive into the parking area, park, and when the driver is ready to leave, the vehicles are reversed and driven out into the road environment. Vehicle movements can be hazardous and appropriate protective barriers must be provided to ensure an out-of-control vehicle can be stoped by the barriers before the occupants of the smoking area are hurt. A fully detailed, dimensioned and comprehensive plan of an appropriate barrier, designed by a suitably qualified and experienced engineer, fully enclosing the proposed smoking area must be provided by the applicant prior to a permit be issued for this proposal. Recommended Permit Conditions / Ground Of Refusal 4) Conclusion The waiver of the parking used for the smoking area is supported as multi-purpose trips are expected to be generated at this shopping strip during the day and Tavern patrons will be able to use existing parking in the area after hours.


The application will be supported subject to the following conditions: 1. Amended Plans: Before the Permit is issued, 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 generally in accordance with the plans submitted with

the application but modified to show but not be limited to:

a. Consent must be provided in writing by all affected parties and be part of the

permit documentation.

b. A fully detailed, dimensioned and comprehensive plan of an appropriate

barrier for the designated use, designed by a suitably qualified and

experienced engineer, fully enclosing the proposed smoking area

c. Lighting type and location for the smoking area

d. Disabled access provision to the smoking area and the rest of the facility.

Response The traffic Unit have assessed the proposed reduction of car parking requirements, noting that the operating times are different to the majority of the businesses in the area. Sufficient parking is available on street in this area of Pakington Street, and within the Pakington Strand complex across the road from the subject site. As such, the reduction of carparking is considered acceptable. However, the Traffic Unit has noted that it is prudent to receive the written consent from all other tenants of the complex to ensure their acceptance of the proposed use in the communal space. In addition, the Traffic Unit have raised concern for the use in a car park area, requiring that sufficient protection be made available in the form of bollards, or something similar, designed by a qualified person. This is considered to be an appropriate condition, and if a permit is granted, this condition will be applied with the use not being able to commence until the installation is complete.


EXTERNAL Victoria Police

Since the provision of this referral response in October 2016, a further Victoria Police report regarding an incident at the venue has been forwarded to the Planning Department. On the 4th March 2017, Victoria Police attended the venue after witnessing intoxicated patrons in the street. The report stated in part:


SINGH (venue manager) and staff spoken to inside the premises regarding

RSA and them breaching amenity issues regarding the vomit around the premises.

PIN to be issued for breaching condition of licence - amenity

(SINGH denied any security were on duty but stated one of the bar tenders

was watching the door, watching patrons etc. Security are required when

there is a function and music higher than background level music; cannot

confirm if security were required for the night as didn’t witness music higher than background levels)

Response

Victoria Police have also raised concerns regarding protection of amenity of the area. Whilst they have not formally stated that they object to the proposal, they note that the venue has had occurrences of behaviour by patrons that is considered to be a breach of their liquor licence. The planning officer contacted the officer who completed the written response to Council to further discuss the circumstances and if Victoria Police wished to “object”. The officer stated that they did not object to the issue of a planning permit for the proposed outdoor red-line extension, but when given the opportunity to comment by VCGLR, they would be objecting to the issue of an extension to the Liquor Licence. In light of this conversation, it appears that the applicant’s proposal is likely to not be supported, regardless of if the amendment to the planning permit is supported by the Responsible Authority. Amendment of the Proposal Prior to Public Notification The application was not amended prior to public notification. Public Notification The application 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 and pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 the following forms of advertising were undertaken:

Notices were sent to owners and occupiers of adjoining land (including opposite)

A3 sign(s) was placed on the land Amendment of the Application Following Public Notification The application was not amended following public notification.


Objections

The proposal received three (3) objections. The objections have been summarised and commented on below.

Effect on other tenants;

Rubbish left in footpath/street;

Noise from loud music and patrons;

Smoking area in carpark will not stop problems, but will exacerbate them;

Owner of land has not given permission to the applicant to alter the car park arrangement.

Comment

Whilst only three objections have been submitted, it is considered that those concerned for the impacts that the proposal may have are key stakeholders. A tenant has objected with concerns regarding their shared car parking arrangement. It is believed that the hours of operation of the two premises do overlap for a period, and as such the tenant has taken the opportunity to be heard. With regard to the planning scheme context, the application has requested a full reduction of car parking requirements to which it has been found to be acceptable in this location. Acceptance under the planning scheme however, does not remove the concern of the objector with regard to the operation of the private car park space. In addition to the tenant objecting, the land owner has also objecting, stating that the permit applicant/ bar operator has not been given approval to use the shared car parking space. The owner indicated that as long as there were concerns from other tenants, he would not be agreeing to the proposed use of the land. The third objection was received from the adjoining land owner/occupier to the south. The objector lives and works in the building and has existing concerns for the operation of the bar, being noise from patrons and music, and rubbish left in the vicinity of the bar footpath and street. The objector is concerned that allowing external alcohol consumption in the smoking area will not make the issues better but exacerbate them. It is noted that there is conditions on the existing planning permit and liquor licence that should control the issues of rubbish, noise control and patron management; however the issues are occurring currently, regardless of the conditions. Assessment

The proposal has two reasons for requiring a planning permit, being to increase the red-line area under the Liquor Licence provisions, and to reduce the car parking requirements of the use under the car parking provisions of the planning scheme. With regard to the car parking reduction requested as part of the proposal, the traffic unit have considered that the current supply with in the locality, at the times of the bar operation, is sufficient to accommodate the generation. The current bar operates as a function facility where it is likely that patrons will arrive at the intended start time of the function and generally leave at the finish time of the function. The functions are generally for celebrations of birthdays, engagements and alike, where attendees are likely to drink alcohol. It is considered that a portion of attendees will arrive together as passengers of other attendees, or in transport such as taxis.


With regard to the decision guidelines of the Car Parking Provisions, it is considered that the detriment received by others as a result of the removal of the car parks, and in general, a full waiver of car parking to this premises will be negligible. It is most likely that those driving to the venue will be able to find on-street parking spaces available, or will be able to utilise the Pakington Strand car park space nearby. Concerns raised by other tenants who share the common car park space will need to be managed by the property owner through some agreement outside of the planning scheme controls. The proposal requires planning approval to extend the red-line area that currently applies to the land under their VCGLR licence. The Liquor Licence Provisions at Clause 52.27 requires planning to consider:

The impact of the sale or consumption of liquor permitted by the liquor licence on the amenity of the surrounding area.

The impact of the hours of operation on the amenity of the surrounding area.

The impact of the number of patrons on the amenity of the surrounding area.

The cumulative impact of any existing licensed premises and the proposed licensed premises on the amenity of the surrounding area.

As has been indicated by Victoria Police, and the Responsible Authority’s owner internal Community Development and Environmental Health Units, there are current concerns that the operation of this bar is currently affecting the amenity of the surrounding area. This has also been noted by one of the objectors. The applicant has made their own statements regarding the impact the operation has on the amenity of the area, stating the current circumstance requires patrons to stand on the footpath to smoke, “making noise, littering (cigarette butts, glasses, urinating, etc) and on some occasions causing damage, up until we close at 12.30 a.m.”. The applicant believes they could better manage the situation by supplying a smoking area in the car park. In addition to providing a smoking area, the applicant seeks to have this area of 50sqm licenced and provide chairs and tables. It is considered that this is not an appropriate format to control the amenity issues of unruly patrons that disrespect the amenity of the area, including causing damage in some instances. What has been proposed is a “beer garden”, not a small area where persons can have a cigarette and then return to the function. The proposed extension of red-line and general set-up of chairs and tables invites patrons to spend time in the outdoor area, which at 50sqm can comfortably accommodate 50 people at any one time. This circumstance will create an additional noise impact on the locality which does include residential interfaces, despite itself being located in a commercial zone. The current planning permit and VCGLR liquor licence both include conditions that seek to control the impacts upon the amenity of the locality. Given the comments from Victoria Police and one of the objectors it appears these conditions are not being complied with by the operator. It is recommended that the operator re-visit the conditions and undertake steps to ensure that the function facility can operator within the parameters. This may require permanent use of security personnel, and perhaps more stricter adherence to the guidelines for responsible service of alcohol. Successfully complying with the conditions may result in the requested amendments to the red-line area and removal of car parking facility not being necessary.


As stated earlier, the property owner has objected to the proposal and has stated that they have not given the operators’ permission for the change to the car parking circumstances. Further, Victoria Police have raised concerns and a liquor licensing officer has stated verbally that is likely that they will not support the proposal when referred to them by VCGLR. Legislative Issues

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme are the relevant documents under which Council must consider this application. Conclusion

The proposal seeks approval for the extension of the red-line area, reduction of car parking and deletion of condition 8 of the existing permit that allows for the use of a Tavern on the site. The reduction of car parking is acceptable in this location where evening car parking demand is low and on-street and alternative parking spaces are nearby. However the proposal has the high likelihood of causing detrimental impact to the amenity of the locality through the production of noise associated with outdoor consumption of alcohol. The proposal is put forward as a solution to the current amenity impacts of the function facility which it is considered can be addressed through adherence to the current liquor licence and planning permit conditions. The operator is encouraged to take responsibility of the actions of patrons, and it is believed that the proposed outdoor area will not achieve a positive outcome where patron management continues to be poor. Regardless of the planning scheme provisions, it is considered a poor planning outcome to issue a planning permit that cannot be acted upon. At this point in time, the operator does not have the approval of the property owner to make the proposed changes, and it is unlikely that they will receive approval from VCGLR where the Victoria Police is not supportive of the proposal due to amenity issues. As such the proposal is recommended for refusal. Report prepared by Leanne Stockley


Application No: PP-1230-2016

Applicant: All General Surveying Pty Ltd

Subject Land: 79-119 Mitchell Street, PORTARLINGTON

Owner: C Arabatzis and M Arabatzis

Zone: Farming Zone (FZ)

Overlays: Special Building Overlay (SBO)

Existing Use: Vacant Land with a Hay Shed

Proposal: Subdivision of Land into Two (2) Lots

79-119 MITCHELL STREET, PORTARLINGTON

Subject Site

Indicates

Objectors


Summary

The subject site is two vacant parcels of land located at 79-119 Mitchell Street, Portarlington. The site is bordered by Calhoun Road to the east, Mitchell Street to the south, farm land to the south west and residential allotments to the north and north-west. The overall area is 11.18 hectares. There is some existing vegetation in the middle and southern portion of the site as well as a hay shed.

The proposal seeks to realign the boundary of the site to create two allotments, with Lot 1 being 5.39 hectares and Lot 2 being 5.79 hectares.

The subject site is situated within a Farming Zone and is covered by a Special Building Overlay.

The application was advertised by two signs on site and 38 letters to adjoining occupiers. The application received one objection questioning whether the land can be built on and how many dwellings could be built on the site, as well as what is proposed to be built on the land.

The application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme and has been found to be inconsistent with Clause 11.05-3 (Rural Productivity), Clause 21.07-5 (Rural Areas), Clause 22.05 (Agriculture, Rural Dwellings and Subdivision) and Clause 35.07 (Farming Zone).

It is recommended that a refusal to grant a planning permit be issued for this application.

Recommendation

That the Responsible Authority, having considered all matters which the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires it to, decides to Refuse to Grant a Planning Permit for the Subdivision of Land into Two (2) Lots at 79-119 Mitchell Street, Portarlington on the following grounds: 1. The proposal is inconsistent with the purpose of Clause 11.05-3 (Rural

Productivity), Clause 14.01-1 (Protection of Agricultural Land), Clause 21.07-5 (Rural Areas), Clause 21.14 (The Bellarine Peninsula), Clause 22.05 (Agriculture, Rural Dwellings and Subdivision) and Clause 35.07 (Farming Zone) in that the subdivision would exacerbate conflict between the residential zoned land to the north and compromise future agricultural activity on the land.

2. The proposal does not demonstrate how the re-subdivision is related to

farming activity other than resulting in two more uniform allotments. 3. The proposal would create lots with unsafe flooding conditions for vehicular

egress/access and people.

Report

The Site & Locality

The subject site is located at 79-119 Mitchell Street, Portarlington and is bordered by Calhoun Road to the east, Mitchell Street to the south, farm land to the south west and residential allotments to the north and north-west. The subject site is an open parcel of land that is undeveloped with the exception of hay shed.


The subject site has a northern boundary of 437.77 metres, a southern boundary of 427.28 metres, a western boundary of 314.90 metres and an eastern boundary of 277.29 metres with an overall area of 11.18 hectares. There is some existing vegetation in the middle and southern portion of the site and there appears to be an open drain that is almost horizontal to the rear boundary of 48 Seaforth Drive. The land is formally known as Lot 1 on Title Plan 235443Q, which is the larger of the two allotments, and Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision 045033.

Figure 1: Existing outline of the boundary of Lot 1 on the subject site (Places Weave, 2017).


Figure 2: Existing outline of the boundary of Lot 2 on the subject site (Places Weave, 2017). The subject site is situated within a Farming Zone and is covered by a Special Building Overlay. The land to the north and North West is zoned General Residential Zone – Schedule 2 and covered by a Design Development Overlay – Schedule 14.


Figure 3: Zone and Overlays applicable to the subject site and surrounding allotments (Places Weave, 2017). Proposal

The proposal is for a boundary realignment that will create two lots with the following dimensions: Lot 1 – A northern boundary of 437.77 metres, a southern boundary of 429.52 metres, a western boundary of 157.45 metres and an eastern boundary of 113.65 metres with an overall area of 5.39 hectares. Lot 2 - A northern boundary of 429.52 metres, a southern boundary of 427.28 metres, a western boundary of 157.45 metres and an eastern boundary of 113.65 metres with an overall area of 5.79 hectares. The existing hay shed is likely to be retained on Lot 1 and no vegetation is proposed to be removed as part of this application. Greater Geelong Planning Scheme

Definition and Nesting

Subdivision is defined in the Subdivision Act 1988 as the division of land into two or more parts which can be disposed of separately A lot is defined as a part (consisting of one or more pieces) of any land (except a road, a reserve, or common property) shown on a plan, which can be disposed of separately and includes a unit or accessory unit on a registered plan of strata subdivision and a lot or accessory lot on a registered plan.


Zone

Clause 35.07 – Farming Zone

The subject site and surrounding properties to the south, east and west are located in the Farming Zone. The purpose of the Farming Zone is to:

implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

provide for the use of land for agriculture.

encourage the retention of productive agricultural land.

ensure that non-agricultural uses, particularly dwellings, do not adversely affect the use of land for agriculture.

encourage use and development of land based on comprehensive and sustainable land management practices and infrastructure provision.

protect and enhance natural resources and the biodiversity of the area. Overlay

The subject site and surrounding properties to the south and west are located in the Special Building Overlay. The purpose of the Special Building Overlay is to:

implement the State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies.

identify land in urban areas liable to inundation by overland flows from the urban drainage system as determined by, or in consultation with, the floodplain management authority.

ensure that development maintains the free passage and temporary storage of floodwaters, minimises flood damage, is compatible with the flood hazard and local drainage conditions and will not cause any significant rise in flood level or flow velocity.

protect water quality in accordance with the provisions of relevant State Environment Protection Policies, particularly in accordance with Clauses 33 and 35 of the State Environment Protection Policy (Waters of Victoria).

Permit required clause and condition

Pursuant to Clause 35.07 of the Farming Zone, a permit is required to subdivide land. Pursuant to Clause 44.05-1 of the Special Building Overlay, a permit is required to subdivide land. Restrictive Covenant

There are no restrictions on either title. Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP) The Aboriginal Heritage Regulations 2007 specify the circumstances in which a cultural heritage management plan is required for an activity or class of activity. A two lot subdivision is an exempt activity and a CHMP is not required.


Coastal Inundation And Erosion: Clause 13.01-1 of the SPPF requires the Responsible Authority to consider the potential coastal impacts of climate change. Strategies include:

In planning for possible sea level rise, an increase of 0.2 metres over current 1 in 100 year flood levels by 2040 may be used for new development in close proximity to existing development (urban infill).

Plan for possible sea level rise of 0.8 metres by 2100, and allow for the combined effects of tides, storm surges, coastal processes and local conditions such as topography and geology when assessing risks and coastal impacts associated with climate change.

Consider the risks associated with climate change in planning and management decision making processes.

The subject site is located within close proximity of existing urban development. Council’s data indicates that the site is unlikely to be affected by the potential coastal impacts of climate change at 2040. Landfill Gas Risk Assessment Before deciding on a Planning Permit application, a Responsible Authority is required to consider, amongst other things:

Any significant effects the responsible authority considers the environment may have on the use or development [S 60(1) of the PEA].

Clause 13.01-1 of The State Planning Policy Framework which aims to ensure that potentially contaminated land is suitable for its intended future use and development, and that contaminated land is used safely.

The EPA has adopted the “Best Practice Environmental Management, Siting, Design Operation and Rehabilitation of Landfills” (September 2010) or “Landfill BPEM.”. The Landfill BPEM identifies that:

Risks associated with landfill gases may occur for at least 30 years post-closure.

Appropriate buffer distances must be maintained between the landfill and sensitive land uses. The BPEM recommends a 500 metre buffer for landfills that contained putrescible waste and 200 metres for landfills that contained non-putrescible waste.

Where the recommended buffers are unavailable, it must be demonstrated that risks are suitably mitigated.

All buildings and structures and associated infrastructure should be considered. The BPEM specifies that development undertaken within a buffer distance of up to 500 metres may be at risk. As the subject site is not located within 500 metres of an identified former landfill site, a risk assessment is not required. Officer Direct Or Indirect Interest: No Council officers have any direct or indirect interest in the matter to which this report relates, in accordance with Section 80 (C) of the Local Government Act. State Planning Policy Framework


11.05-3 - Rural Productivity Objective To manage land use change and development in rural areas to promote agriculture and rural production. Strategies Prevent inappropriately dispersed urban activities in rural areas. Limit new housing development in rural areas, including:

Directing housing growth into existing settlements.

Discouraging development of isolated small lots in the rural zones from use for single dwellings, rural living or other incompatible uses.

Encouraging consolidation of existing isolated small lots in rural zones. Restructure old and inappropriate subdivisions 14.01-1 – Protection of Agricultural Land The objective of Clause 14.01-1 is:

To protect productive farmland which is of strategic significance in the local or regional context.

Strategies include:

Ensure that the State’s agricultural base is protected from the unplanned loss of productive agricultural land due to permanent changes of land use.

Take into consideration regional, state and local, issues and characteristics in the assessment of agricultural quality and productivity.

Permanent removal of productive agricultural land from the State's agricultural base must not be undertaken without consideration of its economic importance for the agricultural production and processing sectors.

In considering a proposal to subdivide or develop agricultural land, the following factors must be considered:

The desirability and impacts of removing the land from primary production, given its agricultural productivity.

The impacts of the proposed subdivision or development on the continuation of primary production on adjacent land, with particular regard to land values and to the viability of infrastructure for such production.

The compatibility between the proposed or likely development and the existing uses of the surrounding land.

Assessment of the land capability.

Subdivision of productive agricultural land should not detract from the long-term productive capacity of the land.

Where inappropriate subdivisions exist on productive agricultural land, priority should be given by planning authorities to their re-structure.

Local Planning Policy Framework

Municipal Strategic Statement


21.05-7 - Flooding The objective of Clause 21.05-7 of the Municipal Strategic Statement is to:

protect floodplains.

minimise the potential for damage and risks to public safety and property from flooding.

Strategies

Ensure that land use and development is compatible with flood prone land.

Discourage land use and development in floodplains where flood function may be impaired.

Recognise flood hazards associated with waterways and ensure the free passage of water whilst protecting development from flooding impacts.

21.07-5 - Rural Areas The objective of Clause 21.07-5 of the Municipal Strategic Statement is to:

Support the use of the northern, western and southern rural areas for productive agriculture.

Ensure that rural areas provide an attractive setting through the preservation of a farmed rural landscape.

Protect and enhance the Bellarine Peninsula as a productive rural area with highly significant landscapes based on farming and environmental features.

Strategies

Maintain rural land in large and productive parcels, in accordance with the schedules to the farming zones.

Minimise non farming land uses in rural areas.

Ensure that any non farming land uses will not compromise farming activity in the area.

Ensure development in rural areas respects the farmed landscape character, particularly significant landscapes identified through the Coastal Spaces Landscape Assessment Study.

Ensure that new dwellings do not compromise the productive potential of land and are associated with the productive agricultural use of the land.

21.14-2 - The Bellarine Peninsula The objective of Clause 21.14-2 includes:

To protect and enhance the rural and coastal environment on the Bellarine Peninsula and maintain non-urban breaks between settlements.

To provide for sustainable industrial, commercial, retail, agricultural and tourism development in designated locations, to service the wider Bellarine community.


Strategies include:

Protect rural and coastal environments from inappropriate urban encroachment.

Ensure that development outside of settlement boundaries (as shown in the Structure Plan maps included in this clause) does not compromise the rural, environmental and landscape values of the non-urban breaks or longer term growth opportunities.

Local Planning Policies

22.05 - Agriculture, Rural Dwellings and Subdivision This policy applies to all land zoned Farming. Policy Basis The rural areas of the City of Greater Geelong are highly valued for their contribution to the economy, liveability and amenity of the whole municipality. Agriculture is and will continue to be the main rural land use in all non urban parts of the municipality, including on the Bellarine Peninsula. Agriculture plays a role in the economic prosperity of the City, both directly through production and indirectly through its contribution to the rural landscape and character of the area and their relationship with tourism and livability. Land use and development in rural areas must be carefully managed to ensure that the ongoing use of land for agriculture is supported and the farming character of the area is preserved. The construction of dwellings and subdivision not related to farming activity and inappropriate subdivision is an issue in Geelong’s rural areas and has the potential to compromise future agricultural activity, farmed rural landscape and is contrary to the purpose of the zone and the vision for the area. The objective of Clause 22.05 is:

To support the ongoing use of the rural areas for agriculture and to preserve their farmed rural landscape.

To ensure that the development of dwellings and excision of existing dwellings in the Farming Zone is consistent with the purpose of the zone and the utilisation of the land for sustainable rural uses.

To protect agricultural production and the normal operation of agricultural activities by preventing land use conflicts, particularly conflicts associated with the introduction of non-farm related dwellings into rural areas.

To limit development of new dwellings on prime or high quality agricultural land. Referrals

Engineering Services Unit Council’s Engineering Services Unit are the relevant floodplain management authority for the Special Building Overlay and are a recommending referral authority pursuant to s55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987. A flood report was received that, in summary, objected to the application and commented, “Proposed re-subdivision would create a lot with unsafe flooding conditions for vehicular egress/access and borderline unsafe flooding for people.” Comment:


A ground of refusal is recommended consistent with the advice received. AMENDMENT OF THE PROPOSAL PRIOR TO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: The application was not amended prior to public notification. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: The application 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 and pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 the following forms of advertising were undertaken:

38 Notices were sent to owners and occupiers of adjoining land (including opposite)

2 x A3 sign(s) were placed on the land One objection was lodged with Council. AMENDMENT OF THE APPLICATION FOLLOWING PUBLIC NOTIFICATION The application was not amended following public notification. Objection

whether the land can be built on and how many dwellings could be built on the site as well as what is proposed to be built on the land.

Comment

The application seeks to re-subdivide the land and no buildings or dwellings are proposed. Assessment

Pursuant to the Farming Zone, a permit is required to subdivide land. Within the Bellarine area (as defined in the Schedule to the Farming Zone), the area of each lot must be at least 30 hectares. However, Clause 35.07-3 states that a permit may be granted to create smaller lots if the subdivision is the re-subdivision of existing lots and the number of lots is not increased. An agreement under Section 173 of the Act must be entered into with the owner of each lot created which ensures that the land may not be further subdivided so as to increase the number of lots. The agreement must be registered on title. This gives scope for Council to consider the proposal. Before deciding on an application to subdivide land in the Farming Zone, Council must consider, amongst other things:


General issues


The capability of the land to accommodate the proposed use or development, including the disposal of effluent.

How the use or development relates to sustainable land management.

Whether the site is suitable for the use or development and whether the proposal is compatible with adjoining and nearby land uses

Agricultural issues

Whether the use or development will support and enhance agricultural production.

Whether the use or development will permanently remove land from agricultural production.

The potential for the use or development to limit the operation and expansion of adjoining and nearby agricultural uses.

The capacity of the site to sustain the agricultural use.

The agricultural qualities of the land, such as soil quality, access to water and access to rural infrastructure.

Any integrated land management plan prepared for the site.

The applicant submitted the following information with regards to Clause 35.07:

• This proposal is for a boundary re-alignment of two existing lots that are fenced in together as pasture. • As it is a subdivision of existing lots and the number is not increased, the lots created may be smaller than the area specified for the land in the schedule. • V8227 F686 is a very small parcel having dimensions of approximately 42m wide and 201m long (0.845ha) and currently able to be transferred separately. If the owner was to sell the parcel currently: o it is most likely that a planning permit to build a dwelling would not be granted by Council because of the parcels location and ‘low lying’ position on ‘unproductive’ farming land based on its size. o The likelihood of being able to develop an intensive agricultural practice that makes the parcel commercially viable is unlikely. • As a result the owner sees fit under the provisions of clause 35.07-3 of the Farming Zone to re-align the boundary between V8227 F686 and V10794 F418 to make both properties more appealing to intensive primary production in having 2 parcels of 5.5 hectares approximately each. The proposal is considered to result in a poorer outcome when compared to the existing lot configuration having regard to the Farming Zone and associated policies. Clause 22.05 (Agriculture, Rural Dwellings and Subdivision) applies to all land zoned Farming and supports the purpose of the Farming Zone. The Policy Basis at Clause 22.05 states: Land use and development in rural areas must be carefully managed to ensure that the ongoing use of land for agriculture is supported and the farming character of the area is


preserved. The construction of dwellings and subdivision not related to farming activity and inappropriate subdivision is an issue in Geelong’s rural areas and has the potential to compromise future agricultural activity, farmed rural landscape and is contrary to the purpose of the zone and the vision for the area.

Figure 4: Aerial and Zoning map of the surrounding allotments that make up the information in Table 1 (Places Weave, 2017). As shown in Figure 4, Lot 1 on the subject site is the largest of the surrounding allotments and Lot 2 is also the smallest of the surrounding allotments. The parcels of land that make up the allotments surrounding the subject site are believed to have been old crown allotments of a uniform size being 4.04 hectares with an average Lot size in the surrounding area being 4 to 5 hectares. It is acknowledged that this allotment could be sold as a separate parcel. Whilst the applicant suggests the two parcels created would be more appealing to intensive primary production, Council considers the two lots would lessen the potential for the land to be used in a manner consistent with the purpose or decision guidelines of the Farming Zone. In its current form, the site presents and is used as one allotment, used for pasture production.


The proposed lot configuration and associated internal fencing between lots would tend to limit buffers available to the northern allotment from residential land further to the north. Any agricultural activities on the northern allotment would be ‘squeezed’ to the north rather than providing the level of flexibility that the current configuration affords. The impact from agricultural activities on the land such as noise, dust, chemicals, machinery and odours would tend to increase as the width of the land is decreased. The lot to the south of the site towards Mitchell Street would contain nearly all vegetation present on the land. This would tend to lessen the productive capacity of this lot, and the ability to work around vegetation that comes with the current configuration. Whilst the amount of native vegetation on the land is not known, considerable effort would be required to increase the productive capacity of the southern lot. The proposal is also considered to be contrary to relevant policies of the State Planning Policy Framework and Municipal Strategic Statement, including Clauses 11.05-3 (Rural Productivity) and 21.07-5 (Rural Areas). These clauses seek to promote agriculture and rural production. Amendment C352 to the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme, whilst not yet a seriously entertained amendment, seeks to reference the latest (2016) Portarlington and Indented Heads Structure Plans in the planning scheme. It is noted that the strategic direction of this land as a “rural break” is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future.

Figure 5: Page 15 of the Portarlington Structure Plan, September 2016 with the subject site in the north east corner with the notation Retain as rural break to Indented Head. As advised by the floodplain manager, the proposal is not supported in relation to public safety. The flood depth over the property is likely to range between 0-0.50 metres and the flood depth affecting access to the property is likely to reach 0.45 metres. The majority of peak depth of flooding on the site is considered to occur within the northern section of the subject site and the realignment of the property boundary may result in increased risk of flooding concentrated on the northern parcel.


Legislative Issues

The Planning and Environment Act 1987 and the Greater Geelong Planning Scheme are the relevant documents under which Council must consider this application.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the proposed boundary realignment at 79-119 Mitchell Street, Portarlington is not considered to appropriately respond to the Farming Zone or various relevant State and local planning policies relating to the use of agricultural land. There is no strong policy basis to support the proposed boundary realignment and therefore it is recommended to refuse the application. Report prepared by Lindsay Jacgung

city of greater geelong of greater geelong agenda development hearings panel meeting no 542 to be...

Documents