council meeting notice paper · council meeting notice paper monday 5 august 2019 order of business...

Council Meeting Notice Paper

Monday 5 August 2019 at 7pm

Council Chamber, Malvern Town Hall,

(enter off Glenferrie Road, Malvern)

Vision Stonnington will be an inclusive, healthy, creative, sustainable and smart community. Council’s vision will be implemented through four key pillars:

Community: An inclusive City that enhances the health and wellbeing of all residents, where people can feel safe, socially connected and engaged.

Liveability: The most desirable place to live, work and visit. Environment: A cleaner, safer and better environment for current and future

generations to enjoy. Economy: A City that will grow its premier status as a vibrant, innovative and

creative business community. These pillars reflect the shared priorities of our community and Council, and are consistent with our history and vision for a liveable future. For each pillar, there is a framework for our strategies, actions and measures which outline the key services and projects to be delivered to our community. The Strategic Resource Plan sets out how Council will provide the resources needed to implement strategies and actions within the Council Plan.

Councillors Cr Steven Stefanopoulos, Mayor

Cr Glen Atwell Cr John Chandler Cr Sally Davis Cr Marcia Griffin Cr Judy Hindle Cr Jami Klisaris Cr Matthew Koce Cr Melina Sehr

NOTES

Council business is conducted in accordance with Part 4 Division 3 of the Meeting Procedure section of Council’s General Local Law 2018 (No 1). Some copies are available with the agenda or you can find a copy on Council’s website www.stonnington.vic.gov.au under local laws. Councillors carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested with them under the Local Government Act 1989, and any other relevant legislation. Councillors

impartially perform the Office of Councillor duties, in the best interests of the City of Stonnington residents to the best of their skills and judgement. Councillors must formally declare their conflicts of interest in relation to any items listed on the agenda at the start of the meeting and immediately prior to the item being considered, in accordance with Sections 77 to 79 of the Act.

READING OF THE RECONCILIATION STATEMENT

We acknowledge that we are meeting on the traditional land of the Boonwurrung and Wurundjeri people and offer our respects to the elders past and present. We recognise and respect the cultural heritage of this land. READING OF THE AFFIRMATION STATEMENT We are reminded that as Councillors we are bound by our Oath of Office to undertake the duties of Councillor in the best interests of the people of the City of Stonnington and to faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in us under the Local Government Act and any other relevant Act

http://www.stonnington.vic.gov.au/

Welcome

Welcome to a Stonnington City Council meeting. These meetings are an important way to ensure that your democratically elected Councillors work for you in a fair and transparent way.

About this meeting

The first page of tonight’s agenda shows the different parts to the meeting, some of these are administrative and are required by Stonnington’s Local Law.

In the agenda you will also find a list of all the items to be discussed under ‘General Business’. Each report is written by a council officer and outlines the purpose of the report, relevant information and a recommended decision for councillors.

Council will consider the report and either accept, reject or make amendments to the recommendation. Council decisions are adopted if they receive a majority vote from the Councillors present at this meeting.

Arrangements to ensure meetings are accessible to the public

Council meetings are held at the Malvern Town Hall, corner High Street and Glenferrie Road (entry via Glenferrie Road by the door closest to the Malvern Police Station).

The Malvern Town Hall has an entrance ramp and elevators to ensure that the Council Chamber is accessible to the public. Fully accessible toilet and bathroom facilities are also available.

If you require translation, interpreting services or a hearing loop set up, please contact Council’s civic support on 03 8290 1331 to make appropriate arrangements before the meeting. To ensure that people in the chamber can follow the meetings’ proceedings, proposed alternate resolutions, also known as ‘yellows’, are displayed on a screen and microphones are used during debate.

Live webcasting

Council meetings are webcast live via Council’s website, allowing those interested to view proceedings without attending Council meetings.

This gives people who may otherwise be unable to attend access to Council decisions and debate. A recording of the meeting is available on our website after the meeting (usually within 48 hours).

Only Councillors and Council officers seated around the Council table are visible on film. People in the public gallery will not be filmed, but if you speak, you will be recorded. Visit stonnington.vic.gov.au for more information.

Members of the gallery If you choose to attend a council meeting as a member of the public gallery, you should note the role of the Chairperson and your responsibilities under the City of Stonnington General Local Law 2018(1).

Extracts from the Local Law:

81. Gallery to be Silent

(1) Visitors must not interject or take part in the debate. (2) The gallery must be silent at all times during any Council Meeting. (3) The ring tones of mobile telephones and other devices must be turned off by people

in the gallery at all times.

88. Recording or Filming Proceedings

(1) A person must not operate an audio tape, mobile telephone or other recording or transmitting equipment or film ('a device') at any Council Meeting without first obtaining the consent of the Chairperson.

(2) Consent given under sub-clause (1) may be revoked by the Chairperson at any time during the course of a meeting.

(3) If a device is operated, or suspected of being operated, in contravention of sub-clause (1), the Chairperson may: (a) order the person operating, or suspected of operating, the device to produce

the device to the Chairperson; and (b) arrange for any matter that has been recorded on the device in contravention of

sub-clause (1) to be deleted, erased or otherwise removed from the device. (4) Subject to sub-clause (5), the Chairperson shall return any device that has been

produced to him or her pursuant to sub-clause (3) at the conclusion of the relevant Council Meeting.

(5) If the Chairperson has been unable to arrange for the matter that has been recorded on the device in contravention of sub-clause (1) to be deleted, erased or otherwise removed from the device, the device shall be returned to the person as soon as practicable after the deletion, erasure or removal has been carried out.

84. Removal from Chamber of a Councillor or Member of the Public

The Chairperson, or Council in the case of a suspension under clause 82, may ask any Authorised Officer or member of Victoria Police to remove from the meeting (including the gallery): (1) any person who the Chairperson has ordered to be removed under clause 82(3); or (2) any Councillor who has been suspended under clause 82 and who has not

immediately left the Council Meeting.

50. Questions to Council from Members of the Public

(1) Questions to Council from members of the public will be considered as part of the order of business of an Ordinary Meeting only when submitted in the format outlined below: (a) Questions must be in writing and lodged at the office of the Chief Executive

Officer by 12 noon on the day of the next scheduled Ordinary Meeting. (b) A limit of five (5) questions per questioner applies. (c) Questions must include the name and address of the questioner and the date of

the question. Questions by facsimile or email are acceptable. (2) Within four (4) working days of receiving a complying question to Council from a

member of the public, the Chief Executive Officer will dispatch a notice to the member of the public who submitted the question, advising that the question has been received.

(3) At a meeting at which a question is to be considered: (a) The Chairperson will acknowledge that a question or questions have been

received from a (named) person and ask if that questioner is in the gallery. (b) If the questioner is present in the gallery, a summary of the subject matter of the

question(s) will be read out by the Chairperson and the questioner advised that a written reply to the question(s) will be issued within 14 days of that meeting date.

(c) If the questioner is not in the gallery, Council will respond to the question(s) in accordance with any standard correspondence to Council.

(4) The Chairperson has the discretion to allow a question to be asked and/or answered at the meeting that is in variance with the procedure in this Local Law.

(5) The Chairperson may refuse to acknowledge a question if, in the opinion of the Chairperson, the question is, or is potentially, defamatory, indecent, offensive, abusive, objectionable in language or substance, irrelevant, trivial, aimed at embarrassing a Councillor or a member of Council staff, outside Council’s powers or functions, has been asked at a previous Council Meeting and a reply issued, or relates to matters that come under section 89(2) of the Act.

(6) Any question relating to electoral matter during an Election Period will not be considered at any Council Meeting.

(7) A copy of the questions and responses will be tabled and inserted into the minutes of the following Council Meeting.

47. Open Meetings

(1) Subject to sub-clause (2), Council Meetings must be open to members of the public pursuant to section 89(1) of the Act.

(2) Council may resolve, under section 89(2) of the Act, that a meeting be closed to members of the public if Confidential Business is to be discussed.

Your cooperation is appreciated, we hope you enjoy the meeting.

Mayor and Councillors, Stonnington City Council

Council Meeting

Notice Paper

Monday 5 August 2019

Order of Business and Index

a) Reading of the Reconciliation Statement and Affirmation Statement

b) Introductions

c) Apologies

d) Adoption and confirmation of minutes of previous meeting(s) in accordance with Section 93 of the Act and Clause 49 of General Local Law 2018 (No 1)

1. MINUTES OF THE COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON 22 JULY 2019 ........................................................... 9

e) Disclosure by Councillors of any conflicts of interest in accordance with Section 79 of the Act1

f) Questions to Council from Members of the Public (Clause 50 of General Local Law 2018 (No 1)

g) Correspondence – (only if related to council business)

h) Questions to Council Officers from Councillors

i) Tabling of Petitions and Joint Letters

j) Notices of Motion – No 02/2019

k) Reports of Special and Other Committees; - Assembly of Councillors

l) Reports by Delegates

m) General Business including Other General Business

1. PLANNING APPLICATION 0823/18 - 36 ELIZABETH STREET, MALVERN - CONSTRUCTION OF A

MULTI-DWELLING DEVELOPMENT IN A GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE ............................................... 12

2. PLANNING APPLICATION 1057/18 - 19 CHESTERFIELD AVENUE, MALVERN - CONSTRUCTION OF

TWO DWELLINGS ON A LOT WITHIN A NEIGHBOURHOOD RESIDENTIAL ZONE..................................... 31

3. PLANNING APPLICATION 1014/18 - 24 BONVIEW ROAD MALVERN - VARIATION OF A

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT ............................................................................................................ 51

4. PLANNING APPLICATION 0692/18 - 24 BONVIEW ROAD MALVERN - CONSTRUCTION OF TWO

DWELLINGS ON A LOT WITHIN A GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE........................................................ 59

5. HOUSING STRATEGY - OUTCOMES OF STAGE 1 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT .................................... 75

6. DRAFT INCLUSION PLAN 2019-2022 ........................................................................................... 83

n) Urgent Business

o) Confidential Business

1. POTENTIAL PROPERTY PURCHASE - SOUTH YARRA ...................................................................... 87

1 Note that s.79(1)(a) of the Act requires Councillors to disclose the nature of a conflict of interest immediately before the relevant consideration or discussion.

ADOPTION AND CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

5 AUGUST 2019

RECOMMENDATION

That the Council confirms the Minutes of the Council Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 22 July 2019 and Minutes of the Confidential Meeting of the Stonnington City Council held on 22 July 2019 as an accurate record of the proceedings.

GENERAL BUSINESS 5 AUGUST 2019

j) Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion No 02/2019: Crs Hindle, Atwell & Stefanopoulos

Notice is given of the intention to move the following motion at the next Ordinary Meeting of the Council to be held on Monday 5 August 2019 at the Stonnington City Centre:

To rescind the motion of the Council made at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Monday, 22 July 2019 on Item 7 - Amendment C278 Hawksburn Railway Precinct Extension – Panel Report as shown below:

That Council: 1. Notes the public release of the Panel Report of Amendment C278. 2. On consideration the Panel report, adopts Amendment C278 to the Stonnington

Planning Scheme, with changes since exhibition and to exclude all of the properties to the south of Motherwell Street, pursuant to Section 29(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

3. Submits the adopted Amendment C278 to the Minister for Planning for approval, in accordance with Section 31(1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.

4. Advises the submitters to Amendment C278 of Council’s Decision.

Reasons for the Motion

For many years now, the Council has been a strong advocate, wherever possible, for the protection of our built heritage. In this instance, the Council sought advice from two independent heritage consultants, prior to pursuing the possible extension of the existing Hawksburn Precinct Heritage Overlay. The independent panel report also supported the inclusion of the 1-11 Howitt Street (odd numbers only) and 9-19 Hobson Street (odd numbers only), South Yarra. The Councillors below feel that we should continue to strongly advocate for heritage protection and pursue the recommendation from our own city strategy manager, heritage advisors, and the independent panel.


m) General Business

1. PLANNING APPLICATION 0823/18 - 36 ELIZABETH STREET, MALVERN - CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTI-DWELLING DEVELOPMENT IN A GENERAL RESIDENTIAL

ZONE

Acting Manager Statutory Planning: Phillip Gul General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin

PURPOSE

For Council to consider a planning application for construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone at 36 Elizabeth Street, Malvern. Executive Summary Applicant: Herbert and Howes Pty Ltd Ward: East Zone: General Residential Zone, Schedule 10 Overlay: No Neighbourhood Precinct: Garden Suburban 3 Date lodged: 6 August 2018 Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)

28

Trigger for referral to Council:

7 or more objections

Number of objections: 15 properties Consultative Meeting: Yes – held on 20 February 2019 Officer Recommendation: Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit BACKGROUND The Proposal The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Herbert & Howes and are known as Job No. 1030-18, Drawing No.s: T1 to T8 Revision E, Council date stamped 8 July 2019, SH1 to SH3 Revision B and Landscape Plan, Council date stamped 12 October 2018. Key features of the proposal are:

Removal of the existing dwelling (no permit required);

Construction of a three storey building comprising of four (4) apartments, each with three bedrooms. Two dwellings will be located at ground floor level with one dwelling each proposed for the first and second floors respectively;

Provision of eight (8) car parking spaces within a basement, with vehicle access via a new crossover from Walnut Street;


Private open space is located at the western and eastern ends of the site in the form of ground level courtyards for the two ground floor apartments and balconies for each of the apartments on the first and second floor;

The development will have a maximum overall height of 9.7 metres;

The building will be of contemporary design with a mansard roof form provided for the second floor. Material finishes include face brickwork and render, with standing seam cladding to the mansard roof;

Front fencing comprises a brick fence with a height of 1.35 - 2.1 metres to Elizabeth Street and the western end of Silver Street; and a steel picket fence above retaining wall with a total height of between 1.7 - 2.4 metres to the eastern end of Silver Street and Walnut Street.

Site and Surrounds The site is located on the eastern side of Elizabeth Street, directly north of Silver Street and west of Walnut Street in Malvern. The site has the following significant characteristics:

The site has three frontages with a width of 15.24 metres to Elizabeth Street and Walnut Street, a length of 38.18 metres along Silver Street, and a total area of 583 square metres.

The land is currently developed with a double storey brick veneer dwelling with a pitched tiled roof. The dwelling was constructed in the mid 1970’s and is oriented toward Elizabeth Street.

Vehicle access is presently via a double width crossover from Silver Street.

The land has a fall from south-west to north-east of approximately 1.7 metres.

The site is informally landscaped and contains several trees, including a Canary Island Date Palm which is located on the northern boundary within the front setback and which is confirmed to be significant. There are four street trees directly adjacent to the site.

High, solid fencing borders all three street frontages. The surrounding area is residential and is characterised by detached houses on varying sized lots and dual occupancy developments. Building styles are diverse and include traditional and contemporary architecture with either flat or pitched roof elements. Most properties exhibit established garden settings and inconsistent street setbacks. Front fence styles and heights vary yet are predominantly high and solid. The site has the following interfaces:

To the north is a double storey rendered dwelling with pitched roof addressed to 38 Elizabeth Street. There is a disused crossover to Elizabeth Street, however primary vehicle access is gained from Walnut Street to a carport adjacent to the southern boundary. Secluded private open space is oriented to the north-east corner of the site and does not share a direct interface with the subject site.

Directly across Silver Street to the south is a single storey rendered, pitched roof dwelling addressed to 34 Elizabeth Street.

To the west on the opposite side of Elizabeth Street are two contemporary double storey flat roofed dwellings at 31 and 33 Elizabeth Street.

Across Walnut Street to the east is a dual occupancy development at 1 and 1A Silver Street. The semi-detached dwellings are flat roofed and are separated by garaging.


Previous Planning Applications A search of Council records indicates there is no planning history pertaining to the subject site and no permits of relevance to this proposal on neighbouring properties. The Title The site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10777 Folio 023 as Lot 1 on Plan of Subdivision 005827. A 1.2 metre wide drainage easement running in a north-south direction is located within the front setback of the site, setback approximately 1.5 metres from the Elizabeth Street boundary. No covenants affect the land. Planning Controls The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application: Zone Clause 32.08 General Residential Zone, Schedule 10 Pursuant to Clause 32.08-06 a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55. Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4, a minimum garden area of 30% is required to be provided at ground level. The development provides a garden area of approximately 43% in compliance with this mandatory requirement. Pursuant to Clause 32.08-9, the maximum height of a building for use as a dwelling must not exceed the building height specified in a schedule to the zone. Schedule 10 to the General Residential Zone specifies that dwellings must not exceed a height of 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 height of the building must not exceed 10 metres. The plans demonstrate that there is a slope across the site which meets the above criteria, therefore a maximum height of 10 metres is applicable. The development, with a proposed height of 9.7 metres, complies with this mandatory requirement. Schedule 10 also specifies modified ResCode Standards as follows:

Standard Requirement

Site coverage B8 Basements should not exceed 75% of the site area.

Landscaping B13 In addition to the requirements of B13, at least one canopy tree should be planted on the site.

Side and rear setbacks

B17 For a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front facade of the building fronting the street, setback new buildings (including basements) a minimum of 2 metres from at least one side boundary and at least 1 metre from the other side boundary up to 3.6 metres in height. Where no setback is specified, standard B17 applies.

Walls on boundaries

B18 Walls should not be located on side boundaries for a distance of 5 metres behind the front façade of the building fronting the street.


Overlays

There are no overlays affecting the land. Particular Provisions Clause 52.06 - Car Parking Pursuant to Table 1 at Clause 52.06-5 two car parking spaces are required for each three or more bedroom dwelling. As such the development generates a car parking requirement of 8 spaces. There is no requirement for visitor car parking given the site is located within the Principal Public Transport Network area. A total of eight car parking spaces are provided within the basement, with each dwelling allocated two spaces. Six spaces are provided at-grade and two are within a mechanical car stacker which is designed to accommodate a B99 vehicle. Accordingly, the requirements of Clause 52.06-5 are satisfied and a permit is not required in this regard. Nonetheless, the development is required to be assessed against the relevant car parking design standards at Clause 52.06-9. Relevant Planning Policies Clause 15.01- Built Environment Clause 16.01 - Residential Development Clause 21.03 - Vision Clause 21.05 - Housing Clause 21.06 - Built Environment and Heritage Clause 22.05 - Environmentally Sustainable Development Clause 22.18 - Stormwater Management Clause 22.23 - Neighbourhood Character Policy Clause 32.08 - General Residential Zone Clause 52.06 - Car Parking Clause 53.18 - Stormwater Management in Urban Development Clause 55 - Two or more dwellings on a lot (ResCode) Clause 65 - Decision Guidelines Advertising

The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing three signs on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily. The site is located in East Ward and objections from 15 different properties have been received which are summarised as follows:

Neighbourhood character

Three storey scale, height and mass

Visual bulk

Overdevelopment

Front and side setbacks

Overlooking

Overshadowing

Location of vehicle access

Vehicle accessibility

Traffic and parking

Inadequate landscaping opportunities


Impact on street tree (Walnut Street)

Lack of private open space

Design details

Colour scheme

Noise

Reduced property values A Consultative Meeting was held on 20 February 2019. The meeting was attended by Councillors Atwell and Davis, a representative of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting resulted in the following changes to the plans which were formally submitted to Council on 13 May 2019:

Altered basement access by extending the length of the ramp to improve gradients, providing a site splay to the southern side, redesigning the crossover to Council’s specifications and increasing the basement setback from the eastern boundary;

Bin storage relocated from the basement to ground level;

Relocation of the significant Canary Island Date Palm which will be moved from the northern boundary toward the south within the Elizabeth Street setback;

A reduction in hard paving and subsequent increase in soft landscaping;

Revised setbacks to the northern boundary, increased from a minimum of 1.4 metres to 1.6 metres at ground floor; from 1.97 metres to 2 metres at first floor; and from 2.6 metres to 2.85 metres at second floor;

Provision of a planter box to the second floor northern elevation;

Reduction in parapet height to the north elevation from between 7.75-8.2 metres to 6.95-7.4 metres;

Increased ground floor setbacks to the north-east corner of the building from 5.28 metres to 7.39 metres;

Increased second floor setback to the eastern side of the building from 4.25 metres to 6.32 metres; and

Reduction in overall building height from 10 metres to 9.7 metres. Further revised plans were received by Council on 8 July 2019 showing the following changes which were made to address concerns raised by Council officers:

Provision of a central recess in the Silver Street façade at first and second floor levels;

Consequential internal layout changes to the lift, stairwell and adjacent rooms; and

Consequential minor changes to central window locations facing Silver Street. Referrals Parks

A significant Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) is located within the front

setback. It makes a significant contribution to the streetscape. The Palm could be successfully relocated.

The landscape plan reflects the limited space available to the northern and southern aspects of the site.

The selected feature trees (Acer rubrum, Parrotia persica) are either very slow growing or not robust enough to easily establish in Melbourne’s climate.

Based on the results of the non-destructive root investigation for the street tree, the proposed crossover location on Walnut Street is supported. Tree protection measures are required.


Planner response: The revised plans indicate that the Palm tree will be relocated within the Elizabeth Street setback. Selection of appropriate new tree species will be addressed via permit condition. Permit conditions are also imposed for protection of all street trees, and a tree management plan and bank guarantee will be required for the Walnut Street tree and the Palm tree on the site. Transport and Parking

The car parking provision meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme and is satisfactory.

The additional traffic generated by the proposal is not expected to significantly impact upon the existing traffic conditions in the area.

The ramp design and gradients are satisfactory.

A sight triangle is appropriately provided to the south side of the accessway and provision of a convex mirror to address sight lines to the north is reasonable.

The dimensions of car parking spaces meet or exceed the requirements of the Planning Scheme.

The car stacker proposed meets the requirements of the Planning Scheme. The useable platform being 5.2m long and 2.6m wide is reasonable.

The existing vehicle crossing to be removed must be reinstated to footpath, nature strip, kerb and channel to the satisfaction of Council.

There is a pit within the proposed location of the vehicle crossing.

The proposed vehicle crossing must be constructed in accordance with the Vehicle Crossing Policy to Council’s satisfaction.

Visibility splays measuring 2 metres are required at the site corners adjacent to street intersections.

Bin storage at ground level allows bins to be easily transported on the kerbside for collection.

Infrastructure

The levels of the crossing should follow the longitudinal levels of the naturestrip and reasonably match the property line levels.

There will be significant additional stormwater runoff generated by the development and there are known drainage problems and flooding downstream of the property. The applicant must provide a stormwater detention system to restrict runoff from the development to the satisfaction of Council. Alternatively, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 2,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development, and the tanks must be connected to all toilets.

Permit conditions are recommended to address drainage and stormwater runoff. Urban Design Based on advertised plans received 12 October 2018:

The upper level appears to present an unreasonable degree of visual bulk to the adjoining property at No.38 Elizabeth Street. It is suggested that the upper level setback from the Northern boundary be increased sufficiently to avoid this detrimental impact.

The limited upper level setback to the East presents a dominant presence to Walnut Street. It is suggested that the upper-level setback be increased to 3m to moderate this impact.


The landscape treatment along the Northern and Southern site boundaries is limited. It is suggested that the landscape setting be strengthened to include a meaningful screen of small canopy-trees to these sensitive locations.

Based on revised plans received 13 May 2019:

The amendments that have been made in the revised plans satisfactorily address the previous concerns.

The amended proposal is supported. KEY ISSUES

Strategic Context The overarching policies and objectives at both a State and Local level encourage urban consolidation in established urban areas and residential development in and around neighbourhood activity centres and close to public transport. These strategies call for well-designed medium-density development that respects neighbourhood character, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency. Council's Strategic Framework defines the site as being within an "incremental change area" which directs multi-unit development of 2-3 storeys to lots capable of accommodating increased density. The subject site is within walking distance of a Neighbourhood Activity Centre and public transport options including a tram route along Malvern Road to the south and Tooronga Railway Station to the east. The site is located in the General Residential Zone, the purpose of which is to encourage a diversity of housing types and housing growth that respects the neighbourhood character of an area, and it is not affected by any overlays. Thus it is considered that the site is suitably located to support the modest increase in density proposed in line with the above policy expectations. Clause 22.23 – Neighbourhood Character Policy: The objectives of Council’s Neighbourhood Character Policy, at Clause 22.23-2, seek to ensure that developments contribute to the preferred character of the area and reflect the intention of the statement of preferred neighbourhood character and associated design guidelines for each precinct. The site is located within the Garden Suburban 3 precinct. The relevant section of the statement of preferred character for this precinct is as follows: The Garden Suburban 3 (GS3) precinct comprises spacious and leafy streetscapes with Victorian, Edwardian, Interwar or Post-war era and new buildings set in established garden surrounds. Generous, regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for canopy trees. New buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while complementing the key aspects of building form, one-two storey scale and design detail of the older dwellings in the precinct. Low or permeable front fences retain views to gardens and buildings from the street….


The following is noted with regard to the proposed development and the statement of preferred character, as well as the relevant Design Guidelines that apply to the precinct:

The application proposes a contemporary design which respects surrounding buildings through the use of appropriate materials, form and siting. The statement of preferred character recognises that the area comprises a mix of architectural styles including contemporary buildings which are encouraged.

The predominant scale of surrounding development is two storeys in the form of large, robust buildings with prominent first floors. The proposal presents a strong two-storey base to the building, with a mansard roof form for the third floor which is recessed from the lower levels. This reduces the visual impact of the top floor and emphasises the prominence of the two storey base, thereby providing compatibility with surrounding built form.

The building is well articulated with horizontal and vertical elements, central recesses along the length to reduce the overall visual mass, suitable fenestration and varying materials and colours to provide further interest. The materials incorporate off-white face brickwork and pale coloured render, with a darker third floor/roof form which allows it to visually recede. The central recess to the first and second floor façade facing Silver Street is also a darker colour which gives the impression of additional depth and allows the upper levels to be read as two separate building forms.

The building is sufficiently setback from all boundaries to maintain the typical rhythm of spacing around buildings and provide appropriate landscaping, including canopy trees, to be consistent with the established garden setting. Furthermore, the only tree on site which makes a positive contribution to the streetscape character is proposed to be relocated within the Elizabeth Street frontage.

The proposal incorporates a basement which ensures that car parking structures do not dominate the development and minimises the use of excessive ground level hard paving.

There is no front fencing proposed to the Silver Street front boundary. Fencing to Elizabeth Street is provided for seclusion around a private open space area, however it is setback from the boundary to provide a landscape buffer in the foreground, while fencing to Walnut Street around a private open space area is visually permeable. The fencing design responds well to the style of the development and is compatible with the character of each streetscape. The proposed fencing represents an improvement on existing conditions, in which high timber paling fencing is provided to all three street fronts.

Site Layout and Built Form The provisions of the General Residential Zone require that the proposal be assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 (ResCode) and the modified standards specified in Schedule 10 to the zone. A full assessment against the applicable objectives and standards has been carried out and the development achieves a high level of compliance with the requirements. The following relevant standards and objectives are highlighted and discussed.


Street setbacks

The site abuts only one other property to the north, which has a dwelling setback 7.4 metres from Elizabeth Street. The proposed development will be setback 7.02 metres from Elizabeth Street. This generally aligns with the northern property setback and the difference will not be readily discernible given the separation between the two buildings. Furthermore, a strictly matching setback is not considered necessary when considering the varying and inconsistent setbacks of surrounding buildings. The development is setback a minimum of 3.1 metres from Walnut Street, increasing to 4.7 metres at the northern end of the ground floor adjacent to the driveway. This is acceptable given this interface represents a side setback to the proposed development. It is noted that the adjacent dwelling to the north turns its back on Walnut Street, with a rear carport setback approximately 4 metres from the street boundary, and further north the front setback to the adjacent dwelling is approximately 3 metres. The building is oriented to face Silver Street with a front setback of approximately 2 metres. This is consistent with the setback of the adjacent dual occupancy development to the east which is also oriented to face Silver Street and is on the corner of Walnut Street. Given the Silver Street frontage does not directly abut any adjoining properties, it is considered the proposed street setback adequately respects the surrounding neighbourhood character whilst making efficient use of the site. Building height The proposal has a maximum building height of 9.7 metres above natural ground level. This complies with the maximum 10 metre height permitted by the General Residential Zone, Schedule 10. Site coverage and Permeability

Schedule 10 of the General Residential Zone varies Standard B8 and states that a basement should not exceed 75% of a site’s area. The proposed basement represents 63% site coverage in compliance with the varied standard. At ground level, the site coverage of the building footprint is 54%, which is less than the 60% permitted by the standard. Standard B9 seeks at least 20% site permeability. The application proposes a permeable area equating to 32% which exceeds the prescriptive requirement. The relatively low site coverage and high permeability combined with a garden area of 43%, which well exceeds the 30% mandatory requirement, are good indicators that this proposal does not represent an overdevelopment of the site. Landscaping The siting and layout of the development ensures that adequate provision is made for sufficient landscaping around the building. Standard B13 calls for an appropriate landscape response to the area which provides for the retention or planting of trees and vegetation consistent with the neighbourhood character. In addition, Schedule 10 of the GRZ imposes an additional requirement of at least one canopy tree to be planted on the site.


The submitted landscape plan includes provision for 14 trees, including a row of Capital Pear trees along the Silver Street frontage and canopy trees within the Elizabeth Street and Walnut Street setbacks. This is supplemented with hedging plants along the northern boundary and various shrubs, climbers, underplantings and ground covers around the perimeter. This combination of landscaping will assist to soften the visual impact of hard surfaces associated with the development and provide a sympathetic response to the landscape character of the neighbourhood. In accordance with the advice of Council’s arborist, a permit condition will require that the selected feature trees “Persian Ironwood” are replaced with a faster growing species. The Landscape Plan will also need to reflect that the existing Canary Island Date Palm will be relocated on site. As previously indicated, proposed fencing is considered appropriate in terms of height and design and is softened by landscaping. Whilst the fencing is detailed on the elevations, notations are required on the ground floor plan to clearly delineate the fencing. This is addressed via permit condition. Amenity Impacts Side and rear setbacks

Schedule 10 of the GRZ varies Standard B17 and requires new buildings to provide side setbacks of 1 metre and 2 metres respectively for a distance of 5 metres behind the street facing façade, up to a height of 3.6 metres. Furthermore, Standard B18 is modified to stipulate that walls should not be located on boundaries within 5 metres of the front façade. As the primary front façade of the development faces Silver Street, the side setbacks are associated with the Elizabeth Street and Walnut Street interfaces. The setbacks are approximately 7 metres and 3 metres respectively which complies with the variation to the standard. The secondary frontage to Elizabeth Street also meets the varied requirements, when considering setbacks to the north and south are approximately 2 metres each. The only wall to be constructed on a boundary is associated with the basement to the north-east corner of the site, which is well removed from the front façade of the building. The development proposes a variation to the required rear setbacks from the northern boundary at first and second floors. The first floor is setback 2 metres from the boundary and minor variations range from 40mm adjacent to the living room at the western end and 490mm adjacent to the master bedroom to the east. At second floor the development is setback 2.85 metres from the boundary and the variations proposed are between 1.44 metres to 1.94 metres (west to east). The relevant objectives seek to ensure that neighbourhood character is respected and amenity impacts on adjacent buildings is limited. The variations to the prescriptive requirements of Standard B17 are considered acceptable given the layout of the adjoining property and the orientation of the land. As the subject site is to the south of the neighbouring property and the adjacent windows are well setback from the development, there will be no unreasonable impact on daylight to existing habitable room windows as the setbacks provide sufficient light courts in compliance with Standard B19 (Daylight to windows objective). The northern elevation is well articulated and planter boxes are provided to the second floor to soften the visual impact when viewed from neighbouring windows.


The neighbouring private open space does not directly interface with the subject site and is separated by a carport on the common boundary, thus it is well removed and will not suffer from unreasonable visual bulk impacts. It is also pertinent to note that whilst the northern neighbour objected to the original proposal as advertised, they have since provided written confirmation that they welcome the changes made in the revised plans as the revisions have addressed their concerns. Although the objection has not been formally withdrawn, their support of the plans clearly indicates that they are accepting of the non-compliances associated with the northern elevation setbacks. Overshadowing

Due to the orientation of the site and the fact that it is surrounded by three street frontages, the development will not overshadow any neighbouring properties. Overlooking

The key assessment tool to determine unreasonable overlooking is the Overlooking Objective at Clause 54.04-5, including Standard B22. The standard provides a 9 metre 45 degree angle arc that determines unreasonable overlooking, and windows or balconies that are located in such a position must be screened to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level accordingly. Due to the site having three street frontages and only adjoining one property to the north at 38 Elizabeth Street, potential overlooking from the proposed development is limited to the adjoining property to the north as it is the only property which has windows or private open space within 9 metres of the proposed building. Overlooking from all ground floor north facing windows will be restricted by existing 2.3 metre high boundary fencing. First and second floor habitable room windows and balconies have been provided with sill heights or fixed obscure glazing/screening with maximum 25 per cent transparency to at least 1.7 metres above finished floor level. The small first floor balcony at the eastern end of the first floor is not required to be screened as it does not have a direct outlook to any windows or secluded private open space within 9 metres. The development complies with the requirements of Standard B22. Internal Amenity Each dwelling is accessed via a common and clearly defined entrance from Silver Street. Apartment G1 at the western end of the ground floor is also provided with an additional pedestrian entrance from Elizabeth Street. All floors are accessible by a stairwell and lift and the communal circulation areas are provided with a window for natural daylight and passive surveillance. The layout of each dwelling has been designed to be functional and maximise natural daylight and solar energy where possible. All living areas are provided with dual aspect windows providing for ample daylight and cross ventilation. Additionally, the living areas and bedrooms are generously sized and exceed the minimum dimensional requirements, ensuring they are functional spaces. Whilst the plans are not dimensioned to specifically demonstrate compliance with the accessibility standard, it is considered the two uppermost apartments could be readily adapted to meet the needs of people with limited mobility. This is considered adequate for the scope of this development, given only four dwellings are proposed.


Private open space areas are sufficient to meet the recreational and service needs of future residents. At ground floor the western apartment is provided with a 98 square metre courtyard within the Elizabeth Street setback and a service yard along the northern boundary, while the eastern apartment has an 18 square metre courtyard adjacent to Walnut Street with an additional 19 square metre service yard to the north. The first floor apartment has a 19 square metre balcony with direct access from the living area, and a secondary 6.5 square metre balcony off the master bedroom. The second floor apartment is also provided with two balconies; the primary one provides an area of 29 square metres directly accessed from the living area, and a 17 square metre balcony is located off the master bedroom. All private open space areas have adequate dimensions and a northern orientation to receive good solar access. The apartments are provided with usable and secure storage by way of individual cages within the basement providing a minimum capacity of 6 cubic metres each, in addition to ample internal storage including walk-in-robes, wardrobes and cupboards within each dwelling. An enclosed bin storage area is sited at ground level adjacent to the south-western corner of the building, which is considered to be appropriately located and conveniently accessible to residents. Air conditioning units are located centrally on the roof adjacent to the lift overrun, which will limit visibility from the public realm and minimise noise impacts to residents. Car Parking and Traffic The proposal complies with the car parking requirements of Clause 52.06 with two car spaces provided for each dwelling. It is noted that dwelling G2 will have its two spaces provided by a car stacker arrangement which is considered satisfactory. The dimensions of the accessway and car parking layout are also satisfactory. Initial concerns were raised with the proximity of the proposed crossover to a tree within the nature strip on Walnut Street. However, a subsequent non-destructive root investigation confirmed that there are no significant roots which will be impacted by the proposed crossover construction. Council’s arborist and traffic engineer have confirmed that the revised plans are acceptable and the tree will not be adversely impacted by the development, provided appropriate protection is provided during construction. As previously stated, permit conditions requiring a tree management plan and a bank guarantee will be imposed. It is noted that whilst a new crossover is proposed, which may result in the loss of an on street car parking space in Walnut Street, an existing crossover to Silver Street will be removed, thereby gaining an on street space in this location. Therefore, the development will not result in the loss of any public car parking on the street. Proposed fencing is setback a minimum of 2 metres from the Silver Street corners of the site. This ensures that adequate pedestrian visibility will be provided in adjacent to the street intersections. Environmentally Sustainable Development (ESD) A Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) was submitted with the application. The proposed development seeks to incorporate several ESD initiatives to ensure the development achieves a BESS score of 51%, which is considered to meet best practice and the policy objectives of Clause 22.05.


A Water Sensitive Urban Design Response was also submitted with the application. The report includes a STORM Rating Report showing a STORM rating of 102%. This is achieved by the provision of a 7,000 litre rainwater tank located in the basement and connected to toilets to capture the runoff from the roof catchment. This meets the policy objectives of Clause 22.18 and the requirements of Clause 53.18. It is noted that the revised plans may have altered the roof catchment area, therefore a permit condition will require an updated STORM Rating Report to be submitted. Human Rights Consideration This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

CONCLUSION Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of State and Local Planning Policy.

The development is designed and sited to adequately respond to its context and the surrounding neighbourhood character.

The proposed development meets the objectives of Clause 55 and will not result in unreasonable amenity impacts.

Adequate car parking is provided in accordance with the Stonnington Planning Scheme and the development will not result in unreasonable traffic and parking impacts.

ATTACHMENTS

⇨1. PA - 823-18 - 36 Elizabeth Street Malvern - Attachment 1 of 1 Plans

RECOMMENDATION

That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 823/18 for the land located at 36 Elizabeth Street, Malvern East be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for construction of a multi-dwelling development in a General Residential Zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Before the commencement of the development, 1 copy of plans drawn to scale

and fully dimensioned must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the revised plans received 8 July 2019 (identified as Drawing No’s. T2 to T8 Revision E, prepared by Herbert & Howes), but modified to show: a) The height and material of proposed fencing annotated on the ground floor

plan. b) An updated materials schedule in accordance with Condition 3. c) An updated Landscape Plan in accordance with Condition 4. d) A Tree Management Plan in accordance with Condition 6.

../../RedirectToInvalidFileName.asp?FileName=CL_05082019_ATT_PLANS.PDF


e) An updated WSUD response (STORM Rating Report) to reflect revisions to

the roof catchment area. All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

2. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason, without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Before the development starts, a schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted and approved. When approved, the schedule will be endorsed and will form part of the permit.

4. Before the development starts, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The landscape plan must show: a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be

retained and/or removed. b) The delineation and dimensions of tree protection zones for all street trees

directly adjacent to the site. c) Buildings and trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring

properties within three metres of the boundary. d) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways. e) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers,

including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant.

f) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site. g) Relocation of the existing Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm)

within the Elizabeth Street setback. h) Replacement of proposed tree species Acer rubrum (Parrotia persica) with

a suitable fast growing species to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

i) The extent of any cut, fill, embankments or retaining walls associated with the landscape treatment of the site.

j) Details of all proposed hard surface materials including pathways, patio or decked areas.

5. Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on

the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

6. Concurrent with the endorsement of development plans a tree management plan prepared by a suitably qualified arborist must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the tree management plan will form part of this permit and all works must be done in accordance with the tree management plan (AS 4970).


The tree management plan must detail measures to protect and ensure the viability of Fraxinus angustifolia (Desert Ash) located within the nature strip on Walnut Street and the Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm) within the Elizabeth Street setback. Among other things, the tree management plan must include the following information: a) Pre-construction (including demolition) – details to include a tree

protection zone, height barrier around the tree protection zone, amount and type of mulch to be placed above the tree protection zone and method of cutting any roots or branches which extend beyond the tree protection zone. A plan must be submitted detailing any tree protection fencing, where the fencing is clearly identified and dimensioned.

b) During-construction – details to include watering regime during construction and method of protection of exposed roots.

c) Post-construction – details to include watering regime and time of final inspection when barrier can be removed and protection works and regime can cease.

Pre-construction works and any root cutting must be inspected and approved by the Responsible Authority's Parks Unit. Removal of protection works and cessation of the Tree Management Plan must be authorised by the Responsible Authority's Parks Unit.

7. Before the development (including excavation and demolition) starts, a tree protection fence must be erected around the street trees directly adjacent to the site on Elizabeth Street, Silver Street and Walnut Street. Fencing is to be compliant with Section 4 of AS 4970. Signage identifying the need for approval from Council’s Parks Unit for any root cutting (prior to it occurring) must also be displayed on the fence.

8. Prior to the endorsement of plans and prior to any development commencing on the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), the owner/developer must enter into a Deed with the Responsible Authority and provide it with a bank guarantee of $28,600 as security against a failure to protect the health of the street tree on Walnut Street and the Canary Island Date Palm within the site. The applicant must meet all costs associated with drafting and execution of the Deed, including those incurred by the responsible authority. Once a period of 12 months has lapsed following the completion of all works at the site the Responsible Authority may discharge the bank guarantee upon the written request of the obligor. At that time, the Responsible Authority will inspect the tree(s) and, provided they have not been detrimentally affected, the bank guarantee will be discharged.

9. Concurrent with the endorsement of plans or prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), whichever occurs sooner, a letter of engagement must be provided to the Responsible Authority from the project arborist selected to oversee all relevant tree protection works. The project arborist must be an appropriately experienced and qualified professional (minimum Cert IV or equivalent in experience).


10. The project arborist must maintain a log book detailing all site visits. The log

book must be made available to the Responsible Authority within 24 hours of any request.

11. Prior to the commencement of any works at the site (including demolition and

excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), the project arborist must advise the Responsible Authority in writing that the Tree Protection Fences have been installed to their satisfaction.

12. Prior to the commencement of any works on the land, each Tree Protection Zone

nominated on the approved Landscape Plan must: a) be fenced with temporary fencing in accordance with the attached

specifications annotated in this permit to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

b) include a notice on the fence to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority advising on the purpose of the Tree Protection Zone, the need to retain and maintain the temporary fencing and that fines will be imposed for removal or damage of the fencing and trees.

c) No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone.

13. A copy of the tree protection zones are to be included in any contract for the

construction of the site or for any other works which may impact upon the trees.

14. The permit holder / developer must advise Council in writing that a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued in respect to the development and that the 12 month establishment period has commenced.

15. No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within the Tree Protection Zones without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the Tree Protection Zones.

16. Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film) designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority thereafter for the life of the building.

17. All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or screened so as to minimise visibility from any of the surrounding footpaths and from overhead views and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

18. All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority by completion of the development.


19. Any poles, service pits or other structures/features on the footpath required to

be relocated to facilitate the development must be done so at the cost of the applicant and subject to the relevant authority’s consent.

20. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved, the permit holder must obtain approval from Council’s Building and Local Laws Department to construct or modify any vehicle crossovers providing access to the subject site. The issue of a planning permit does not provide approval for vehicular crossovers which are outside of the title boundary.

21. Prior to occupation of the building, any existing vehicular crossing made redundant by the building and works hereby permitted must be broken out and re-instated as standard footpath and kerb and channel at the permit holders cost to the approval and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

22. Prior to a building permit being issued, a report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with all ‘recommendations’ and requirements contained in that report. All drainage must be by means of a gravity based system with the exception of runoff from any basement ramp and agricultural drains which may be pumped. The relevant building surveyor must check and approve the drainage design and ensure that protection of the building is provided from a 1 in 100 A.R.I. rainfall event as required by the Building Regulations.

23. The applicant must at their cost provide a stormwater detention system to restrict runoff from the development to no greater than the existing runoff based on a 1 in 10 A.R.I. to the satisfaction of Council’s Infrastructure Unit. Alternatively, in lieu of the stand alone detention system, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 2,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development. Those tanks must be connected to all toilets.

24. The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.

25. The existing nature-strip levels must not be lowered or altered at the property line to facilitate access to the site.

26. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances applies:

a) The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit. b) The development is not completed within four years of the date of this

permit. In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.


NOTES: I. This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or

occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.

II. The permit holder / developer must advise Council in writing that a Certificate of

Occupancy has been issued in respect to the development and that the 12 month establishment period has commenced.

III. Council has adopted a zero tolerance approach in respect to the failure to

implement the vegetation related requirements of Planning Permits and endorsed documentation. Any failure to fully adhere to these requirements will be cause for prosecution. This is the first and only warning which will be issued.

IV. Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of,

damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further written approval of Council. “Significant tree” means a tree: i. with a trunk circumference of 180 centimetres or greater measured at its

base; or ii. with a trunk circumference of 140 centimetres or greater measured at 1.5

metres above its base; or iii. listed on the Significant Tree Register. Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of trees during construction works.

V. Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,

damage to or pruning of any street tree without the further written consent of the Stonnington City Council. Contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 for further information.

VI. The crossover must be constructed to Council’s Standard Vehicle Crossover

Guidelines unless otherwise approved by the Responsible Authority. Separate consent for crossovers is required from Council’s Building and Local Law Unit.

VII. The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not eligible to

receive “Resident Parking Permits”. VIII. At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987

stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes: i. Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the

development allowed by the permit has not yet started; and ii. Within 12 months after the permit expiry date, where the development

allowed by the permit has lawfully started before the permit expires.


2. PLANNING APPLICATION 1057/18 - 19 CHESTERFIELD AVENUE, MALVERN - CONSTRUCTION OF TWO DWELLINGS ON A LOT WITHIN A NEIGHBOURHOOD

RESIDENTIAL ZONE


PURPOSE

For Council to consider a planning application for construction of two dwellings on a lot within a Neighbourhood Residential Zone at 19 Chesterfield Avenue, Malvern. Executive Summary Applicant: Plans in Motion Pty Ltd Ward: North Zone: Neighbourhood Residential Zone- Schedule 2 Overlay: Nil Neighbourhood Precinct: Garden Suburban 3 Date lodged: 12 October 2018 Date revised: 11 June 2019 Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)

48


More than 7 objections and Councillor call up

Number of objections: 10 Consultative Meeting: Yes– held on 29 May 2019 Officer Recommendation: Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit.

BACKGROUND

The Proposal The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Lamprecht Architect and are known as File No. 1057/18, Drawing No.s: TP000, TP001, TP002, TP003, TP004, TP005, TP006, TP007, TP008, TP009, TP010, TP011, TP012, TP013 and Council date stamped 11 June 2019. Landscape Concept Plans dated 17 June 2019 LCD001 and Council date stamped 17 June 2019 prepared by Hansen have also been submitted. The application was revised after the consultative meeting and the advertised plans have been superseded by the plans Council date stamped 11 June 2019 and 17 June 2019. In summary, the amendments to the plans have been made to facilitate greater opportunity for in ground planting; to increase the setbacks from the side and rear boundaries; and to relocate all car parking to within the basement. Details of all of the changes are included under the “Advertising” section of the report. The development will involve the demolition of the existing dwelling on the subject site and the construction of a two storey apartment building comprising two dwellings.


Key features of the proposal are:

Demolish the existing building on the subject site (no permit required).

Construct a two level apartment building (comprising two dwellings).

Construct a basement car park accessible from Chesterfield Avenue via the existing crossover.

The development will result in 48.4% site coverage at ground, 46.7% basement coverage, 37% garden area and 24.4% permeability.

The maximum height of the building will be 7.905 metres above natural ground level.

The building presents a contemporary architectural style. Materials and finishes include a combination of concrete and render finish, corten and recycled timber cladding and clear windows and balustrades

More specifically the dwellings are arranged as follows:

Apartment 1 occupies the ground floor. The apartment comprises four bedrooms plus study and is provided with two car parking spaces, a store room and cellar within the basement. Private open space for the dwelling is at ground floor level and features a pool.

Apartment 2 occupies the first floor. The apartment comprises three bedrooms and is provided with two car parking spaces, a gymnasium, laundry, workshop/store within the basement. Private open space for the dwelling is in the form of a deck at first floor level.

Pedestrian access to apartment 1 is via a footpath from Chesterfield Avenue and pedestrian access to apartment 2 is via a footpath from Chesterfield Avenue that provides access to a lift.

Site and Surrounds The site is located on the northern side of Chesterfield Avenue, approximately 140 metres east from the intersection of Glenferrie Road. The site has the following significant characteristics:

Rectangular allotment with a frontage to Chesterfield Avenue of 18.29 metres, a site depth of approximately 33.22 metres, a rear boundary of 18.29 metres and yielding an overall site area of 610 square metres.

There is a steep cross fall from the west to the eastern side of the site.

The land is developed with a double storey brick veneer dwelling with a tiled roof. A swimming pool located at the rear of the site.

Vehicle access is provided via a single width crossover on the western frontage of the site.

A 2.0 metre high white timber fence is located on the Chesterfield Avenue Frontage.

There are a number of mature street trees in front of the subject site.

The wider area is residential in nature and displays a mixed character in terms of building scale and architectural style. The Chesterfield Avenue streetscape is comprised of large single and double storey dwellings, with generous side and rear setbacks and large areas of private open space. Development heights on Chesterfield Avenue are generally two stories. Heights of front fences on Chesterfield Avenue vary with the nearby properties exhibiting fences between heights of 1.2 metres to 2.1 metres. Directly to the north of the subject site at No. 698 Toorak Road is a single storey rendered finish dwelling with a flat roof. Importantly, there is a significant change in levels between the subject site and 698 Toorak Road.


To the south of the subject site is Chesterfield Avenue, featuring a number of mature street trees. The dwelling at No. 18 Chesterfield Avenue is located directly across from the subject site site. The dwelling is contemporary with exposed brick and white mounding accents. The dwelling has a high brick pier and wrought iron front fence. A double storey painted brick dwelling with a tiled, hip and valley roof is located directly to the east of the subject site at No. 21 Chesterfield Avenue. The dwelling is setback between 7.9 metres and 9.2 metres from Chesterfield Avenue. To the west of the subject site is a pair of dwellings at No. 15-17 Chesterfield Avenue. The dwellings at No. 15-17 Chesterfield Avenue are two semi-detached double storey rendered finish dwellings with a flat roof. Previous Planning Application(s) A search of Council records indicates that there are no recent planning applications registered to this site. The Title The site is described on Certificate of Title Volume 10238 Folio 493 / Title Plan 213134D and no covenants or easements affect the land. Planning Controls The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application: Zone:

Clause 32.09 – Neighbourhood Residential Zone- Schedule 2 Pursuant to Clause 32.09-2 a permit is not required to use the land for dwellings. Pursuant to Clause 32.09-6, a permit is required to construct two or more dwellings on a lot and a front fence that exceeds a height of 1.5m. A development must meet the requirements of Clause 55. The Zone requires that an application to construct a residential building on a lot of between 500-650sqm in area must provide a minimum garden area of 30% of the site. The plans confirm 37% of the site will be provided as garden area. In addition, a residential building must not exceed a height of 9 metres and contain no more that two storey. The development has a height of 7.905 metres and contains 2 storeys.


Schedule 2 varies the following ResCode Standards:

Standard Requirement

Site coverage A5 and B8 Basements should not exceed 75% of the site area.

Landscaping B13 In addition to the requirements of B13, at least one canopy tree should be planted on the site.

Side and rear Setbacks

A10 and B17 For a distance of at least 5 metres behind the front facade of the building fronting the street, setback new buildings (including basements) a minimum of 2 metres from at least one side boundary and at least 1 metre from the other side boundary up to 3.6 metres in height. Where no setback is specified, standard A10 or B17 applies.

Walls on boundaries

A11 and B18 Walls should not be located on side boundaries for a distance of 5 metres behind the front façade of the building fronting the street.

Overlay: None Particular Provisions:

Clause 52.06 – Car Parking Pursuant to Clause 52.06-2, the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land prior to the commencement of a new use. Pursuant to Clause 52.06-5, a dwelling requires:

1 car space to each one or two bedroom dwelling;

2 car spaces to each three or more bedroom dwelling.

0 car space for visitors to every 5 dwellings for the development of 5 or more dwelling. Each new dwelling contains 3 more bedrooms and is provided 2 car parking spaces, complying with the statutory requirement for car parking. Clause 55 – Two dwellings on a lot and residential buildings A development:

Must meet all of the objectives of this clause. Should meet all of the standards of this clause.

Relevant Planning Policies

Clause 9 Plan Melbourne

Clause 11 Settlement

Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage

Clause 16 Housing

Clause 21.02 Overview

Clause 21.03 Vision

Clause 21.05 Housing

Clause 21.06 Built Environment and Heritage

Clause 22.05 Environmentally Sustainable Design


Clause 22.18 Stormwater Management (Water Sensitive Urban Design)

Clause 22.23 Neighbourhood Character Policy

Clause 32.09 Neighbourhood Residential Zone

Clause 52.06 Car Parking

Clause 55 Two or more dwellings on a lot

Clause 65 Decision Guidelines Advertising The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing one sign on the site. The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily. The site is located in North Ward and objections from 10 different properties have been received. The concerns can be summarised as follows:

Neighbourhood Character.

Visual Bulk.

Building Height.

Side and rear setbacks.

Overlooking.

Front Fence.

Landscaping.

Garden Area.

Front setback. A Consultative Meeting was held on 29 May 2019. The meeting was attended by Councillors Koce, Griffin and Chandler, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council Planning Officer. Discussion plans were tabled at the meeting and these plans were formally revised and submitted to Council on 11 June 2019. The plans included but are not limited to the following changes:

The car parking for dwelling 1 relocated from the ground floor to within the basement.

The street setback at ground floor level increased from 5505mm to 6350mm and at first floor level increased from 5570 mm to 6350 mm.

The setback of the dwelling 2 pool from the eastern boundary increased from 1438mm to 2000mm.

The addition of 1700 mm high obscure screening to the second floor balcony

The amount of paving within the front of the site reduced, this is as a result of the relocated car parking for dwelling 1.

Existing olive trees at the rear of the site retained.

The addition of 500 millimetres trellis screening to the existing rear fence

The entry to each dwelling re-organised to facilitate additional landscaping and canopy trees.

Additional landscaping along both sides (east and west) of the subject site. Public notification of the formally revised plans Council date stamped 11 June 2019 did not occur given the extent of changes as listed above result in an overall reduction in the building footprint. Therefore, the proposed changes would not result in any additional material detriment.


Referrals Parks and Landscape

Councils Parks Department has reviewed the revised plans submitted to Council on 11 June 2019 and provided the following comments:

The proposed built form allows for no meaningful landscape content along the eastern, northern or western aspects of the proposal. The revised plans show a row of Syzigium included on a section of the eastern boundary, but the above ground width is between 2m – 1.1m, which is a space that will be hard to maintain these trees to enable use of the path in this vicinity.

Standard conditions in regards to tree protection fencing of the Liquidambar styraciflua (Sweet Gum) street tree must be included on any permit

Planner Response: Conditions will be included on any permit issued to address the concerns. Infrastructure

Councils Infrastructure Department has reviewed the revised plans submitted to Council on 11 June 2019 and raised the following concerns:

The proposed ground floor levels are apparently barely above the lowest levels of the property meaning that designing an effective drainage system to provide protection of drainage from a 1 in 100 year storm will be very difficult. I believe the ground floor level needs to be lifted to allow this to be achieved. A suitably qualified Engineer should be engaged to look at this matter and recommended appropriate floor levels to allow protection from a 1 in 100 year storm as required by the Building Regulations.

The following conditions were recommended by Council’s Infrastructure Engineer:

A report for the legal point of discharge must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with all ‘recommendations’ and requirements in that report prior to a building permit being issued. Protection of the building must be provided from a 1 in 100 A.R.I. event as required by the Building Regulations and all drainage must be by means of a gravity based system with the exception of runoff from any basement ramp and agricultural drains which may be pumped.

The existing footpath levels must not be lowered or altered in any way at the property line (to facilitate the basement ramp).

Planner Response:

In regards to the flood levels, it is noted that these comments have been forwarded on to the applicant. However, given that the subject site is not covered by a Special Building Overlay, the levels of the site are out of planning control and this issue would be addressed at building permit stage. Conditions will be included on any permit issued to show the other conditions requested by Councils Infrastructure Engineer.


Transport and Parking Department

Councils Transport and Parking Department has reviewed the revised plans council date stamped 11 June 2019 and raised the following concerns:

The plans do not show sight triangles at the property boundary. This is not considered acceptable.

The applicant must provide turning templates showing a B85 vehicle accessing and egressing all parking spaces for both units. This is to demonstrate the functionality of the parking design (including the accessway ramp) and ensuring that vehicles can access and egress the property in a forward direction.

Planner Response:

Conditions will be included on any permit issued to address the outstanding issues. Urban Design

Councils Urban Design Advisor has reviewed the revised plans Council date stamped 11 June 2019 and provided the following comments:

The principal concern with this application is the limited space provided for a satisfactory perimeter canopy-tree landscape setting; in particular, the absence of effective landscape interfaces to the West, North and East.

Subject to further refinement of the external material & colour palette, the contemporary design character is supported. The proposed external cladding is nominated as ‘Off-form concrete finish or Stone cladding’; and this should be reviewed, given the predominant character of brick and rendered buildings within the streetscape.

Planner Response: To address the concerns a condition will be included requiring the materials changed to brick or render. Another condition will be included requiring the footpath on the eastern boundary removed and larger trees planted instead of the Lily Pilly trees proposed. This will ensure that there will be additional landscaping on the eastern side to soften the form of the development from the neighbouring dwellings. KEY ISSUES Strategic Context The overarching policies and objectives at both a State and local level encourage urban consolidation in established urban areas and medium density residential development in and around neighbourhood activity centres and close to public transport. These strategies call for well-designed medium-density development that respects neighbourhood character, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency. Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) identifies the site as being within an “incremental change area”. These areas (outside of the Heritage Overlay and Neighbourhood Character Overlay), are encouraged to direct multi-unit development (2-3 storeys) to lots capable of accommodating increased density.


The subject site is 610m2 in area and is located within the Principal Public Transport Network Area being only 200m from Glenferrie Road which is serviced by the No. 16 tram and within close proximity to Toorak Road which is serviced by the 72 tram. The proximity of the site to public transport affirms that this land is capable of accommodating increased density. Furthermore, the design represents an appropriate infill response and achieves a degree of integration with the evolving streetscape of predominantly 2 storey dwellings. Neighbourhood Character The subject site falls within the Garden Suburban 3 Neighbourhood Character Precinct (at Clause 22.23) which includes the following statement of preferred neighbourhood character:

The Garden Suburban 3 precinct comprises spacious and leafy streetscapes with Victorian, Edwardian, Interwar or Post-war era and new buildings set in established garden surrounds. Generous, regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for canopy trees. New buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while complementing the key aspects of building form, one- two storey scale and design details of the older dwellings in the precinct. Low or permeable front fences retain views to gardens and buildings from the street. Areas within a Residential Growth or Mixed Use Zone or within a substantial change area will accommodate more development with a more compact setting but with spaces for canopy trees and other vegetation and high quality responsive design.

The design guidelines that seek to achieve this character are:

To encourage the retention of intact, period dwellings that contribute to the character of the area.

To ensure new buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape.

To encourage a high quality of building detailing that references, without mimicking, the details of buildings in the area.

To maintain and reinforce the rhythm and spacing between and around buildings.

To maintain and strengthen the garden settings of buildings and the tree canopy of the neighbourhood.

To prevent the loss of front garden space and the dominance of car parking structures.

To ensure fences complement the predominant style of front boundary treatment in the street and retain views to dwellings and gardens,

The proposed development will adopt a maximum building height of 7.92 metres above natural ground level and will be two storeys in height. It is considered that the proposal complies with these policy requirements for an incremental change area and meets the discretionary height limit of the schedule to the zone. Whilst a 2 storey form is possible within the Neighbourhood Residential Zone, there is an obligation for a development of this scale to relate to the character of the area. The proposed built form must be designed sympathetically in terms of scale, setback and facade detailing. In this instance the current proposal is considered to respond appropriately in this regard due to its generous setbacks to Chesterfield Avenue. Efforts have been made to recess the building by incorporating varied materials to the front of the dwelling and a terrace facing Chesterfield Avenue, this is sufficient to adequately reduce the visual impression of the building. There are examples of recent development occurring within the environs of the subject site. These examples include the dual occupancy approved at No. 11 Chesterfield Avenue with basement car parking.


The proposed basement car parking arrangement is a positive response to the preferred character of the area and is a design response that is consistent with recent approvals within the streetscape. The neighbourhood character statement makes it clear that landscaping is an important feature of this area and further, Clause 21.06-2 (Landscape Character) in particular, seeks to maintain and enhance Stonningtons landscaping qualities. It is considered that the Landscape Plan prepared by Hansen (Council date stamped 17 June 2019) adequately responds to the landscaping character within the surrounding area and that sought within preferred character of the area. The large canopy trees within the front of the site contribute to the garden character of the area. A condition will be included on the permit to ensure that larger trees can be planted on the eastern side of the site. The proposed 1.085 to 1.8 metre high rendered front fence is acceptable as it responds to the streetscape and character of the area. The fence is consistent with the existing fence styles along Chesterfield Avenue which comprise either solid painted render, timber fences or brick fences. Overall, it is considered that the design response, in terms of its presentation to key interfaces and incorporation of features of the surrounding area, and built form, will sit comfortably within the preferred character and emerging features of the surrounding area. Further, the proposal is considered to be a suitable response to the emerging streetscape character, as assessed against Clause 16.01 and Clause 21.06. For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is considered to be an appropriate response to the Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.23 and Standard B1 (Neighbourhood Character), B2 (Residential Policy), B5 (Integration with the Street), B31 (Design Detail) and B32 (Front Fences). Site Layout and Building Massing Street Setback The subject sites frontage is to Chesterfield Avenue. On the eastern side of the site is the dwelling at No. 21 Chesterfield Avenue and on the western side of the site is the dwelling at No. 17 Chesterfield Avenue. The street setback of the dwelling to the east at No. 21 Chesterfield Avenue is 7.9 metres and the setback of the dwelling to the west at No. 17 Chesterfield Avenue is approximately 4.8 metres. Therefore the proposed development should be setback 6.35 metres from Chesterfield Avenue to comply with standard B6. The proposed development complies with the standard as it is setback a minimum of 6.35 metres at ground and first floor level. Overall it, it is considered that the proposed front setback to Chesterfield Avenue is adequate to respond to the existing and preferred character of the area. Notably, the development will be located further from the street than the existing dwelling on the subject site that is setback 5.5 metres from Chesterfield Avenue. Building Height

The proposed development has a maximum height of approximately 7.9 metres above natural ground level. This complies with the requirements of Schedule 2 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone that allows a height of 9 or 10 metres depending on the slope of the land.


Site Coverage and Permeability

The total lot size is 607m2.The basement site coverage is approximately 46.7%, compliant with the 75% site coverage varied by Schedule 2 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone. The site coverage of the development is 48.4% (294m2) compliant with the maximum 60 percent site coverage recommended by standard B8 at Clause 55.05-3. The proposed permeable area will be 24.4% (148m2). This complies with the 20% minimum standard required by standard B9 (Permeability). Energy Efficiency

The apartments have been designed with good access to natural light and ventilation and an acceptable level of internal amenity. Both dwellings will have a northerly aspect or dual aspect to promote cross ventilation. Clause 22.05 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme requires the development to achieve best practice in environmentally sustainable development. The applicant has submitted a Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA), detailing how the development addresses the 10 key sustainable design categories using the Built Environment Sustainability Scorecard (BESS). A Sustainable Design Assessment has been submitted with the application showing that the proposal achieves a BESS score of 61% and passes the requirements for water, energy stormwater and IEQ which is satisfactory. Overall the design of the development is considered to achieve the broad energy efficiency objectives of standard A10. Overall, the design of the development is deemed to achieve the broad energy efficiency Objectives of Standard B10. Safety

The development is designed to provide for safety and security of residents. The development incorporates two clear and identifiable designated path accessed from Chesterfield Avenue. There are also large windows at ground and first floor fronting Chesterfield Avenue to provide for passive surveillance of the street. The design response achieves the objectives of the standard. Landscaping

Council’s Local Policy Framework emphasise the provision of high quality landscaping and seek to ensure that landscaping forms a key consideration of development proposals. Clause 21.06-2 (Landscape Character) seeks to ‘repair and reinforce the high quality landscape character of the City’. Further to this, Clause 22.23 (Neighbourhood Character Policy) seeks ‘to maintain and strengthen the garden settings of buildings and the tree canopy of the neighbourhood’. The policy further encourages a design response which ‘includes planting around the perimeter of the site to strengthen the garden setting’ and provides ‘setback basements from all property boundaries to allow for in-ground planting’.

As per the Landscape Concept Plan prepared by Hansen, seven canopy trees are proposed on the site. This is greater than the number of existing canopy trees on the site. Landscaping is also proposed on the eastern side boundaries in the form of Lili Pillys. On the western boundary the existing trees are retained and at the rear of the site on the northern boundary the existing olive trees are retained.


Subject to conditions, the proposed landscape response will soften the presentation of the proposed development when viewed from the streetscape and adjoining lots Council’s Arborist commented that ‘the revised plans show a row of Syzigium included on a section of the eastern boundary, but the above ground width is between 2m – 1.1m, which is a space that will be hard to maintain these trees to enable use of the path in this vicinity’. The

path on the eastern boundary is not shown on the development plans, however is shown on the landscape plan. The path is a secondary path and is not required for direct access to Apartment 1. To ensure any trees on this boundary are adequately maintained and larger trees are incorporated in the available space to soften the built form of the building, a condition will be included on the permit. The additional condition will require ‘Removal of the side path on the eastern side boundary of the development and larger tress incorporated instead of the Syzigium trees proposed’. Subject to the conditions detailed above, the landscaping response for the subject site is an appropriate response to the garden character of the area and will ensure a standard of landscape integration is achieved. Amenity Impacts Side and rear setbacks

Schedule 2 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone includes the following modified B17 Standard:

The proposed development complies with the modified standard to B17 as at ground floor level the proposal is setback 1.13 metres from the eastern boundary and 3.802 metres from the western boundary. Standard B17 (side and rear setbacks) sets out numerical requirements for side and rear setbacks. The tables below illustrates how the proposal meets these requirements. Setbacks to the North

Northern setback

Minimum proposed setbacks

Setback required by Standard B17 (Side and rear setbacks)

Complies?

Ground 2.125 1.15 Yes First Floor 3.140 2.88 Yes


Setbacks to the East

Northern setback

Minimum proposed setbacks


Complies?

Ground- Entry of Apartment 2

1.13 1.12 Yes

Ground Floor- Stair and storage wall

2.0 1.42 Yes

First Floor- Pool Balustrade

2.0

1.93 Yes

First Floor- wall 4.8 2.99 Yes

Setbacks to the West

Northern setback Minimum proposed setbacks


Complies?

Ground

3.802 1.0 Yes

First Floor- master bedroom 1 and bedroom 2 wall

3.802 1.78 Yes

First Floor-Kitchen to Bedroom 3 wall

2.0 1.99 Yes

As outlined in the tables above, the setbacks of the development comply with standard B17 on all side and rear boundaries. The setbacks ensure that the rhythm and spacing of the building is maintained when viewed from Chesterfield Avenue. Furthermore as outlined in the assessment against daylight to existing windows, the setbacks comply with standard B19 (daylight to existing windows) and ensure that windows on the properties to the east and west are adequately protected. Walls on boundaries The proposal includes a wall on the western boundary for a length of 14.3 metres at ground floor level. Standard B17 specifies that new walls constructed on or within 200mm of a side or rear boundary should not exceed 15.8 metres based on a boundary length of 33.22m. Therefore the proposed length of the wall on boundary complies with the standard. Standard B17 also requires wall on boundaries no to exceed an average height of 3.2 metres and a maximum height of 3.6 metre. The proposed wall is an average height of approximately 3.33 metres and is a maximum height of 3.52 metres. The wall does not achieve the standard given that it is an average height of 3.33 metres. A variation is considered reasonable in this instance given that the majority of the wall on boundary is directly opposite the wall on boundary of No. 17 Chesterfield Avenue and therefore the amenity impacts of the height of the wall will not be unreasonable.. Daylight to existing windows

The proposed development is located opposite habitable room windows of the adjoining dwellings to the east and west. As outlined below, the setbacks of the proposed development from the dwellings to the east and west achieve compliance with Standard B19 (Daylight to Existing windows).


The setbacks from the existing habitable room windows of No. 21 Chesterfield Avenue to the east of the site are assessed against the requirements of Standard B19 (Daylight to Existing Windows) as follows.

Location Minimum proposed wall to window setbacks

Wall to window setback required by Standard B19 (Daylight to Existing Windows)

Complies?

Ground 5.61 2.2 Yes First Floor 5.22 3.03 Yes

The setbacks from the existing habitable room windows of No. 17 Chesterfield Avenue to the west of the site are assessed against the requirements of Standard B19 (Daylight to Existing Windows) as follows.

Location Minimum proposed wall to window setback

Wall to window setback required by Standard B19 (Daylight to Existing Windows)

Complies?

Ground 7.25 1.0 Yes

First Floor 7.27 3.15 Yes

As outlined in the table above, the proposal achieves full compliance with standard B19, ensuring reasonable amenity of the adjoining dwellings at No. 17 and 21 Chesterfield Avenue is maintained. Overshadowing

Standard B21 of ResCode seeks to ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow the existing secluded private open space. Where sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is reduced, at least 40 square metres with minimum dimensions of 3 metres of the secluded private open space should receive at least five (5) hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm at the September Equinox. The proposal will result in an additional 0.3m2 of shadow to the secluded private open space of No. 21 Chesterfield Avenue at 3pm. This impact is not considered to be detrimental given that at least 40 square metres with a minimum dimension of 3 metres of the secluded private open spaces receives at least five hours of sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 22 September in accordance with Standard B21. There will be no unreasonable additional shadow to the secluded private open space of No. 17 Chesterfield Avenue. Overlooking

The key assessment tool to determine unreasonable overlooking is the Overlooking Objective, including Standard B22. The standard provides a 9 metre, 45 degree angle arc that determines unreasonable overlooking, and windows or balconies that are located in such a position must be screened to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level accordingly.


At first floor level, there are habitable room windows and areas of secluded private open space that have the potential to overlook the neighbouring habitable room windows and areas of private open space within 9 metres at the properties north, south and east of the site. Ground Floor A 1.9-2.6 metre high boundary fence is proposed along the north, eastern and western side of the development. Therefore, there are no unreasonable overlooking opportunities from the proposed ground level. First Floor North Elevation Obscure glazing has been proposed to habitable room windows and balconies along the north elevation of the building at first floor level to 1.7 metres from finished floor level. East Elevation Obscure glazing has been proposed to habitable room windows and balconies along the north elevation of the building at first floor level to 1.7 metres from finished floor level. West Elevation Obscure glazing has been proposed to most habitable room windows or balconies along the west elevation of the building at first floor level to 1.7 metres from finished floor level. Bedroom 2 does not have any glazing or screening to comply with standard B22. Therefore a condition will be included on any permit issued requiring ‘screening to the first floor west facing windows of bedroom 3 to comply with standard B22’. Internal views

Given the orientation of the apartments and that there will be obscure glazing to 1.7 metres on the balcony for the first floor apartment, there are no areas that will result in unreasonable internal views. Noise impacts

The proposed apartment building is not expected to generate noise above and beyond that normally associated with a residential development. On Site Amenity and Facilities Dwelling Entry A common entry to the development, with pedestrian gate and delineated pedestrian path, is clearly identifiable and is directly accessible from Chesterfield Avenue. The building has been designed to provide an appropriate sense of address. Furthermore, each dwelling is clearly identifiable from the central lobby of each level within the building. Daylight to New Windows All proposed windows will face outdoor spaces clear to the sky with a 3 square metre light court with a minimum dimension of 1 metre and thus allow for an adequate amount of daylight into habitable rooms.


Private Open Space

Apartment 1 will have a secluded private open space (SPOS) area accessed from the living room. The secluded private open space area of this apartment is in excess of the numerical requirements of standard B28 requiring a minimum area of 25square metres and a minimum dimension of 3 metres. The size of the balcony to Apartment 2 meets the numerical requirements of Standard B43, requiring a minimum area of 12 square metres and a minimum dimension of 2.4 metres. The proposed private open space area of 74m2 to the apartment is considered sufficient to meet the recreation and service needs of future residents and the private open space area can be conveniently accessed from the main living area. Apartment Developments The amenity of the two apartments is deemed to be of a high standard and complies with the Objectives of Clause 55.05. Energy efficiency in the design of the building has been considered in conjunction with Council’s Environmentally Sustainable Development Policy (Clause 22.05). Both apartments benefit from dual aspect and will be able to achieve cross ventilation. Overall the apartments will offer high quality amenity with large internal areas (244m2 at ground floor level for apartment 1 and 187m2 at first floor for apartment 2), dual aspects, natural daylight and ventilation to each room and reasonably sized areas of private open space. No communal open space is required by Standard B36 as the development is for less than 40 dwellings. Deep soil planting requirements are listed at Standard B38. As the lot size is 607.5m2, there

is no minimum deep soil requirement for the site.

Standard B41 seeks to ensure the design of dwellings meets the needs of people with limited mobility. Both of the dwelling are generous in size and will have at least one accessible bathroom. The dimensions and layout of these bathrooms has not been documented on the plans and a condition will be included on the plans requiring this. The apartment entries are located at the front of the building with apartment 2 accessed via a lift. The entrance to each apartment from Chesterfield Avenue is surrounded by canopy trees and shrubs. The development is considered to provide safe and efficient movements across the site for future occupants in accordance with Standard B42. As required by Standard B43 (Private open space above ground level), the balcony to apartment 2 at first floor level is in excess of 12 square metres in area and exceed the minimum dimension of 2.4 metres. Apartment 2 has a balcony with an area of 74m2. The apartments will be provided with a storage space of storage for each dwelling within the external basement. Storage within the dwellings themselves will also be substantial given the floor area and size of rooms within each dwelling. The storage provided is in excess of the requirements of Standard B44 (Storage objective). In terms of functional layout, room depth, windows and cross ventilation standards of Clause 55.07, the new dwellings are large in size with the smallest bedrooms having dimensions of 3.6m by 3.6m. The minimum living area dimensions to both dwellings exceed 3.6m and 12sqm in area as specified by Standard B46.


Overall, this proposal is considered to offer high quality apartment accommodation for future occupants. Water Sensitive Urban Design The Water Sensitive Urban Design Response shows a 4,000L rainwater tank and 1.8m2 of raingardens would result in a STORM rating of 100% which complies with the 100% minimum required under Clause 22.18. The storm response has not been updated to reflect the layout of the revised plans and the rainwater tank and raingarden shown in the storm report has not been included on the plans. These details will be required as a condition of the permit. Car Parking and Traffic Car Parking Provision

Each new apartment within this development will be provided 2 car parking spaces within the basement level accessed via Chesterfield Avenue. This meets the statutory rate and complies with the requirements of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. No visitor car parking space are required for a development of two dwellings. Car Park Design

As detailed in the “Referrals” section of this report, there are outstanding items that need to be shown on the plans with regard to the design of the car parking layout and accessway. The items relate to the sight distance triangles and B85 Access Capacity required. These matters can be addressed via conditions.

Objections

In response to the grounds of objection not already discussed in the report, the following comments are made:

Noise associated with air conditioning units The development is not expected to generate noise above and beyond that of a normal residential building. Any noise associated with plant equipment or mechanical services (i.e. lift overrun) will be required to be baffled via a condition of any permit issued to comply with the relevant noise regulations of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA). Human Rights Consideration This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.


CONCLUSION

Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:

The proposed development of the site for two apartments within a two storey building is in accordance with State and Local policy to consolidate housing in locations proximate to services and transport.

The proposed design of the development will respond appropriately to the existing and preferred character of the area.

The development will not unreasonably impact upon adjoining amenity as determined by compliance with the Clause 55 Objectives.

The development provides adequate parking provision at the site and can be safely accessed by vehicles

ATTACHMENTS

⇨1. PA - 1057-18 - 19 Chesterfield Avenue Malvern - Attachment 1 of 1 Plans

RECOMMENDATION That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 1057/18 for the land located at 19 Chesterfield Avenue Malvern be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for construction of two dwellings on a lot within a Neighbourhood Residential Zone subject to the following conditions: 1. Before the commencement of the development, one (1) electronic copy of plans

drawn to scale and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the revised plans Drawing No.s TP001, TP002, TP003, TP004, TP005, TP006, TP007, TP008, TP009, TP010, TP011, TP012, TP013 and Council date stamped 11 June 2019 but modified to show: a) Screening to the first floor west facing windows of bedroom 3 to comply

with standard B22. b) Dimensions of the bathrooms to comply with standard B41. c) Sight distance triangles, fully dimensioned and shown on the plans in

accordance with Clause 52.06-9 d) Turning templates showing a B85 vehicle accessing and egressing all

parking spaces for both units and any changes required to ensure that vehicles can access and egress the property in a forward direction.

e) All treatment measures shown on the STORM Report to be included on the development plans. This is required in accordance with condition No. 4 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

f) The façade material changed to render or brick. g) The elevation drawing to include annotations to clearly show the colours

and materials of the building. The annotations must correlate with that shown on the colours and materials schedule.

h) Removal of the annotation on the west elevation drawing that stipulates ‘Min 2.2 Head Clearance to be provided to unit 1 garage (Note 2.7 Proposed)’.



i) Any changes as required by the Sustainable Design Assessment and

Landscape Plan in accordance with Conditions 3 and 5. All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

2. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. Concurrent with the endorsement of any plans pursuant to Condition 1, a

Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Upon approval the SDA will be endorsed as part of the planning permit and the development must incorporate the sustainable design initiatives outlined in the SDA to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The SDA must be in accordance with SDA prepared by Statewide Rating Service (Council date stamped 14 December 2018), but modified to show: a) An assessment of the revised plans Council date stamped 11 June 2019. b) Any changes required by Condition 1. All of the above to the satisfaction of the responsible Authority.

4. The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report.

5. Before the development starts, a landscape plan to be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the landscape plan prepared Hansen (Council date stamped 17 June 2019) but modified to show:

a) Removal of the paving adjacent to the eastern boundary and a notation

confirming that the area is a non-trafficable area. b) Larger trees to screen the eastern boundary instead of the Syzigium (Lilly

Pilly) trees proposed.

All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

6. Before the occupation of the building, the landscaping works as shown on the

endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Landscaping at ground, first and second floor including the planter boxes must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

7. Concurrent with the endorsement of plans or prior to the commencement of any

works at the site (including demolition and excavation whether or not a planning permit is required), whichever occurs sooner, a letter of engagement must be provided to the Responsible Authority from the project arborist selected to oversee all relevant tree protection works. The project arborist must be an appropriately experienced and qualified professional (minimum Cert IV or equivalent in experience).


8. Protection fencing must be afforded to the Liquidambar styraciflua (Sweet Gum))

street tree at this location prior to construction works occurring. Fencing must comply with Section 4 of AS 4970 and form a 2m x 2m protection zone around the tree.

9. No vehicular or pedestrian access, trenching or soil excavation is to occur within the tree protection zone without the written consent of the Responsible Authority. No storage or dumping of tools, equipment or waste is to occur within the tree protection zone.

10. The project arborist must maintain a log book detailing all site visits. The log

book must be made available to the Responsible Authority within 24 hours of any request.

11. Prior to a building permit being issued, a report for the legal point of discharge

must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with all ‘recommendations’ and requirements contained in that report. All drainage must be by means of a gravity based system with the exception of runoff from any basement ramp and agricultural drains which may be pumped. The relevant building surveyor must check and approve the drainage design and ensure that protection of the building is provided from a 1 in 100 A.R.I. rainfall event as required by the Building Regulations.

12. Prior to an ‘Occupancy Permit’ being issued, a suitably qualified Engineer must

carry out a detailed inspection of the completed stormwater drainage system and associated works including all water storage tanks and detention (if applicable) to ensure that all works has been constructed in accordance with the approved design and the relevant planning permit conditions. Certification of the completed drainage from the Engineer must be provided to Council prior to a ‘Statement of Compliance’ being issued for the subdivision.

13. The existing footpath levels must not be lowered or altered in any way at the property line (to facilitate the basement ramp).

14. Prior to the occupation of the building, fixed privacy screens (not adhesive film or timber screens) designed to limit overlooking as required by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 in accordance with the endorsed plans must be installed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority thereafter for the life of the building.

15. All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or

screened so as to minimise visibility from any of the surrounding footpaths and from overhead views and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

16. All utility services to the subject land and buildings approved as part of this

permit must be provided underground to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority by completion of the development.




permit. In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.

NOTES:

I. This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.

II. Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,


III. Council has adopted a zero tolerance approach in respect to the failure to

implement the vegetation related requirements of Planning Permits and endorsed documentation. Any failure to fully adhere to these requirements will be cause for prosecution. This is the first and only warning which will be issued.

IV. The owners and occupiers of the dwelling/s hereby approved are not eligible to

receive “Resident Parking Permits”. V. At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987

stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:

i. Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the




3. PLANNING APPLICATION 1014/18 - 24 BONVIEW ROAD MALVERN - VARIATION OF A

RESTRICTIVE COVENANT


PURPOSE

For Council to consider a planning application for the variation of restrictive covenant 08665977 at 24 Bonview Road Malvern. Executive Summary Applicant: proUrban Advisory Ward: East Zone: General Residential Zone Schedule 10 Overlay: None Date lodged: 27 September 2018 Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)

58


Councillor call up

Cultural Heritage Plan No Number of objections: 6 Consultative Meeting: Yes – held on 11 July 2019 Officer Recommendation: Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit

BACKGROUND The Proposal The application seeks to make changes to the wording of Covenant 0866597 registered on

the allotments Title. The lot is described as Lot 39 on Plan of Subdivision 005348, Vol 04164

Folio 791.

The covenant seeks the following changes to the covenant (shown with track-changes):

“...will not erect any building any more than two dwellings on the said land other than

a double fronted dwelling-house with outbuildings, and such buildings shall be

constructed of new material only and be in accordance with the Plan of Specifications

approved by an Elliot Cairnes his executors, administrators or transferees and will not

permit such house to be used for any purposes other than as a dwelling”


As such, it is proposed to make the following modifications to the covenant:

Replace the words: ‘any building on the said land’

With

‘Any more than two dwellings on the said land’

Remove the words:

‘Other than a double fronted dwelling house’

Remove the words:

‘and to be in accordance with Plans and Specifications to be approved by the said Elliot Cairnes his Executors, administrators or transferees’.

Site and Surrounds The site is located on the eastern side of Bonview Road, approximately 80 metres south of Malvern Road. The site has the following significant characteristics:

The site has an area of 654 square metres.

The site is currently occupied by a two storey dwelling with a pitched tile roof. The

second storey is located within the roof form.

The site has an existing crossover from Bonview Road on the northern side of the lot. A

car port is located next to the dwelling on the northern boundary.

The site has the following interfaces:

North – 26 Bonview Road is located to the north of the site. This lot is occupied by a

single storey dwelling with a gabled roof. A car port and shed are built on the common

boundary with the subject site.

South – 22 Bonview Road exists to the south of the site. The lot is occupied by a two

storey dwelling with a pitched roof.

East – 23 Shaftesbury Avenue is located across the unnamed rear lane to the east.

The lot is occupied by a two storey brick dwelling. A pool and large private open space

area exists to the rear of this dwelling.

West – Bonview Road runs along the western boundary of the site. The street is

characterised by a mix of single and double storey dwellings, with the pattern of

development consisting predominately of single dwellings on a lot. Large plane street

trees are a strong characteristic of the streetscape.

Previous Planning Application(s) This application is being assessed concurrently with Planning Application 692/18 which proposes the construction of two dwellings on the subject site.


Two permits issued for a nearby site at 27 Bonview Road are of particular relevance to the current application. These are as follows:

Planning Permit No. 1186/17 was issued under delegation on 3 January 2018 for

variation of a restrictive covenant in instrument of transfer 636882 as it relates to

volume 03464 folio 739 (Lot 44 on Plan of Subdivision 005348) by replacing the words

‘any building on the said land’ with ‘any more than two dwellings on the said land’, and

removing the words ‘other than a double fronted dwelling house’ and ‘and to be in

accordance with plans and specifications to be approved of by you the said Walter

Richard Brooks or your executors administrators or transferees. No beneficiaries

objected to the modification of this covenant.

Planning Permit 871/16 was issued on 9 January 2018 for the construction of two

dwellings on a lot at 27 Bonview Road. This permit is still valid. The approved

development shares some similarities with the current proposal in that it is two double

storey dwellings in a side by side configuration and is to be constructed boundary to

boundary configuration.

The Title The site is described as Lot 39 on Plan of Subdivision 005348. As mentioned above, the title shows restrictive covenant 0866597 registered on the title. The covenant places the following restriction on the lot:

“...will not erect any building on the said land other than a double fronted dwelling house with outbuildings, and such buildings shall be constructed of new material only and be in accordance with the Plan of Specifications approved by an Elliot Cairnes his executors, administrators or tranferees and will not permit such house to be used for any purposes other than as a dwelling”

This Planning Permit Application 1014/18 seeks to vary the covenant. This Permit Application seeks the following changes to the wording of the covenant:

“...will not erect any building any more than two dwellings on the said land other than a

double fronted dwelling-house with outbuildings, and such buildings shall be

constructed of new material only and be in accordance with the Plan of Specifications

approved by an Elliot Cairnes his executors, administrators or transferees and will not

permit such house to be used for any purposes other than as a dwelling”

Planning Controls The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application: Clause 52.02 – Easements, Restrictions and Reserves:

Pursuant to Clause 52.02 a permit is required before a person proceeds under Section

23 of the Subdivision Act 1988 to vary or remove a restriction.

Relevant Planning Policies Clause 52.02 – Easements, Restrictions and Reserves Clause 65 – Decision Guidelines. Section 60(5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987.


Advertising

The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing two signs on the site (one on Bonview Road and one to the rear laneway). This advertising occurred in November 2018. In accordance with Section 52(1AA)(b) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 the

application was also advertised in the Stonnington Leader for two consecutive weeks. Confirmation of this has been provided by the applicant and is on file. It is noted that Section 52(cb) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires notice to

be given to the owners and occupiers of land benefited by a registered restrictive covenant if the application is to remove or vary the covenant. When the application was submitted, the applicant stated that there were no beneficiaries to the covenant. During the processing of the application, this was discovered to not be the case and in fact three lots are beneficiaries. This necessitated the re-advertising of the application to the owners and occupiers of these lots. This advertising occurred in May 2019 but did not attract any objections from beneficiaries. The public notification of the application has now been completed satisfactorily. Council has received six objections (in relation to the original advertising) and they can be summarised as follows:

The variation to the wording of the covenant will create a precedent for all covenants in the street to be varied and therefore allow development that changes the character of the street.

The covenant is a single dwelling covenant and residents in the street moved there on that understanding.

The variations to the covenant will allow the proposed development under Application 692/18 to proceed which will fundamentally alter the character of the street, have impacts on car parking, etc.

The variation to the covenant will impact on property values.

The Maddocks advice provided with the application is dated 2014. This is out of date and may not be current with recent case law.

No legal advice has been provided to back up the applicants claim that there are no beneficiaries to the covenant.

Again, it is important to note that out of the six objections received, none have been received from a lot that benefits from the Covenant. The importance of this is discussed below in the ‘Key Issues’ section. A Consultative Meeting was held on 11 July 2019. The meeting was attended by Councillor Davis, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting did not result in any changes to the plans.

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/s3.html#registered_restrictive_covenant

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/s3.html#registered_restrictive_covenant


KEY ISSUES This applications is limited in its scope as it applies solely to the proposal to vary the wording of a restrictive covenant registered of the lot’s Title. It does not apply to the proposed development on this site that is subject of a separate application currently being assessed by Council (692/18). Although the applications are linked, it is important to distinguish what is being assessed in this application, which is the following changes to the covenant:

Replace the words:

‘any building on the said land’

With


Remove the words:


Remove the words:


What are the relevant considerations?

Section 60(5): Section 60(5) states that:

The responsible authority must not grant a permit which allows the removal or variation

of a restriction referred to in subsection (4) unless it is satisfied that—

a. the owner of any land benefited by the restriction (other than an owner who,

before or after the making of the application for the permit but not more than

three months before its making, has consented in writing to the grant of

the permit) will be unlikely to suffer any detriment of any kind (including any

perceived detriment) as a consequence of the removal or variation of the

restriction; and

b. if that owner has objected to the grant of the permit, the objection is vexatious

or not made in good faith.

This is a statutory requirement that prohibits Council from granting a permit to vary a covenant if it has received a non-vexatious objection from a beneficiary of the covenant.

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/s3.html#permit

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/s3.html#owner

http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/vic/consol_act/paea1987254/s3.html#land







As previously mentioned above, none of the six objections received come from a land parcel that have the status as a beneficiary of the covenant. The provisions of Section 60(5) therefore do not prevent a Planning Permit being issued to vary the covenant. Clause 52.02: The proposed changes to the wording of the covenant require a planning permit under Clause 52.02 of the Stonnington Planning Scheme. The sole Decision Guideline of this provision states:

Before deciding on an application, in addition to the decision guidelines in Clause 65, the responsible authority must consider the interests of affected people.

As per Hill v Campaspe SC (includes Summary) (Red Dot) [2011] VCAT 949, this includes objectors who are not beneficiaries of the covenant. Such an assessment will be carried out below. Objections

In response to the grounds of objection, the following comments are made:

Despite views to the contrary of many objectors, the existing covenant is not

considered to restrict development on the lot to a single dwelling. This has been

confirmed not only by legal advice provided by the applicant but in independent legal

advice sought by Council.

As per the legal advice, there is clear authority that the singlular term ‘a’ before the phrase ‘dwelling house’ in a restrictive covenant does not restrict the construction of

more than one dwelling on land burdened by the covenant. The leading case for this is Tonks v Tonks and Others [2003] VSC 195, where Bongiourno J held that:

…If the parties to the original covenant had wished to restrict the number of dwelling houses built on each of these lots they could have done so very simply and definitely by replacing the word ‘a’ in the covenant with the word ‘one’, or by making some similar simple amendment. The true construction of the covenant is that it prohibits the placing of any building on the land unless that building is a dwelling house”

Given that the covenant does not restrict development to a single dwelling per lot, it is not correct to state that the changes to the covenant will now allow a multi-dwelling on the lot. This could already be proposed under the existing covenant.

The consideration of the current application is concerned solely with the variation to the

wording of the covenant. The impact of a future multi-dwelling development on the

character of the street will be subject to the assessment of that application at that time

(such as, for example, the proposal as set out in Planning Application 692/18).

Concerns with the design and type of future development are not valid objections to

this application.

Given the 2014 date of the original Maddocks legal advice, Maddocks have provided a

letter dated February 2019 that confirms their 2014 advice is still relevant and valid.

It is a long held principle of Town Planning that a development’s impact on property

values is not a valid ground of objection. An application should be decided on its merits


and assessed against the relevant provisions of the Planning Scheme. Whether

property values rise or fall as a result of a development should not influence its

assessment or the resulting decision.

Removal of the requirement for a double fronted dwelling in the covenant

The removal of the requirement to provide a double fronted dwelling would have little impact upon the streetscape. There is already a significant number of dwellings that are effectively ‘single fronted’ within Bonview Road such as directly across the road at no. 23, next door at no. 22, and nearby at no. 23, 20, 16, 17 (amongst others).

Removal of reference to Elliot Cairnes

The removal of the reference to ‘and to be in accordance with Plans and Specifications to be approved by the said Elliot Cairnes his Executors, administrators or transferees’ is

appropriate given Elliot Cairnes is presumed long past having any interest in the property (noting the covenant dates from 1918). The removal of this element would have no impact from a planning perspective. Capping of two dwellings on a lot

Lastly, the insertion of the words ‘any more than two dwellings on the said land’ in lieu of ‘any building’ has little impact on the covenant other than to cap the number of dwellings to two. As elaborated upon above, the existing covenant does not limit the number of dwellings on the site to one. It is understood that this change is to avoid any doubt in terms of the operation of the covenant. If anything, this change is more restrictive than remaining silent on the capping of two dwellings. Overall, the removal of the covenant is not considered to give rise to any town planning issues. Human Rights Consideration This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

CONCLUSION

Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported for the following reason:

The variation to the covenant will not have any unreasonable impacts to the orderly planning of the area nor any actual or perceived impact to beneficiaries of the covenant.


ATTACHMENTS

⇨1. PA - 1014-18 - 24 Bonview Road Malvern - Attachment 1 of 1 Plans

RECOMMENDATION

That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 1014/18 for the land located at 24 Bonview Road Malvern be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for the variation to restrictive covenant 0866597, registered on Lot 39 on Plan of Subdivision 5348, to make the following changes to the wording of the covenant:

Replace the words:

‘any building on the said land’

With


Remove the words:


Remove the words:


subject to the following conditions: 1. This permit will expire if one of the following circumstances apply:

a. The plan is not certified under Section 6 of the Subdivision Act 1988 within

two (2) years of the date of this permit.

b. The plan is not registered with the Registrar of Titles within five (5) years of

the date of certification.

The Responsible Authority may extend the period referred to for certification if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within three months afterwards.

Notes

The covenant is not removed from the title until a plan certified under Section 6

of the Subdivision Act 1988 is registered by the Registrar of Titles.

This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any buildings works on

the site. For development approval, information should be sought from Council’s

Planning Department on 8290 3329 or Council’s Building Department on 8290

3218.



4. PLANNING APPLICATION 0692/18 - 24 BONVIEW ROAD MALVERN - CONSTRUCTION

OF TWO DWELLINGS ON A LOT WITHIN A GENERAL RESIDENTIAL ZONE


PURPOSE

For Council to consider a planning application for the construction of two dwellings on a lot within a General Residential Zone at 24 Bonview Road, Malvern. Executive Summary Applicant: proUrban Advisory Ward: East Zone: General Residential Zone, Schedule 10. Overlay: None Neighbourhood Precinct: Garden Suburban 3 Date lodged: 5 July 2018 Date Amended: 4 February 2019 Statutory days: (as at council meeting date)

49 Days


Number of objections (nine)

Cultural Heritage Plan No Number of objections: Nine properties. Consultative Meeting: Yes – held on 19 March 2019 and 11 July 2019. Officer Recommendation: Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit. BACKGROUND

The Proposal The plans that form part of the basis of Council's consideration were prepared by Ashley Lochhead Architects and are known as Drawing Nos: TP-008, TP-010, TP-011, TP-012, TP-013, TP-013/1, TP-014, TP-015, TP-016, TP-017 and TP-018, all revision 03 and Council date stamped 4 February 2019. The landscape plans were prepared by Robyn Barlow Design, project BV-18, sheets SD-LF-010 and SD-LF-011, revision 01, and Council date stamped 4 February 2019. The previously lodged shadow diagrams, materials schedule and garden area plan remain unaltered. These plans are numbered TP19/1 – TP19/14 (inclusive) and TP20, 21 and 22. The application proposes the construction of two double storey dwellings on the lot in a ‘side by side’ configuration.


Key features of the proposal are:

At ground floor, each dwelling is proposed with a bedroom at the front of the building and an open plan kitchen/dining/living room towards the rear.

At first floor, each dwelling is proposed with three bedrooms and a ‘family’ room. For the purpose of this report the ‘family room’ is considered as the equivalent of a bedroom, resulting in each dwelling having five bedrooms.

The dwellings have similar mirror image floor plans. However, the southernmost dwelling has a reduced footprint in response to the secluded private open space of the property to the south (22 Bonview Road).

Each dwelling is proposed to be served by a detached double car garage at the rear of the site, accessed from the rear lane.

The dwellings are proposed in a contemporary architectural style, predominately clad with limestone blockwork. Aluminium ‘grilles’ characterise the front (western) elevation.

The above relates to a formally amended proposal, as amended on 2 February 2019. The key changes to the proposal were as follows:

Reduction in the scale of the southern elevation to respond to 22 Bonview Road;

Increase in landscaping around the site including within the garage side setbacks at the rear (eastern) portion of the site; and

Reduction in the northern boundary wall height to an average of 3.2m to comply with Standard B18.

This revised proposal has been re-advertised. Site and Surrounds The site is located on the eastern side of Bonview Road, approximately 80 metres south of Malvern Road. The site has the following significant characteristics:

The site has an area of 654 square metres.

The site is currently occupied by a two storey dwelling with a pitched tile roof. The second storey is located within the roof form.

The site has an existing crossover from Bonview Road on the northern side of the lot. A car port is located next to the dwelling on the northern boundary.

The site has the following interfaces:

North – 26 Bonview Road is located to the north of the site. This lot is occupied by a single storey dwelling with a gabled roof. A car port and shed are built on the common boundary with the subject site. Habitable windows (dining and bedroom) face the common boundary, whilst secluded private open space (SPOS) is located at the rear (east) of the site.

South – 22 Bonview Road exists to the south of the site. The lot is occupied by a two

storey dwelling with a pitched roof. It has its SPOS located within the eastern and northern setbacks.

East – 23 Shaftesbury Avenue is located across the unnamed rear lane to the east. The lot is occupied by a two storey brick dwelling. A pool and large private open space area exists to the rear of this dwelling.


West – Bonview Road runs along the western boundary of the site. The street is

characterised by a mix of single and double storey dwellings, with the pattern of development consisting predominately of single dwellings on a lot. Mature street trees (London Plane) are a strong characteristic of the streetscape.

Previous/Relevant Planning Application(s) A search of Council records do not reveal any relevant planning permit history for the site. However, the following relevant planning application currently under consideration:

Planning Application 1014/18 for the variation of restrictive covenant 0866597 is being assessed in conjunction with the current application. The application proposes to vary the covenant on the subject site’s title by replacing the words 'any building on the said land' with 'any more than two dwellings on the said land', and removing the words 'other than a double fronted dwelling house' and 'and to be in accordance with plans and specifications to be approved of by you the said Elliott Cairnes his Executors, administrators or transferees'

The Title The site is described as Lot 39 on Plan of Subdivision 005348. As mentioned above, the title shows restrictive covenant 0866597 registered on the title. The covenant places the following restriction on the lot:

“...will not erect any building on the said land other than a double fronted dwelling house with outbuildings, and such buildings shall be constructed of new material only and be in accordance with the Plan of Specifications approved by an Elliot Cairnes his executors, administrators or tranferees and will not permit such house to be used for any purposes other than as a dwelling”

In summary, the covenant states that any dwelling constructed on the lot must be a double fronted design, constructed of new materials and be in accordance with a Plan of Specifications approved by a Elliot Cairnes (or his executors, administrators or transferees). As it currently stands, the proposal would result in a breach of the covenant. However, as mentioned above, Planning Permit Application 1014/18 seeks to vary the covenant is being assessed in conjunction with the current application. This Permit Application seeks the following changes to the wording of the covenant:

“...will not erect any building any more than two dwellings on the said land other than a double fronted dwelling-house with outbuildings, and such buildings shall be constructed of new material only and be in accordance with the Plan of Specifications approved by an Elliot Cairnes his executors, administrators or transferees and will not permit such house to be used for any purposes other than as a dwelling”

If approved, this variation will allow the current proposal. Importantly, as per s. 61 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the current Permit (i.e. 692/18) cannot be issued unless a decision to grant a permit has been issued to vary or remove the covenant.


Planning Controls The following controls/permit triggers are considerations for this application: Zone

Clause 32.08 – General Residential Zone, Schedule 10:

Pursuant to Clause 32.08-6 a permit is required to construct two dwellings on a lot.

Pursuant to Clause 32.08-4 a lot with an area over 650 square metres must provide 35% of the lot as Garden Area. The proposal complies with this requirement.

Pursuant to Schedule 10 of the zone, a building used as a dwelling must not exceed 9 metres in height (or 10m with a slope). The maximum height proposed is 6.92 metres.

Particular Provisions Clause 52.06 – Car Parking:

Pursuant to Clause 52.06, two car spaces must be provided on site per dwelling. As the proposal includes a double car garage for each dwelling, the proposal satisfies the statutory car parking requirement and no permit is required under this clause.

Relevant Planning Policies Clause 21.03 - Vision Clause 21.06 - Built Environment and Heritage Clause 22.03 - Environmentally Sustainable Development Clause 22.18 - Stormwater Management Clause 22.23 - Neighbourhood Character Policy Clause 32.08 - General Residential Zone Clause 52.06 - Car Parking Clause 55 - Two dwellings on a lot Clause 65 - Decision Guidelines Advertising

The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 by sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and by placing two signs on site (one on Bonview Road, one on the rear lane). The public notification of the application has been completed satisfactorily. It is noted that, due to the submission of amended plans, the application was re-advertised. As the changes did not result in substantial changes to the appearance of the building, the readvertising notification was only sent via letter to those properties directly to the north, south and east of the subject site.


The site is located in East Ward and objections from nine different properties have been received. The objections are summarised as follows:

Inconsistency with neighbourhood character.

Insufficient street setback.

Excessive construction on side boundaries.

Excessive site coverage.

Insufficient provision of private open space and landscaping.

Car parking, traffic and inadequacy of rear lane for vehicular access.

Poor internal amenity.

Overlooking.

Overshadowing.

Non-compliance with Clause 55 standards.

Development is inconsistent with single dwelling covenant. Some objections raised devaluation of property as a concern. It is a long standing principle of town planning that objections relating to property value do not carry weight in the assessment of an application. A Consultative Meeting was held on 19 March 2019 and 11 July 2019. The March meeting was attended by Councillors Davis and Atwell, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The July meeting was attended by Councillor Davis, representatives of the applicant, objectors and a Council planning officer. The meeting did not result in any changes to the plans. Referrals Parks

The Crepe Myrtle 'Diamonds in the Dark' needs to be replaced with a large Crepe Myrtle. Planner note: This will form a condition on the permit Infrastructure Given that the garages are in part lower than the edge of the ROW, there may be a risk of flooding of the garages and in particular the southern garage. The minimum floor levels of both of the garages should raised to be no lower than 50mm above the abutting edge of the ROW at the projection of the Southern side of the respective garages to protect from runoff from the ROW. Given the step up that this would create for the access ramps, those ramps may need to be extended into the garages and those grades should be stipulated and clearly shown on the plans. Under no circumstances shall the existing levels of the ROW be raised or lowered to facilitate access. There will be significant additional stormwater runoff generated by the development and there are known drainage problems and flooding downstream of the property. In order to address this, the applicant must at their cost provide a stormwater detention system to restrict runoff from the development to no greater than the existing runoff based on a 1 in 10 A.R.I. Alternatively, in lieu of the stand-alone detention system, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 2,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development. Those tanks must be connected to all toilets.


Planner note: The above comments will be addressed by way of permit conditions. Council’s Drainage Engineers have provided recommended conditions that will form conditions on the permit. Transport and Parking (original proposal)

The application provides the statutory number of car spaces required for each dwelling by the Planning Scheme. The net increase of two dwellings (as the current iteration does not have laneway access) is not anticipated to significantly impact traffic in the laneway.

There are concerns with the functionality of the proposal due to the width of the laneway (apron width). The Australian Standards require a 5.6m apron width when the doorway width is 3m. This ensures a single manoeuvre within the laneway. In this case, a doorway width of 3m would apply as a vehicle would be exiting from either the north or south side of the garage, not the middle.

It appears that the laneway is approximately 3.3m wide, and may be insufficient for vehicle access. Multiple manoeuvres in the public road network are not appropriate. To demonstrate functionality, the applicant is to provide vehicle swept path diagrams using a B99 vehicle. The swept path diagrams must be able to demonstrate ingress and egress in a single manoeuvre.

Headroom needs to be shown with minimum 2.2m. Convex mirrors may be required to provide appropriate sight lines for vehicles exiting the site into the laneway. Planner note:

Swept path diagrams have been provided that show access to the garage. Whilst these require up to one correction manoeuvre, this is considered acceptable given the low volumes within the laneway as well as the limited number of times per day the garage is to be accessed.

Convex mirrors have been provided in the updated plans. KEY ISSUES

The overarching policies and objectives at both a State and Local level encourage urban consolidation in established urban areas and medium density residential development in and around neighbourhood activity centres and close to public transport. These strategies call for well-designed medium-density development that respects neighbourhood character, improves housing choice, makes better use of existing infrastructure and improves energy efficiency. The subject site is not located on a main road and has no overlay restrictions. It is therefore classified as being within an Incremental Change Area according to Council’s Strategic Framework Plan (Clause 21.03-3). Policy directs that two to three storey multi-unit development should occur in Incremental Change Areas on lots capable of accommodating increased density. The subject site has an area of 654 square metres and is therefore considered to be capable to accommodate the modest increase in dwelling density proposed under the current application.


In principle, the redevelopment of this land to provide additional housing opportunities in a well serviced location is supported. Specific elements of the proposal are examined in detail below. Garden Area:

Under the provisions of the General Residential Zone, a lot with an area over 650 square metres requires 35% of the site to be Garden Area. This is a mandatory requirement of the zone that cannot be varied. Garden Area is defined by the Planning Scheme as:

Any area on a lot with a minimum dimension of 1 metre that does not include:

a) a dwelling or residential building, except for:

an eave, fascia or gutter that does not exceed a total width of 600mm;

a pergola; unroofed terraces, patios, decks, steps or landings less than 800mm in height;

a basement that does not project above ground level; any outbuilding that does not exceed a gross floor area of 10 square metres; and

domestic services normal to a dwelling or residential building;

b) a driveway; or

c) an area set aside for car parking.

The application complies with the Garden Area requirement as 35.6% of the site was provided as Garden Area within the original proposal. The proposal as revised on 2 February 2019 marginally increases garden area associated with the development, as would the required change relating to the reduction in the scale of the garages (discussed below). Neighbourhood Character:

The site is located within the Garden Suburban 3 Neighbourhood Character Precinct as

defined by Council’s Local Neighbourhood Character Policy at Clause 22.23. The relevant section of the statement of preferred character for this precinct is as follows:

The Garden Suburban 1 (GS3) precinct comprises leafy streetscapes with a range of Victorian, Edwardian or Interwar era and contemporary buildings set in established garden surrounds. In typical streets regular front and side setbacks provide space around buildings and allow for small, well designed garden areas that contribute to the landscape quality of the street. New buildings or additions offer innovative and contemporary design responses while complementing the key aspects of form, general one-two storey scale and design detail of the older buildings. Low, visually permeable front fences retain views to gardens and dwellings from the street.


The following is noted with regard to proposed development and the statement of preferred character:

The proposal incorporates a 6.68 metre street setback, which will allow for adequate landscaping. The provision of landscaping is further assisted by the relocation of vehicle access to the rear of the site, increasing the ability of the front setback to accommodate meaningful landscaping.

Although the proposal seeks permission for boundary to boundary construction, the building incorporates 2.1 metre side boundary setbacks to the ground and first floor on both side elevations for the front portion of the building. When viewed from the street this will create a character of setbacks from both side boundaries and will maintain the rhythm of building separation in the street.

The Bonview Road streetscape contains an eclectic range of single and double storey dwellings from many architectural periods. As such there is no predominant architectural style that characterises the street. The street’s character is more a result of the setbacks, massing and landscaping around buildings. The proposed development is consistent with these built form elements.

The proposed building is a contemporary two storey design response that will contribute to the mix of architectural styles in the street. It is noted that the design shares many similar characteristics with the duplex development approved on 27 Bonview Road under Planning Permit 871/16, which was issued on 9 January 2018.

The front fence is proposed with a height averaging approximately 1.5 metres, which is considered appropriate as per the character statement.

An important element of the Bonview Road streetscape is the avenue of plane trees planted along the street. The application proposes vehicular access via the rear and thus will not have a detrimental impact on the street trees in front of the site. Notwithstanding this, conditions are recommended to endure the street trees in front of the site are protected during construction.

Built Form:

The application has been assessed against the objectives and standards of Clause 55 – Two or more dwellings on a lot (ResCode). A full assessment against the standards and objectives of Clause 55 has been carried out. The development is generally compliant with these standards. The following relevant standard are highlighted and discussed: Building height The proposal is seeking a maximum building height of 6.92 metres. This complies with the mandatory 9 metre maximum height of the General Residential Zone, Schedule 10. Street setback Standard B6 governs street setbacks. The Standard requires that buildings be setback the average distance of the two adjoining dwellings. For the subject site, this equates to a required 7.9 metre street setback. The application seeks a variation to this with a 7.2 metre street setback on the northern side of the lot and a 6.6 metre setback on the southern end.


There is a somewhat varied street setback character along Bonview Road and the proposal is consistent with this. Furthermore, front setbacks are not prominent within the street due to the extensive canopy provided by the London Plane trees within the road reserve. Lastly, the proposed setback will be able to accommodate adequate levels of landscaping to complement the existing street trees. This level of variation to the Standard is acceptable. Site coverage The application proposes a site coverage of 57.5%. This complies with the 60% site coverage prescribed by Standard B8. Permeability Standard B9 of Clause 55.03-4 asks for at least 20% site permeability. The application proposes 32% of the site area as permeable surfaces, exceeding the requirement of the Standard by 12%. Side boundary setbacks All side and rear boundary setbacks comply with the relevant Standard, Standard B17. The following table illustrates the side and rear boundary setbacks:

Elevation Maximum wall height

B17 setback requirement

Proposed setback

Complies?

Northern 6.92 metres 2.01 metres 2.1 metres YES

Southern 6.58 metres 1.89 metres 2.1 metres YES

Eastern (rear) 3.49 metres 1.0 metres 1.5 metres YES

In addition to the above compliance with the Standard, sufficient articulation is provided by each side elevation to break up their length. Walls on boundaries The application proposes walls on both the northern and southern boundaries. Standard B18 is the applicable control governing walls on boundaries. The Standard states that a wall on boundary may be constructed for a length of 10 metres plus 25% of the remaining length of the boundary of an adjacent lot. The height of the wall on boundary should not exceed an average height of 3.2 metres, with no part over 3.6 metres. The proposal complies with the above. The following table illustrates the proposal’s compliance:

Elevation Wall length B18 allowed length

Average wall height

Complies?

Northern 12.9 metres 18.25 metres 3.2 metres YES

Southern 9.96 metres 18.25 metres 2.9 metres YES

Notably, the southern boundary wall has been reduced in length to improve amenity impacts to no. 22 Bonview Road, particularly given secluded private open space (SPOS) is located directly adjacent to its south. This change was made despite compliance with Standard B18.


Despite objections from the adjoining owner to the north, it is considered unnecessary to require a similar reduction in length to the northern boundary wall. This is on the basis that the setback area adjacent to the boundary within no. 26 is not the primary private open space for this dwelling and more a light court for the two habitable windows along its southern elevation. Daylight to existing windows No north-facing windows exist within 22 Bonview Road. The ground floor wall on the boundary complies with the Standard, which would allow a 6m tall wall at this point. The proposed first floor is setback 5.1m from the affected windows. The Standard would call for a maximum height of 10.1m. Given the proposed wall is 6.08m, compliance is easily achieved. South-facing windows within 26 Bonview Road

These windows are located 3m from the common boundary. North facing windows No north facing windows exist within 3m of the boundary. Overshadowing open space The relevant assessment mechanism for overshadowing of neighbouring areas of private open space is the Overshadowing Open Space Objective, including Standard A14. This Standard states the following:

Where sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is reduced, at least 75 per cent, or 40 square metres with minimum dimension of 3 metres, whichever is the lesser area, of the secluded private open space should receive a minimum of five hours of sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm on 22 September.

If existing sunlight to the secluded private open space of an existing dwelling is less than the requirements of this standard, the amount of sunlight should not be further reduced.

The Objective states: To ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space.

The shadow diagrams submitted with the application (relating to the original proposal) show that, although there will be some additional shadow cast to 22 Bonview Road to the south, it is well below what would be considered unreasonable by the relevant test under Standard B21 (Overshadowing objective). The remaining amount of private open space at no. 22 that will not be overshadowed is in excess of the requirements of the Standard. It is noted that this is further improved by changes made within the formal plans lodged on 4 February 2019. It is also noted that the proposal would not unreasonably overshadow any neighbouring properties to the east.


Overlooking The key assessment tool to determine unreasonable overlooking is the Overlooking Objective, including Standard A15. The standard provides a 9m 45 degree angle arc that determines unreasonable overlooking, and windows or balconies that are located in such a position must be screened to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level accordingly. The Standard does not apply to any overlooking issues from the proposed ground level as the existing and proposed fences will prevent any unreasonable overlooking issues. Assessment of overlooking impacts from the upper levels to each interface is provided as follows: The plans indicate that all first floor windows on the side and rear elevation will be screened to address any overlooking. However, some ambiguity exists due to a lack of information on the plans. For example, the rear (eastern) first floor windows indicate screening applied on the plans, yet the elevations do not show this outcome. Also, although the side elevations suggest translucent glazing below 1.7m this is not made abundantly clear. To remove any doubt, it is recommended that a condition on the permit requires all first floor habitable room windows on the side and rear elevations to be screened in accordance with the Standard B22 (Overlooking objective). It is also noted that the roof located above the living room for the southern dwelling (to the east of the first floor family room) is not indicated to be a roof terrace. However, the elevations indicate a parapet/balustrade around this area which might suggest otherwise. A condition will require the deletion of this parapet/balustrade and the roof to be clearly marked as ‘non-trafficable’. Private open space The usable open space area to the rear of each dwelling is approximately 42 square metres. This is the area of lawn to each dwelling, not including the BBQ area or the covered deck. The objective of Clause 55.05-3 (Private open space) is: To provide adequate private open space for the reasonable recreation and service needs of residents. Standard B28 requires a

minimum of 25sqm of secluded private open space (SPOS) and a minimum of 40sqm of private open space. Whilst the proposal provides a minimum of 40sqm SPOS for each dwelling (in addition to the private open space within the front setback of the site), in the context of a four bedroom family home it is considered necessary to increase the amount of SPOS within this rear yard environs. As such, the double garage of each dwelling should be reduced to a single garage. The area lost from the garages must be used for dual purpose – i.e. as an at-grade car space and as open space area. Any new car parking spaces must also be adequately accessed from the lane in terms of vehicular turning movements. Clause 22.05 – Environmentally Sustainable Development (ESD): In accordance with the requirements of Council’s ESD policy, the application was submitted with a Sustainability Design Assessment (SDA), including a BESS Report. The BESS Report shows a score of 52%, meaning the development achieves best practice and can be supported. It is recommended that the SDA and BESS Report are endorsed under any permit issued for the development.


Clause 22.18 – Stormwater Management:

In accordance with requirements of Council’s Stormwater Policy the application was submitted with a STORM Rating Report. The STORM Report shows a rating of 101% which satisfies Council’s policy. This score is based on a water tank capacity of 12,000 litters across the site. Although underground tanks with this capacity are indicated on the ground floor plan (beneath the garage), a condition requires them to be annotated to be connected to the toilets. Covenant 0866597:

Multiple objections have raised a concern that the proposal is inconsistent with a single dwelling covenant on title. There is a covenant on title, but it does not restrict development to a single dwelling. The relevant wording is:

“will not erect any building (…) other than a double fronted dwelling-house” A number of objectors have interpreted this wording as a single dwelling covenant. However this is not the case. The Covenant does not specify that development is limited to a ‘single’ dwelling, but rather that any dwelling constructed must be ‘double fronted’. The application was submitted with legal advice that is consistent with this position. This advice is accepted. The covenant does however restrict the materials of construction and requires the design of a dwelling to be a ‘double fronted’. As stated earlier in this report, Planning Application 1014/18 is currently under assessment to vary the covenant by replacing the words 'any building on the said land' with 'any more than two dwellings on the said land', and removing the words 'other than a double fronted dwelling house' and 'and to be in accordance with plans and specifications to be approved of by you the said Elliott Cairnes his Executors, administrators or transferees'

These amendments to the covenant are required to ensure the proposed development does not result in a breach of covenant. Relevantly, section 61(4) requires the following (emphasis added):

(4) If the grant of a permit would authorise anything which would result in a breach of

a registered restrictive covenant, the responsible authority must refuse to grant the permit unless a permit has been issued, or a decision made to grant a permit, to allow the removal or variation of the covenant.

As a result, a decision to grant this development (ref. 692/18) cannot be granted without a decision to grant the covenant variation application (ref. 1014/18). Human Rights Consideration This application has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 (including the Stonnington Planning Scheme), reviewed by the State Government and which complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.


CONCLUSION

Having assessed the application against the relevant planning controls, it is recommended that the proposal be supported for the following reasons:

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of State and Local Policy.

The proposal is consistent with Council’s Neighbourhood Character Policy.

The proposal does not result in unreasonable amenity impacts on adjoining land.

ATTACHMENTS

⇨1. PA - 692-18 - 24 Bonview Road Malvern - Attachment 1 of 1 Plans

RECOMMENDATION That a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit No: 692/18 for the land located at 24 Bonview Road Malvern be issued under the Stonnington Planning Scheme for the construction of two dwellings on a lot in the General Residential Zone, subject to the following conditions: 1. Before the commencement of the development, 1 copy of plans drawn to scale

and fully dimensioned, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with the application (known as known as Drawing Nos: TP-008, TP-010, TP-011, TP-012, TP-013, TP-013/1, TP-014, TP-015, TP-016, TP-017 and TP-018, all revision 03 and Council date stamped 04-02-2019) but modified to show:

a) Deletion of the parapet/balustrade around the roof to the east of the Family

Room to the southern dwelling and the roof area denoted as ‘non-trafficable’.

b) All first floor windows on the side and rear elevations must be screened in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6. Clear annotations, dimensions and detail of screening type must be provided.

c) The double garage for each dwelling to be reduced to a single garage, with the remaining space provided as a dual purpose space (i.e. provides one car space as well as open space for future residents). Updated turning circles must also be provided to ensure the new garage layout is accessible to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

d) Any garage must have a floor level no lower than 50mm above the abutting edge of the rear lane at the projection of the southern side of the respective garage. Any ramps required to achieve this must comply with the Design Standards of Clause 52.06 and must not alter the level of the laneway in any way.

e) An annotation of the water tanks on ground floor plan and elevations in accordance with the STORM Report submitted with the application.

f) An annotation on the Ground Floor Plan that the existing vehicle crossing on the Bonview Road frontage of the site will be removed, and the nature strip, kerb and channel reinstated.

g) The location of street tree protection fencing in accordance with Condition 8.

h) Any change as required by condition 10.



All to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

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

works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason, without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

3. This permit does not come into effect until covenant 0866597 is removed or

varied from the lot’s title as allowed by Planning Permit Application 1014/18. 4. The level of the footpaths and/or laneways must not be lowered or altered in any

way to facilitate access to the site. 5. Prior to occupation of the building, the existing vehicular crossing made

redundant by the building and works hereby permitted must be broken out and re-instated as standard footpath and kerb and channel at the permit holders cost to the approval and satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

6. Concurrent with the endorsement of plans under Condition 1, a landscape plan

must be prepared by a landscape architect or suitably qualified or experienced landscape designer, must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the landscape plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The landscape plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions. The landscape plan must be in accordance with the landscape concept plan prepared by Robyn Barlow Design, project BV-18, sheets SD-LF-010 and SD-LF-011, revision 01, and Council date stamped 4 February 2019, but modified to show:

a) The Crepe Myrtle 'Diamonds in the Dark' needs to be replaced with a large

Crepe Myrtle 7. Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works as shown on

the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Landscaping must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

8. Before the development (including excavation and demolition) starts, a tree

protection fence must be erected around the street trees in front of the site. Fencing is to be compliant with Section 4 of AS 4970. Signage identifying the need for approval from Council’s Parks Unit for any root cutting (prior to it occurring) must also be displayed on the fence.

9. Prior to a building permit being issued, a report for the legal point of discharge

must be obtained from Council and a drainage design for the development must be prepared by a suitably qualified Engineer in accordance with all ‘recommendations’ and requirements contained in that report. All drainage must be by means of a gravity based system with the exception of runoff from any basement ramp and agricultural drains which may be pumped. The relevant building surveyor must check and approve the drainage design and ensure that protection of the building is provided from a 1 in 100 A.R.I. rainfall event as required by the Building Regulations.


10. The permit holder must at their cost provide a stormwater detention system to

restrict runoff from the development to no greater than the existing runoff based on a 1 in 10 A.R.I. to the satisfaction of Council’s Infrastructure Unit. Alternatively, in lieu of the stand-alone detention system, the owner may provide stormwater tanks that are in total 2,000 litres greater than those tanks required to satisfy WSUD requirements for the development. Those tanks must be connected to all toilets.

11. The project must incorporate the Water Sensitive Urban Design initiatives

detailed in the endorsed site plan and/or stormwater management report. 12. All plant and equipment (including air-conditioning units) shall be located or

screened so as to minimise visibility from any of the surrounding footpaths and from overhead views and shall be baffled so as to minimise the emission of unreasonable noise to the environment in accordance with Section 48A of the Environment Protection Act 1970 to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

13. Prior to the occupation of the development, all screening devices as shown on

the endorsed plans must be installed and permanently fixed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The screens must then be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.



permit.

In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a request may be submitted to the Responsible Authority within the prescribed timeframes for an extension of the periods referred to in this condition.

NOTES:

I. This permit does not constitute any authority to carry out any building works or occupy the building or part of the building unless all relevant building permits are obtained.

II. Nothing in this permit hereby issued shall be construed to allow the removal of,

damage to or pruning of a significant tree (including the roots) without the further written approval of Council.

“Significant Tree” means a tree or palm:

a) with a trunk circumference of 140 cm or greater measured at 1.4 m above its base;

b) with a total circumference of all its trunks of 140 cm or greater measured at 1.4 m above its base;

c) with a trunk circumference of 180 cm or greater measured at its base; or d) with a total circumference of all its trunks of 180 cm or greater measured at

its base.


III. Please contact the Council Arborists on 8290 1333 to ascertain if permission is required for tree removal or pruning or for further information and protection of trees during construction works.

IV. Nothing in the permit hereby issued may be construed to allow the removal of,


V. At the permit issue date, Section 69 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987

stated that the Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to if a request is made in writing within the following timeframes:

i. Before or within 6 months after the permit expiry date, where the




5. HOUSING STRATEGY - OUTCOMES OF STAGE 1 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Acting Manager City Strategy: Hannah McBride-Burgess General Manager Planning & Amenity: Stuart Draffin

PURPOSE

To consider the outcomes of the Stage 1 community engagement undertaken to inform the preparation of a draft Housing Strategy. BACKGROUND On 17 December 2018, Council resolved to ‘endorse the Stage 1 community engagement activities…which will include a symposium and a community panel as additional engagement activities, which will inform the subsequent preparation of Council’s draft housing strategy.’

The ‘additional engagement activities’ were to run concurrently with the original community engagement program designed by Council’s housing strategy consultants, Ethos Urban. Capire Consulting Group was subsequently appointed in January 2019 to advise and deliver the community panel component of the engagement given their specialisation in this field. A 12-week community engagement period commenced on Friday 1 March and closed to the general public on Sunday 26 May (two final focus group discussions were held on Tuesday 11 and Wednesday 12 June). DISCUSSION

Promotion Promotion of the community engagement activities was undertaken prior to, and throughout the engagement period as detailed in Attachment 1. This included media releases, email notifications, advertorial content in the Stonnington Leader, tram stop advertising, and promotional material in Council libraries, pools and other facilities. Engagement Activities and Outcomes Six (6) engagement activities were undertaken throughout the engagement period and attracted a total of 614 participants, as follows:- 1. A Shaping our Neighbourhoods Symposium – 88 participants 2. Eight Roaming pop-up information stalls – 168 participants 3. Two library drop-in sessions – 51 participants 4. An Online survey - 216 responses received 5. Five Focus group discussions – 49 participants 6. A Community Panel – 42 representative participants from 105 expressions of interest In addition to the above, the project website received 1,409 visits and on average each of the eight Facebook posts reached an audience of approximately 1,600 people.


The outcomes of the Stage 1 community engagement activities are detailed in two reports:

Ethos Urban’s ‘Stonnington Housing Strategy: Phase 1 Engagement Report’ (Attachment 2); and

Capire Consulting Group’s ‘A Housing Strategy for the City of Stonnington: Stonnington Community Panel’ (Attachment 3).

Summaries of the Symposium and the Community Panel are included below, while the other engagement activities are summarised in Attachment 4. ‘Shaping our Neighbourhoods’ Symposium – 20 March 2019

The symposium sought to help the community better understand the reasons behind demographic and built-form changes, and to help their understanding of planning processes and the policy context environment. It was envisaged that a well-informed community could provide more meaningful and targeted feedback into the other community engagement activities, as well as discuss these important issues with neighbours, friends and families with an informed view. Councillors, various representative Council staff, and members of the consultant project team. The agenda included presentations by four industry experts:

Lailani Burra (CEO, id – The Population Experts) discussing population growth and demographic change;

Steve Dunn (until recently Executive Director, Victorian Planning Authority, currently seconded to the Department of Health and Human Services) discussing State Government planning policy;

Kathy Mitchell (Chief Panel Member, Planning Panels Victoria) discussing Planning Panels and the planning process; and

Jeremy McLeod (founding architect, Nightingale Housing model) discussing an alternative housing model.

Audience members were invited to prepare questions in facilitated round-table discussions, which were then presented to the experts in a final panel discussion involving the experts and Stuart Draffin (General Manager, Planning and Amenity). The panel discussion also included a short Q&A session with the audience. Based on the questions posed to the panel, key findings from the symposium are:

There is appetite to learn more about population change, policy, and how Council is managing that anticipated change.

There is also interest in learning about alternative, innovative housing models and how planning policy can be shaped to respond to environmental design, heritage, and to deliver high-quality outcomes.

Heritage preservation, neighbourhood design and quality streetscapes (especially vegetation) remain important issues for the Stonnington community.

At the conclusion of the event, attendees were invited to complete an evaluation of the symposium. Twenty-nine evaluations were received. Overall, symposium participants were very satisfied with the event. In particular, the quality of the information presented was highly rated. From those that provided feedback, everyone had learnt at least something from the night and no-one stated that they had not learnt anything at the event.


Community Panel

The purpose of the community panel was to gain more in depth feedback and engagement from a representative-sample of the Stonnington community. Capire Consulting Group independently managed the recruitment process and selected 48 people to closely represent the demographic profile of the Stonnington community (43 people were being sought, 48 invitees accounted for potential drop-off). From the 48 people invited, 42 people attended the first workshop session. There was some drop-off in participant numbers which is a typical occurrence in community engagement events (due to several factors such as participants having a set agenda on what they would like to discuss which then does not match the conversation had on the day, or personal reasons such as illness or family commitments). The remaining three workshop sessions were attended by 33 members. Across the four 2-3 hour workshop sessions, the Panel members were asked to deliberate on the question “how can Council manage the future change within the City of Stonnington whilst protecting what we love about our neighbourhoods?”

To support the deliberations, a series of expert presenters shared important information about a range of topics including demographics, the planning process, housing affordability, environmentally sustainable design, heritage, developer perspectives, and State Government planning policy. This information coupled with facilitated sessions supported the Panel in preparing a set of 25 principles as recommendations to be considered in developing the housing strategy. The principles included a range of anticipated outcomes relating to housing choice, open space, transport options, community infrastructure and development types. The top five priority principles for the Panel were:- 1. Where possible, new housing needs to provide access to green open space. 2. The distinctive character of each Stonnington neighbourhood is to be acknowledged,

protected and enhanced through planning controls. 3. New housing developments to be preferred near or adjacent to strategic, integrated

public transport system with the capacity to absorb existing and future growth. 4. New developments shall use materials and design to better reflect the character and

heritage of local streetscapes and neighbourhoods. 5. New housing to use building materials and design that ensures long term liveability and

that contributes to low environmental impacts. The Panel also prepared a series of key messages in the form of a ‘communique’ which summarises their view about what they felt is important for Council to hear about their experience in the process and the principles they thought were most important. The Panel communique is detailed in Section 3.3 of Attachment 3, however two key messages to Council were:-

‘…please ensure you remember what we love about the area in regulating for current and future development…green open spaces; treed properties that support and sustain biodiversity; heritage character alongside innovative, sustainable design’.

‘…please ensure that all effort is made to advocate to State Government for commitments around schools, health facilities and infrastructure to support growth. It is unsustainable to build for a larger population without considering the education, transport, health and social services needs of that increase’.


Panel members were invited to complete pre and post benchmarking surveys to gauge their level of understanding about urban planning, housing and Council decision-making. The post exit survey data demonstrates a level of increased knowledge and learning with each survey criteria receiving a higher average score. Panel members were also invited to provide feedback about their experience in the process with most participants indicating a positive experience that they would participate in again if provided the opportunity. Summary of Key Findings of engagement to date A significant number of ideas and views has been gathered from the Stonnington community throughout the 12 weeks of engagement activities. Given the nature of the process, the five key principles from the Community Panel are clear and have been detailed above. A summary of the key messages is provided below: 1. Public transport, parks and gardens are the most valued types of community

infrastructure. Access to these assets should be a key consideration when determining the location for new residential development. The Housing Strategy should identify requirements to ensure future access to these assets are maintained and improved across the municipality;

2. Local heritage and neighbourhood character is highly valued by the community. Ensuring high-quality developments with improved façade designs and landscaping, and appropriate scale and setbacks to protect local neighbourhood character and heritage is important;

3. Future housing stock should include more environmentally sustainable design features and be constructed to a high quality standard. The aesthetics and internal amenity (space and natural light) of new stock should be improved;

4. Housing that meets the needs of a diverse community should be encouraged. Housing that supports families, group housing, ageing in place, long-term residents (both renters and home owners), and different price options is important;

5. There is a lack of both short-term and long-term solutions to homelessness and affordability issues. Participants identified that Stonnington is a privileged community and could do more to address these issues.

Overall the engagement activities and project website attracted over 2000 people, however one shortfall was representation from the younger 18-24 age group (despite extensive efforts to attract this demographic). The community panel, pop-up stalls, drop-in sessions and Renters Focus Group had the strongest representation from the 25-50 age group. The 50+ age group were well represented in the community panel, pop-up stalls and online survey activities. POLICY IMPLICATIONS Council Plan 2017-2021

The current Council Plan recognises the challenges from Melbourne’s accelerating growth and the constant development pressure and associated amenity issues for Stonnington. It also highlights Council’s advocacy role with Victorian and Australian Governments in improving public housing infrastructure. The Council Plan aims to “enhance community engagement to ensure Council makes long-term decisions in the best interests of the community” (Community Strategy C4).


The Housing Strategy will develop a framework plan to help address the challenges identified in the Council Plan and will also formulate an approach to advocate with State and Federal governments on the provision and quality of public housing and infrastructure in Stonnington. Plan Melbourne 2017-2050

This State Government Plan highlights Victoria’s increasing population growth and changing demographic pattern and recognises the need to cater for diverse housing needs and lifestyles. The Plan also recognises the need to ensure housing affordability and an adequate supply of public housing. It emphasises the need for enabling people to be able to live closer to jobs, public transport and services for social, economic and environmental reasons. The Plan defines where housing growth should occur and anticipates that “…these areas will experience significant, but planned housing and population change compared to other parts of Melbourne and regional Victoria, and will require new or enhanced services and infrastructure”. FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS

The Housing Strategy Project is being funded from the City Strategy consulting budget over three financial years, 2017/18, 2018/19 and 2019/2020. The cost of the project is estimated to be $130,000, including two stages of community engagement. The symposium and community panel were beyond the scope of the original Housing Strategy Project Brief and therefore resulted in additional costs. The symposium and community panel elements were funded from the City Strategy consulting budget from the 2018/2019 financial year. The symposium cost approximately $28,200 and the community panel cost approximately $85,000. This excludes staff costs and approximately $22,500 spent on promoting the symposium, community panel and other engagement activities. Next Steps The findings from the Stage 1 community engagement will be used to inform the preparation of a draft housing strategy. The strategy will provide a strategic framework for housing growth and change in Stonnington to 2036, and identify high-level infrastructure needs required to support that growth. It is anticipated that a draft housing strategy document will be available for public exhibition and comment (Stage 2 community engagement) later this year. CONCLUSION

To be successful, the Housing Strategy must be based on a shared vision that is supported by members of the community. The Stage 1 community engagement activities aimed to gather the necessary insight to formulate this shared vision for housing in Stonnington. The Stage 1 engagement programme was extensive in terms of both the consultation period and the activities undertaken. The symposium and the community panel in particular had never been undertaken in Stonnington before and both received positive feedback from participants, demonstrating Council’s commitment to innovative and best-practice engagement processes. The engagement outcomes and particularly the key findings, as detailed in this report will provide a solid foundation for developing a draft housing strategy that reflects the views of the Stonnington community.


HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION

This recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

ATTACHMENTS

⇨1. Attachment 1 - Promotion Snapshot Excluded

⇨2. Attachment 2 - EU Housing Strategy Phase 1 Engagement Report Excluded

⇨3. Attachment 3 - Capire - Stonnington Community Panel Report Excluded

⇨4. Attachment 4 - Summary of Engagement Activities Excluded

RECOMMENDATION That Council: 1. Note the outcomes of the Stage 1 community engagement programme which will

be used to inform the preparation of Council’s draft Housing Strategy; 2. Note the key principles from the Stage 1 engagement activities that will be used

to guide the development of a draft Housing Strategy:-

2.1. Public transport, parks and gardens are the most valued types of community infrastructure. Access to these assets should be a key consideration when determining the location for new residential development. The housing strategy should identify requirements to ensure future access to these assets are maintained and improved across the municipality;

2.2. Local heritage and neighbourhood character is highly valued by the community. Ensuring high-quality developments with improved façade designs and landscaping, and appropriate scale and setbacks to protect local neighbourhood character and heritage is important;

2.3. Future housing stock should include more environmentally sustainable design features and be constructed to a high quality standard. The aesthetics and internal amenity (space and natural light) of new stock should be improved;

2.4. Housing that meets the needs of a diverse community should be encouraged. Housing that supports families, group housing, ageing in place, long-term residents (both renters and home owners), and different price options is important;

2.5. There is a lack of both short-term and long-term solutions to homelessness and affordability issues. Participants identified that Stonnington is a privileged community and could do more to address these issues.

../../RedirectToInvalidFileName.asp?FileName=CL_05082019_ATT_EXCLUDED.PDF





3. Note the key principles from the Community Panel that will be used to guide the

development of a draft Housing Strategy:- 3.1. Where possible, new housing needs to provide access to green open

space; 3.2. The distinctive character of each Stonnington neighbourhood is to be

acknowledged, protected and enhanced through planning controls; 3.3. New housing developments to be preferred near or adjacent to strategic,

integrated public transport system with the capacity to absorb existing and future growth;

3.4. New developments shall use materials and design to better reflect the character and heritage of local streetscapes and neighbourhoods;

3.5. New housing to use building materials and design that ensures long term liveability and that contributes to low environmental impacts.

4. Note next step in the project is to prepare a draft Housing Strategy which will be

presented to Council for consideration later in the year (prior to the Stage 2 community engagement phase).

5. Thanks all members of the public who participated in the community

engagement activities, and particularly the members of the Community Panel for their time and contributions to the process.


6. DRAFT INCLUSION PLAN 2019-2022

Manager Diversity & Aged Services: Liz Daley General Manager Community & Culture: Cath Harrod

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to present the draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 to

Council for approval for community consultation for a period of 4 weeks.

BACKGROUND

The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 (Attachment 1) provides a strategic plan for Council to continue building a community which fosters inclusion by removing barriers to participation faced by people with disability.

The draft Plan meets Council’s obligation under Section 38 of the Victorian Disability Act (2006) to deliver a Disability Action Plan. It also acknowledges the role that the National Disability Insurance Scheme now has as part of the broader disability landscape and ensures Council’s continued approach to inclusion is through a social model of disability. The social model perspective places the onus on the community to make adjustments to accommodate disability as an expected form of human diversity.

Of note is the change in name from the previous “Access and Inclusion Plan” to “Inclusion Plan” reflecting values expressed in the Council Plan (2017-2021) and the broader progression of society where diversity is valued and everyone is included in all aspects of community life.

DISCUSSION

The Victorian State Disability Plan, “Absolutely Everyone (2017-2020)” describes a disability as any continuing condition that restricts everyday activities. The State Disability Plan, accepts that more than often, people with a disability face widespread social and cultural barriers that have a real and negative impact upon their lives. It acknowledges that people with a disability are less likely to be employed, more likely to have lower levels of education, more likely to live in a household with a low income, more likely to live in public and social housing, and less likely to participate in sport and recreational pursuits or in community groups.

The Council Plan (2017-2021) commits to delivering an inclusive, healthy, creative, sustainable and smart community. This underpins the draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 which in its simplest form, inclusion is about the opportunity to be involved, to contribute and to be valued.

The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 has been developed following extensive consultation, ensuring that the voices of people who have lived experience of disability, the agencies who deliver services to people with disabilities, the carers of people with disabilities, the Stonnington Access Committee, as well as relevant Council Officers are heard.

Demographics

The 2016 ABS Census identified approximately 3,500 people living in the City of Stonnington needed help in their day to day lives due to a disability, long term health condition or old age. The Census identified that there were over 8,500 people providing unpaid assistance to a person with disability, a person with long term illness or an older person. Combined this represents over 10 percent of Stonnington’s population and reinforces how important it is for Council to focus upon making Stonnington an inclusive place for all members of the community. Detailed demographic information is available in Attachment 2.


Council has a critical role in supporting people with a disability and their families and carers through developing inclusive policies and plans, providing infrastructure, services and information, championing inclusive practices, and most importantly through ensuring people with a disability and their families and carers are treated fairly, equally and with respect.

Consultation and Engagement

The following consultation was undertaken to inform the draft Plan:

The Access Stonnington Committee (3 workshops) – at Plan commencement; during the consultation program; and as key priorities and directions were identified.

Organisations (1 workshop) - 15 people attended, representing 9 organisations.

Individuals who care for a person with a disability (1 workshop) - 10 people attended.

Individuals with a lived experience of disability (2 workshops) - 25 people attended.

Council officers (2 workshops) - 36 officers attended these workshops.

Community survey through Connect Stonnington; although heavily promoted it was completed by 12 people.

Consultation identified four themes to focus the draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 under which a series of actions have been developed to deliver priority areas. These are:

Knowledge Building and Information – Commits to building community capability of

what it means to live with a disability in an inclusive community. Includes a role as provider and broker of information about services and supports.

Leadership and Advocacy – Commits to inclusion in key policies and plans and to modelling inclusive practices. Includes celebrating and championing; as well as collaborating to support; inclusive practices. Commits to advocacy for people with disabilities, their families and carers about issues impacting everyday life.

Choice, Participation and Empowerment – Commits to actively consult and empower people to influence decisions, policies and plans. Includes working to eliminate barriers to enable participation when people want; rather than when they can. Includes celebrating achievements and talents of people with a disability.

Responsiveness – Commits to active listening and ensuring those needs are heard,

understood and responded to. Includes delivering responsive programs and services, making sure they are consistent with Council’s broader priorities, and delivering the right outcomes for people with a disability.

A consultation summary report is provided as Attachment 3.

Community feedback on the draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 will complete the engagement process ensuring the final Plan is reflective of community needs and expectations. A community consultation plan is provided as Attachment 4.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 will assist Council delivery of Council Plan objectives of Community and Liveability. The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 considers United Nation commitments, Federal and State legislation and policies.

FINANCIAL AND RESOURCES IMPLICATIONS

The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 will be delivered over the next three years, with appropriate budget planning for key initiatives being the responsibility of the relevant Council area.


LEGAL ADVICE & IMPLICATIONS

The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 fulfils Council’s obligation under Section 38 of the Victorian Disability Act (2006) to deliver a Disability Action Plan.

CONCLUSION

The draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 provides the strategic direction for Council in supporting people with disability living, working and visiting the City of Stonnington. The draft Plan responds to the changing and dynamic nature of the landscape in service delivery and in providing services and supports to people with disability within a changing policy framework such as the introduction of the NDIS.

HUMAN RIGHTS CONSIDERATION

This recommendation complies with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

ATTACHMENTS

⇨1. Draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 Excluded

⇨2. Background Research Document - Draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 Excluded

⇨3. Consultation Summary Report - Draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 Excluded

⇨4. Communications and Consultation Plan - Draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 Excluded

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Approve the draft Inclusion Plan 2019-2022 for community consultation for a period of 4 weeks prior; and

2. Notes the draft Inclusion Plan will be amended as appropriate following community consultation and presented to Council for final consideration.






o) Confidential

1. POTENTIAL PROPERTY PURCHASE - SOUTH YARRA

Property Coordinator: Peter Angwin

Confidential report circulated separately.

council meeting notice paper · council meeting notice paper monday 5 august 2019 order of business...

Documents