knox city council...knox city council planning applications decided by responsible officer 1...

KNOX CITY COUNCIL MINUTES

Ordinary Meeting of Council

Held at the Civic Centre

511 Burwood Highway Wantirna South

On

Tuesday 15 December 2015

KNOX CITY COUNCIL

MINUTES FOR THE ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL HELD AT THE

CIVIC CENTRE, 511 BURWOOD HIGHWAY, WANTIRNA SOUTH ON

TUESDAY 15 DECEMBER 2015 AT 5.00 P.M. PRESENT:

Cr T Holland (Mayor & Chairperson) Friberg Ward Cr P Lockwood Baird Ward Cr J Mortimore Chandler Ward Cr J Cossari Collier Ward Cr A Gill (arrived at 5.41pm) Dinsdale Ward Cr K Orpen Dobson Ward Cr L Cooper Scott Ward Cr D Pearce Taylor Ward Cr N Seymour Tirhatuan Ward Dr G Emonson Chief Executive Officer Dr I Bell Director – Engineering &

Infrastructure Mr A Kourambas Director - City Development Ms J Truman Director – Corporate Development Ms K Stubbings Director – Community Services Ms F Cousins Acting Manager - Governance &

Innovation

THE MEETING OPENED WITH A PRAYER, STATEMENT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND A STATEMENT OF COMMITMENT

“Knox City Council acknowledges we are on the

traditional land of the Wurundjeri and Bunurong people and pay our respects to elders both past and present.”

COUNCIL 15 December 2015 BUSINESS: Page Nos. 1. APOLOGIES AND REQUESTS FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Nil. 2. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST

Nil. 3. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

MOVED: CR. PEARCE SECONDED: CR. COSSARI

3.1 Confirmation of Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday 24 November 2015 CARRIED

MOVED: CR. PEARCE SECONDED: CR. COSSARI

3.2 Confirmation of Minutes of Strategic Planning Committee Meeting held on Tuesday 8 December 2015 CARRIED

MOVED: CR. ORPEN SECONDED: CR. COSSARI

3.3

Confirmation of Minutes of Ferntree Gully Cemetery Trust Special Committee Meeting held on Wednesday 9 September 2015 CARRIED

4. PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS

Nil.

COUNCIL 15 December 2015

MAYORAL STATEMENT

Before we move to the next item of business I'd like to acknowledge that this is our Chief Executive Officer's last meeting here at Knox. Dr Emonson has announced his resignation and appointment as the Executive Director Local Government Victoria, with the Victorian State Government. I would like to personally thank Graeme for his passion, commitment and the contribution that he has made to Knox City Council. Graeme has served as the Chief Executive Officer at Knox for 14 years and over that time has led the organisation to be a highly regarded, high performing local government organisation. On behalf of the Council and the Knox community, I wish him well for his future endeavours and look forward to continuing to work with him in his new role heading up Local Government Victoria. I give notice of two items of urgent business at tonight's meeting regarding this matter.

COUNCIL 15 December 2015 5. REPORTS BY COUNCILLORS

5.1 Committees & Delegates 1.

5.2 Ward Issues 3.

6. CONSIDERING AND ORDERING UPON OFFICERS’ REPORTS WITHIN THE

CITY DEVELOPMENT GROUP

6.1

All Wards Report Of Planning Applications Decided Under Delegation (160/1/06)

4.

6.2

Tirhatuan Ward Application for the Construction of Eighteen (18) Dwellings on the Land (Seventeen (17) Double Storey and One (1) Single Storey), Removal of Native Vegetation and Alteration of Access to a Road Zone Category 1 at 1030 Wellington Road, Rowville, Melways Ref. 82 A3 (Application No. P/2015/6661)

12.

6.3

Tirhatuan Ward Application to End Two (2) Section 173 Agreements and Apply a New Section 173 Agreement for Lot B7 on PS705529, Harcrest Estate at 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South, Melway Ref. 72/K2

59.

6.4

All Wards Plan Melbourne Refresh – Knox Submission

72.

7. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME (Following the completion of business relating to Item 6, City Development, the business before the Council Meeting will be deferred to consider questions submitted by the public). 133. 8. CONSIDERING AND ORDERING UPON OFFICERS’ REPORTS WITHIN THE

ENGINEERING & INFRASTRUCTURE GROUP

8.1

Dinsdale Ward Update on Bayswater Level Crossings Removal

134.

8.2

Tirhatuan Ward Scoresby Village Precinct Masterplan (Scoresby Recreation Reserve and Scoresby Village Shopping Centre)

155.

COUNCIL 15 December 2015 9. CONSIDERING AND ORDERING UPON OFFICERS’ REPORTS WITHIN THE

COMMUNITY SERVICES GROUP

9.1

All Wards Recreation and Leisure Liaison Group – Annual Report

197.

9.2

All Wards Knox Access and Inclusion Plan for People with Disabilities 2016

202.

10. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

10.1

All Wards Works Report (As Of 24 November 2015)

225.

10.2

All Wards Supplementary Valuations

241.

10.3

All Wards Assemblies of Councillors

245.

11. MOTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS PREVIOUSLY BEEN GIVEN 254. 12. SUPPLEMENTARY ITEMS 254.

12.1

All Wards Incidental Community Grants Program Applications

254.

13. URGENT BUSINESS 260. 13.1 Urgent Business 260. 13.1.1 Recruitment of Chief Executive Officer 260. 13.1.2 Motion of Thanks 261. 13.2 Call Up Items 262. 14. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE 262. GRAEME EMONSON CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

1 COUNCIL - REPORTS BY COUNCILLORS 15 December 2015

5. REPORTS BY COUNCILLORS

5.1 Committees & Delegates 5.1.1 COUNCILLOR NICOLE SEYMOUR Councillor Seymour attended the following Meetings

• Knox Active Ageing Advisory Committee • Knox Regional Sports Park Advisory Committee • Berrabri Preschool Annual General Meeting • Knox Disability Advisory Committee • Community Consultation Session regarding Stud Park Reserve • City of Knox District Scouts Annual Report and Presentation • Community Health and Wellbeing Reference Group • Meals on Wheels Christmas Luncheon • Rowville Community Kitchen Christmas Luncheon 5.1.2 COUNCILLOR LISA COOPER Councillor Cooper attended the following Meetings

• Knox Regional Sports Park Advisory Committee • Launch of Wally Tew Reserve Playground • Knox Community Sports Centre Management Committee • Youth Issues Advisory Committee • Knox Park Primary School choir visit to Amaroo Gardens Nursing Home • Knox Football Club Award Presentations • All Nations Cup Final • Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-day Saints Carol Service 5.1.3 COUNCILLOR DARREN PEARCE Councillor Pearce attended the following Meetings

• Park Ridge Preschool Annual General Meeting • Audit Committee • Knox Central Advisory Committee 5.1.4 COUNCILLOR KARIN ORPEN Councillor Orpen attended the following Meetings

• Ferntree Gully Cemetery Trust Special Committee • Victorian Local Governance Association - Q & A with Minister Natalie

Hutchins • Victorian Local Governance Association End of Year Dinner • Ferny Creek Reserve Open Day • Society of St Vincent de Paul Senior Citizens Christmas Party • City of Knox District Scouts Annual Report and Presentation • Audit Committee


5.1 Committees & Delegates (cont'd) 5.1.5 COUNCILLOR JOHN MORTIMORE Councillor Mortimore attended the following Meetings

• Meals on Wheels Christmas Luncheon • Eastern Alliance for Greenhouse Action • Transport and Mobility Advisory Committee • Municipal Association of Victoria Environment Committee • Shaun Leane MP • Knox Community Safety Advisory Committee • Metropolitan Waste Management Group • Community Health and Wellbeing Reference Group • Environment Advisory Committee 5.1.6 COUNCILLOR PETER LOCKWOOD Councillor Lockwood attended the following Meetings

• Knox Multicultural Advisory Committee and Inter Faith Network combined meeting

• Eastern Transport Coalition 5.1.7 COUNCILLOR TONY HOLLAND (MAYOR) Councillor Holland attended the following Meetings

• Victorian Local Governance Association Mayoral Welcome with Hon Natalie Hutchins, Minister for Local Government

• Eastern Region Mayors and Chief Executive Officer's Group • Alan Tudge MP, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister • Senior Citizen's Christmas Luncheon hosted by Society of St Vincent de

Paul and St John the Baptist Parish • All Nations Cup Final and Presentation of Trophy • Fairhills High School End of Year Awards Presentation • Meals on Wheels Christmas Luncheon • Audit Committee • Knox Central Advisory Committee • Knox Youth Council Awards Presentation • Carols by Candlelight • Wattletree Primary School Opening of New Facilities • Launch of Wally Tew Reserve Playground • Mountain Gate Shopping Centre Upgrade Opening


5.2 Ward Issues

5.2.1 COUNCILLOR PEARCE (TAYLOR WARD)

• Councillor Pearce advised of his recent attendance at the Heany Park Scout Group end of year break up. Councillor Pearce acknowledged the outstanding efforts of retiring leaders Will Druiven and Michelle Raymond in their service.

5.2.2 COUNCILLOR ORPEN (DOBSON WARD)

• Councillor Orpen provided an update on the fire siren issue raised at the last Council Meeting. Councillor Orpen noted there had been a great deal of support for the service on social media since raising this issue. She also advised that she had received advice from the CFA confirming that the early warning system was going to be reviewed and that a siren, in some shape of form, would be retained. She did however note her disappointment that consultation would occur within the CFA regarding this matter but not externally with the community. Councillor Orpen advised that she had passed this information onto local CFA’s.

5.2.3 COUNCILLOR MORTIMORE (CHANDLER WARD)

• Councillor Mortimore was pleased to advise of the success of The Basin CFA’s Carols by Candlelight in the park. Councillor Mortimore also noted the positive feedback received in relation to the work by Council on the pavilion and surrounds. He further advised that a free concert would be held in the park this weekend for those people who had not been able to attend the Carols.

• Councillor Mortimore advised that further consultation would be undertaken regarding the proposed location of the toilet at Alchester Village.

5.2.4 COUNCILLOR COSSARI (COLLIER WARD)

• Councillor Cossari praised the Christmas decorations at the Civic Centre noting that Christmas is a time of peace, harmony and love.

4 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015

ALL WARDS

6.1 REPORT OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS DECIDED UNDER DELEGATION

SUMMARY: Manager – City Planning (Paul Dickie)

Details of planning applications considered under delegation are referred for information. It is recommended that the items be noted.

RECOMMENDATION

That the planning applications decided under delegation report (between 1 November to 30 November 2015) be noted.

REPORT

Details of planning applications decided under delegation from 1 November to 30 November 2015 are attached. The applications are summarised as follows:

Application Type No

Building & Works: Residential Other

14 7

Tree Removal/Pruning 11 Units 22 Subdivision 28 Change of Use 4 Signage 2 Boundary Realignment 2 Apartments 1 Car Parking Reduction 1 Demolition 1

TOTAL 93 COUNCIL RESOLUTION MOVED: CR. COSSARI SECONDED: CR. PEARCE

That the planning applications decided under delegation report (between 1 November to 30 November 2015) be noted. CARRIED


Knox City Council Planning Applications Decided by Responsible Officer

1 November – 30 November 2015

Ward No/ Type Address Description Decision

Baird 2015/9092 6 Corporate Boulevard BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Buildings and works (extend existing mezzanine)

2/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6592 461 Dorset Road BAYSWATER VIC 3153

2 Lot Subdivision (Approved Unit Development)

6/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6659 241 Dorset Road BORONIA VIC 3155

Construction of additions to existing building and advertising signage

5/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6099 203 Boronia Road BORONIA VIC 3155

Development of seven (7) double storey dwellings and provision of access to a Road Zone Category 1

6/11/2015 Notice of Decision


Tree Removal and Maintenance Works 10/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6668 1/41 Commercial Road FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

3 Lot Boundary realignment 18/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6648 3 Stradbroke Road BORONIA VIC 3155


19/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6361 23 Pine Crescent BORONIA VIC 3155

The construction of four (4) double storey dwellings


Baird 2015/6593 21 McMahons Road FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Development of land for double storey dwelling at the rear of existing

16/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6654 8 Kearney Street BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Use of the land for an Indoor Recreation Facility and buildings and works (mezzanine extension)

19/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6427 932 Mountain Highway BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Construction of two (2) warehouses, associated car parking and alteration of access to a Road in a Road Zone Category 1

19/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6685 46 Westley Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

4 Lot Subdivision (approved development site)

24/11/2015 Approved





30/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6217 14 & 14A Pine Crescent BORONIA VIC 3155

The construction of 8 attached dwellings (three 3 storey and five 2 storey) on the land and associated 8 lot subdivision

24/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6628

1-5,7, 9-11, 13, 15-17 & 19-21 Corporate Boulevard BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Re-subdivision of Lots 8, 9, S15, S16, S17 and S21 and consolidation

20/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6709 9 Simpson Road FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

3 Lot Subdivision (approved unit development)

27/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6677 18 Woodvale Road BORONIA VIC 3155


24/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2014/6789 2 Wilson Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156


27/11/2015 Approved

Baird 2015/6536 189-191 Boronia Road BORONIA VIC 3155


30/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/9094 8 Pope Avenue BORONIA VIC 3155

Removal of one (1) Corymbia citriodora (Lemon-scented Gum)

6/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/9098 1 Dorrigo Drive BORONIA VIC 3155

Removal of one (1) Eucalyptus globulus (Blue Gum)

10/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6298 6 Kalman Drive BORONIA VIC 3155

The development of the land for two industrial buildings and car parking reduction

16/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6509 3 Hansen Road BORONIA VIC 3155

Buildings and works (construction of a garage) and the removal of one (1) Melaleuca linariifolia and one (1) Acacia melanoxylon.

13/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6652 953 Mountain Highway BORONIA VIC 3155

3 Lot Subdivision (approved unit development)

19/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6191 15 Rosella Avenue BORONIA VIC 3155

Construction of six (6) double storey dwellings


Chandler 2015/9100 19 Lockwoods Road BORONIA VIC 3155

The removal of one Liquidambar styraciflua tree

13/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6831 331 Forest Road THE BASIN VIC 3154 The removal of two Trees 20/11/2015 Approved



Chandler 2015/6857 5 Lyric Court THE BASIN VIC 3154

Removal of thirteen (13) Cypress trees comprising Hesperocyparis macrocarpa & XCupressocyparis leylandii

25/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/9101 267 Forest Road BORONIA VIC 3155

Remove one (1) dead/dying Quercus palustris (Pin Oak tree)

20/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/9099 55 Currawa Drive BORONIA VIC 3155

Remove one (1) Liriodendron tulipifera 11/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6771 112 Inverness Avenue THE BASIN VIC 3154

Alterations to existing alfresco 27/11/2015 Approved

Chandler 2015/6083 460 Dorset Road BORONIA VIC 3155

Development of a single storey dwelling to the rear of the existing dwelling

30/11/2015 Approved

Collier 2015/9095 9 Hadlow Drive WANTIRNA VIC 3152 2 Lot Subdivision 9/11/2015 Approved

Collier 2015/6605 17 Templeton Street WANTIRNA VIC 3152


10/11/2015 Approved

Collier 2015/6606 9 Magnolia Street WANTIRNA VIC 3152


13/11/2015 Approved

Collier 2015/6449 9 Heswall Court WANTIRNA VIC 3152

The construction of two (2) double storey dwellings


Dinsdale 2015/6363 20 Orange Grove BAYSWATER VIC 3153


6/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6493 28 Bona Vista Road BAYSWATER VIC 3153

The construction of two double storey dwellings


Dinsdale 2015/9097 5 Caroline Court BAYSWATER VIC 3153

2 Lot Subdivision 10/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6341 5 Somerset Street WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

Construction of two (2) double storey dwellings (side by side)


Dinsdale 2014/7098 1-2/18 Myrtle Street BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Development of the land for a three (3) storey apartment building containing 14 dwellings


Dinsdale 2015/6645 2 Coleman Road WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152


19/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6333 7 Grandview Grove BAYSWATER VIC 3153

The construction of three (3) single storey dwellings 27/11/2015 Approved



Dinsdale 2015/6343 1 Gidgee Court WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

The construction of two (2) double storey dwellings on the land

26/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6388 50 Coleman Road WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

The construction of a double storey dwelling at the rear of the existing dwelling

19/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6829 89 Lewis Road WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

Erection of a business identification sign 19/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6672 89 Stud Road BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Re-alignment of Boundaries and Creation of Carriageway Easements across 2 Lots

20/11/2015 Approved



20/11/2015 Approved



20/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6646 4 Scoresby Road BAYSWATER VIC 3153

Change of Use - Trade Supplies (and associated buildings and works) and alternations to the access of a Category 1 Road

24/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6684 78 Scoresby Road BAYSWATER VIC 3153


24/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6240 93 Orange Grove BAYSWATER VIC 3153


30/11/2015 Approved

Dinsdale 2015/6458 47 Terama Crescent BAYSWATER VIC 3153

The construction of two (2) double storey dwellings 26/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6722 5 Alvina Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Buildings and works (extension to existing decking and verandah)

2/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/9093 29 Moore Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Remove one (1) Eucalyptus ovata (Swamp Gum)

6/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6559 2 Rona Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Buildings and works (construction of a deck) 5/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6514 8 Selman Avenue FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156


6/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6708

63A Old Belgrave Road UPPER FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Extension of decking 9/11/2015 Approved



Dobson 2015/6775 10 Hunter Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Construction of alterations and additions to the existing dwelling onsite

18/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6692 8 Manna Court FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Buildings and works (existing carport to be converted to a garage)

17/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6686 2 Grand Valley Terrace LYSTERFIELD VIC 3156

Buildings and works (construction of a balcony) 17/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6752 87 Grange Drive LYSTERFIELD VIC 3156

Buildings and works (construction of a gazebo) 16/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6342 53 Kevin Avenue FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

The construction of two (2) double storey dwellings on the land

16/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6630

1204 Burwood Highway UPPER FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Change of Use - Restricted Recreation Facility (Fitness Club)

17/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6790 2 Tarana Avenue UPPER FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Construction of a shed 17/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6805 4 Hatherly Grove FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Remove 24 dead and/or dying trees (Eucalyptus, Exocarpos and Acacia)

11/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/9102 27 Doysal Avenue FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Removal of one Eucalyptus cephalocarpa 27/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6660 5 Blucher Street FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156


25/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6690 9 Mount View Road UPPER FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Additions & alterations to existing weatherboard dwelling

27/11/2015 Approved

Dobson 2015/6863 18 Heritage Way LYSTERFIELD VIC 3156

Buildings and works (render the existing exterior of the dwelling grey and alter external windows)

30/11/2015 Approved

Friberg 2015/6307 38 King Parade KNOXFIELD VIC 3180

The construction of a double storey dwelling to the rear of the existing dwelling


Friberg 2015/6734 6/18 Rushdale Street KNOXFIELD VIC 3180

Change of Use - Office 2/11/2015 Approved

Friberg 2015/6737

Shop 59-60/1880 Ferntree Gully Road FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156

Buildings and works (alterations to existing facade)

5/11/2015 Approved



Friberg 2015/6409 10 Henderson Road KNOXFIELD VIC 3180

The construction of 24 warehouses and reduction in car parking

19/11/2015 Approved

Friberg 2015/6582 51 Folkstone Crescent FERNTREE GULLY VIC 3156


18/11/2015 Approved

Friberg 2015/9096 1577 Ferntree Gully Road KNOXFIELD VIC 3180

Reduction of Car Parking requirement 9/11/2015 Approved

Scott 2014/7085 107 Kathryn Road KNOXFIELD VIC 3180

Development of the land for seven (7) double storey dwellings and the removal of vegetation

9/11/2015 Refused

Scott 2015/6224 6 Richardson Rise WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

The construction of a double storey dwelling to the rear of the existing dwelling


Scott 2015/6601 62 Fonteyn Drive WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152


13/11/2015 Approved

Scott 2015/6571 384 Burwood Highway WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

Electronic Sky Signage 11/11/2015 Refused

Scott 2015/6555 191 George Street WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

Demolition of existing buildings and removal of vegetation

19/11/2015 Approved

Scott 2015/6644 437 Stud Road WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

Building and works for approved car sales use and associated business signage

19/11/2015 Approved

Taylor 2015/6574 298 Dandelion Drive ROWVILLE VIC 3178


6/11/2015 Approved

Taylor 2015/6538 6 Pecan Court LYSTERFIELD VIC 3156

Buildings and works (construction of a double storey dwelling)

10/11/2015 Approved

Taylor 2015/6507 74 Major Crescent LYSTERFIELD VIC 3156

The construction of a single storey dwelling to the front of the existing dwelling and removal of vegetation

9/11/2015 Approved

Taylor 2015/6792 10 Hayes Court LYSTERFIELD VIC 3156

Buildings and works (construction of a verandah)

17/11/2015 Approved

Taylor 2015/6676 259 Dandelion Drive ROWVILLE VIC 3178


23/11/2015 Approved

Tirhatuan 2015/6566 12 The Fairway ROWVILLE VIC 3178

Double story dwelling to the rear of the existing dwelling

2/11/2015 Approved



Tirhatuan 2015/6396 525 Stud Road WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

The construction of ten (10) double storey dwellings and a waiver of the visitor parking requirements (Stage 10AB)

6/11/2015 Approved

Tirhatuan 2015/6397 525 Stud Road WANTIRNA SOUTH VIC 3152

The construction of eleven (11) double storey dwellings and waiver of the visitor parking requirements (Stage 10AA)

6/11/2015 Approved

Tirhatuan 2014/6838 1114-1116 Stud Road ROWVILLE VIC 3178

Development of land for 20 three storey dwellings


Tirhatuan 2015/6345 10 Rosehill Street SCORESBY VIC 3179


18/11/2015 Approved

Tirhatuan 2015/6716 741 Stud Road SCORESBY VIC 3179


26/11/2015 Approved

Total: 93


TIRHATUAN WARD

6.2 APPLICATION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF EIGHTEEN (18) DWELLINGS ON THE LAND (SEVENTEEN (17) DOUBLE STOREY AND ONE (1) SINGLE STOREY), REMOVAL OF NATIVE VEGETATION AND ALTERATION OF ACCESS TO A ROAD ZONE CATEGORY 1 AT 1030 WELLINGTON ROAD, ROWVILLE, Melways Ref. 82 A3 (Application No. P/2015/6661)

1. SUMMARY:

Land: 1030 Wellington Road, Rowville Applicant: Bayland Property Group Proposed Development: The construction of eighteen (18)

dwellings on the land (seventeen (17) double storey and one (1) single storey), removal of native vegetation and alteration of access to a Road Zone Catregory 1.

Existing Land Use: Single dwelling Area/Density: 6144m2 / 1:341m2 Zoning: General Residential Zone - Schedule 2. Overlays: No overlays Local Policy: Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS)

Housing Policy Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character Policy

Application Received: 11 September 2015 Number of Objections: 6 PCC Meeting: Not applicable Assessment:

Subject to conditions the development can provide an appropriate balance between the need for additional housing within an established residential area, the amenity of occupants and adjoining residents, and planting of new canopy vegetation.

The proposal can comply with the Housing Policy, the Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character Policy, and ResCode subject to conditions.

The proposal complies with the General Residential Zone – Schedule 2, and responds appropriately to key points previously raised by VCAT.

On balance it is considered that the proposal responds reasonably to State and Local Planning Policies. It is recommended that Council issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit, subject to conditions.

13 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.2 1030 Wellington Road, Rowville (cont’d)

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 Planning Scheme Amendments

Amendment C131 proposes to implement the findings of the Knox Housing Strategy 2013, the Knox Residential Guidelines, the Rowville Plan (2013) and the new residential zones. Amendment C131 has been adopted by Council.

At the time this application was submitted Amendment C131 was adopted and therefore shall be assessed against the provisions proposed by the amendment, in accordance with the Council resolution dated 25 February 2015.

2.2 Previous Planning Application

Planning Application P/2014/6159 was considered by Council on 28 October 2014. The application proposed the construction of twenty-two (22) dwellings on the land (18 double storey and 4 single storey) on the land. An Appeal to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) against Council’s failure to determine the application within the prescribed time was lodged. Council advised VCAT it would not support the proposal based on a number of grounds.

The matter was refused by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) on 22 June 2015.

VCAT acknowledged that the intensity of the previous application was appropriate and built form was consistent with the surrounding land. It was also acknowledged that access from Saltbush Court was appropriate. The main areas of concern related to dwelling diversity, the extent of landscaping opportunities to the southern end of the development, northern orientation of living areas, size of bedrooms and living rooms and lack of windows in bathrooms.

A range of dwelling types (2, 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings), greater landscaping opportunities to the southern end of the development and larger living / bedrooms areas have been proposed in the current application. Bathrooms have also been proposed with windows.

Therefore it is considered that subject to conditions of permit requiring upper storeys of some dwellings to be further setback, the proposed development is consistent with VCAT’s concerns raised in the previous VCAT decision.


2.3 Subject Site and Surrounds

The location of the subject site is shown in Appendix A.

• The site is irregular in shape, located on the southern side of Wellington Road, Rowville and has a total area of 6144m2.

• The site contains a single dwelling of brick construction, setback 32 - 35 metres from Wellington Road, with access from the north western corner of the property.

• The surrounding properties are zoned for residential use and have been developed accordingly. Development is a mix of single dwellings on a lot and medium density development is present.

• A mixture of native and exotic vegetation exists to the periphery of the land, with the frontage of the site being heavily vegetated.

2.4 The Proposal

(Refer to attached plans at Appendix B)

It is proposed to remove the existing dwelling and construct eighteen (18) dwellings (seventeen (17) double storey dwellings and one (1) single storey dwelling), removal of native vegetation and alteration of access to a Road Zone – Category 1. Details are as follows:

• Dwelling 18 is single storey and contains three (3) bedrooms, open living / kitchen, two (2) bathrooms and a laundry. A single garage and tandem space is proposed in association with the dwelling.

• Dwellings 2 – 5 are double storey and contain two (2) bedrooms, open living / kitchen, two bathrooms and a laundry. A single garage is proposed in association with each dwelling.

• Dwellings 9, 11 and 13 are double storey and contain three (3) bedrooms (one at ground floor level), three bathrooms, open living / kitchen and a laundry. A single garage and tandem space is proposed in association with each dwelling.

• Dwellings 6, 8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 are double storey and contain three (3) bedrooms, a retreat, open living / kitchen, two bathrooms, a water closet and a laundry. A double garage is proposed in association with each dwelling.

• Dwellings 1, 15 and 17 are double storey and contain four (4) bedrooms, two bathrooms, water closet, open living / kitchen and a laundry. A double garage is proposed in association each the dwelling.


• The proposed buildings have a maximum height of 5.95 to 7.17 metres and are setback 11.03 metres from Wellington Road with a 10m wide Tree Reserve proposed to the Wellington Road frontage.

• Access to the site will be via a 5.0m wide crossover and driveway to Saltbush Court, with pedestrian access proposed via Wellington Road. The existing crossover to Wellington Road is proposed to be removed.

• Four (4) visitor car parking spaces are proposed throughout the site.

• A total of 22 native and exotic trees are proposed to be removed, three of which require a planning permit. Stands of native vegetation will be retained along the northern, eastern and western boundaries of the land.

3. CONSULTATION

3.1 Advertising

The application was advertised by way of a sign on each of the site’s frontages and notices were sent to adjoining property owners and occupiers. Council received 6 objections to the application that can be summarised as follows:

Access onto Wellington Road causing accidents

• It is proposed to close access to Wellington Road and use Saltbush Court as the point of access for this development. The only access proposed to Wellington Road is pedestrian access.

No access through Saltbush Court / Parking within Saltbush Court will restrict vehicle access

• Council’s Traffic Engineers conclude there is adequate capacity on the surrounding road network and intersections to accommodate the site-generated traffic.

• In addition to this, in the VCAT Order for the previous application on this site, also with access from Saltbush Court; VCAT noted that the proposed method of access to the review site is reasonable and appropriate.


Traffic report submitted with application is insufficient

• Further to the submitted Traffic Report, Council’s Traffic Engineers have carried out their own review and assessment of this matter. In addition to this, as part of the assessment of the previous application, Council’s Traffic Engineers sought independent advice, and it was determined that the future (post-development) two-way daily traffic volume on Saltbush Court will remain within the capacity of the existing road. The same conclusions have been made for the current application.

Overdevelopment / inconsistent with ‘Knox Neighbourhood Area’

• The density of the development is considered reasonable (subject to modifications) as dwellings can be accommodated with appropriate setbacks to adjoining properties, sufficient articulation of built form and ability to provide for meaningful landscaping onsite.

• The proposed built form is considered to meet the neighbourhood character requirements of the Knox Planning Scheme, this is discussed further in the assessment against ‘Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character’ Policy at section 4.2.2 of this report.

No visitor car parking spaces

• Clause 52.06.2 (Provision of car parking spaces) of the Knox Planning Scheme specifies that one (1) visitor car parking space is required for every five (5) dwellings proposed. The proposal provides for four (4) visitor spaces in accordance with this requirement.

Apartments should be located near Stud Park Shopping Centre

• The proposed built form is considered to be detached dwellings, rather than apartments; as dwellings are separated at ground and first floor level. The proposed dwelling type is consistent with the preferred dwelling type within a Knox Neighbourhood Area.

Noise

• The development would not be expected to emit noise beyond that of normal residential background noise.


3.2 Referrals

The application has been referred to Vic Roads and internal departments for comment. No objection has been raised; the following is a summary of relevant advice:

Traffic Engineer

• Standard conditions to be included on any permit issued.

• The width of the driveway outside garages 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17 must be widened to match the opening from the garage.

• It is considered that the post development traffic volume scenario on Saltbush Court is within the capacity of Saltbush Court and the surrounding road network. It is expected that the amenity of Saltbush Court will be affected as the proposed traffic volume will double that of the existing volume.

• While a landscaped pedestrian access is proposed from the development to Wellington Road, it is desirable to upgrade the foot access to a shared path (2.5m wide) as a shared path currently exists on Wellington Road.

• Provision of footpath to south side of Saltbush Court, connecting to existing footpath adjacent to 4 Wellington Road.

Officer Comment: A condition of any permit issued will require the widths of the driveways outside of certain garages to be widened to match the opening of the garage; as well as deletion of the footpath south of Dwelling 2. It is also not considered necessary to increase the width of the footpath leading to Wellington Road as this will not be a public / shared footpath.

Drainage Engineer

• Standard conditions to be included on any permit issued.

• Inadequate overland flow path through the property is shown. The applicant must demonstrate how overland flow for the 100 year ARI will be appropriately managed to Council's satisfaction - details must be included in the engineering stormwater design plans. The proposed screening fences are acceptable on the proviso their plinth boards are pervious.

Officer Comment: These matters will be addressed by a condition of any permit issued.


Assets

• The proposed location of crossover to exit into Saltbush Court is wider than Saltbush Court roadway. This will need to be rectified prior to approval of permit.

Officer Comment: These matters will be addressed by a condition of any permit issued.

Arborist / Landscape Officer

• The proposed canopy tree planting and understorey for the proposed Wellington Road Tree Reserve should be indigenous and native only with no exotic component. (All environmental weed species (which are often self seeded) should be shown to be removed and replaced with indigenous/native species).

• The proportion of exotic to indigenous/ native vegetation of the proposed plants on the plant schedule is too high especially when you consider the location of the adjacent Site of Biological Significance. The proportion of indigenous and native plants on the plant schedule should be at least 80% across all plant forms.

• There is a large area of hard surface down the centre of the site which has an eight metre fall from front to rear. There will be a large volume of water travelling down the site at a high velocity. The water runoff from the pavements should be treated at the rear of the site through a rain garden or bioswale and in this instance a small retarding basin would be recommended. Unit 1 should be removed to allow room for this treatment and retention. Roof water can be treated by rain water tanks.

• A Tree Management Plan prepared by a Qualified Arborist as per section 5 of the Arborist Report, should be submitted in conjunction with Landscape Plan for Council endorsement. This Plan should also state that the Arboricultural Consultant be on site and supervise whenever works are to take place within the TPZ areas of the existing trees for trees both on site and on the neighboring properties.

Officer Comment: Matters in relation to existing weeds being removed, planting of greater indigenous vegetation, submission of a Tree Management Plan and further details on Landscape Plans can be addressed through a condition of any permit issued. Standard conditions in relation to Water Sensitive Urban Design will be placed on any permit issued; as it is considered that that requirement to remove a dwelling to accommodate a bioswale is excessive.


Waste Management

• The submitted Waste Management Plan is approved.

Building

• Identification of the retaining wall should be shown clearer on elevations and one will be required between units 8 & 10 otherwise there may be drainage issues for unit 8.

• Otherwise no obvious issues for building with this proposed building works.

Officer Comment: A condition of any permit issued will ensure retaining walls are shown correctly.

City Futures

• The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the policy intent of Amendment C131 and should be supported, providing that the canopy tree requirements are confirmed and an Accessibility Report submitted.

Officer Comment: Landscaping can be addressed through a condition of any permit issued. An Accessibility Report has not been requested for this application as eight dwellings have been proposed with a bedroom, bathroom and kitchen at ground floor level which provides sufficient accessibility for those with limited mobility. In addition to this, dwellings are not shown to be provided with steps up to the entries.

Vic Roads

• No objection, subject to conditions of permit. 4. DISCUSSION

4.1 Zoning and Overlays

4.1.1 Zone

The site is located within the General Residential Zone – Schedule 2 (Amendment C131). Within the General Residential Zone – Schedule 2, a Planning Permit is required to construct more than one dwelling on a lot.

• The proposal remains consistent with the purpose of the General Residential Zone by providing for diversity in housing types that respects the neighbourhood character of the area.


Schedule 2 to the General Residential Zone varies the ResCode requirements for Standard B13 (Landscaping) which requires a minimum of one canopy tree per 175 square metres of the site area including a minimum of one canopy tree within each area of secluded private open space and one canopy tree within the front setback per 5 metres of width of the site. Each tree should be required to be surrounded by 20 square metres of permeable surface with a minimum radius of 3 metres. Up to 50 per cent of the permeable surface may be shared with another tree.

• It is considered that the proposed development can accommodate the required canopy tree planting; subject to a condition of any permit issued.

Schedule 2 to the General Residential Zone also varies the ResCode requirements for Standard B28 (Private Open Space) which requires the provision of private open space consisting of a minimum area of 100 square metres including one part of secluded private open space at the side or rear of the dwelling with a minimum area of 60 square metres with a minimum dimension of 5 metres with convenient access from a living room.

• Each dwelling has been proposed with 100sqm of open space, including 60sqm of secluded space however; it appears that the area of secluded private open space to Dwellings 3, 7, 9 and 15 has not been proposed with a minimum dimension of 5 metres. This will need to be addressed by a condition of any permit issued.

Schedule 2 to the General Residential Zone also varies the ResCode requirements for Standard B32 (Front fence height) which requires a front fence height of 2m to a street in a Road Zone Category 1 and 1.2m to other streets:

• No front fence proposed.

Dwellings or residential buildings must not exceed a height of 8 metres (dependant on slope)

• Complies. The proposed dwellings have a maximum height of 5.95 to 7.17 metres.

4.1.2 Overlays

No overlays apply to the land.


4.2 Policy Consideration

4.2.1 State Planning Policy Framework

State policy requires Council to integrate the range of policies relevant to the issues to be determined, and balance conflicting objectives in favour of net community benefit and sustainable development.

Key Policies:

Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage – Encourages high quality architecture and urban design outcomes that reflect the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of the community; enhances liveability, diversity, amenity and safety of the public realm; and promotes attractiveness of towns and cities within broader strategic contexts.

• The design of the development reflects the built form, scale and modern finishes found in the area. The proposal provides for an increased density, with minimal adverse amenity impacts and is within reasonable distance of shops, services, and public transport.

Clause 15.02 Sustainable Development – Encourage land use and development that is consistent with the efficient use of energy and the minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions.

• The proposal contributes to the consolidation of urban development through the provision of increased density with access to urban services and transport. Dwellings are orientated to the north to provide for passive solar access.

• A Sustainable Design Assessment (SDA) will be required as a condition of any permit issued. A condition of any permit issued will require the development to be constructed in accordance with the approved SDA.


Clause 16 Housing – Encourage the development of well-designed medium-density housing that respects the neighbourhood character; improves housing choice; makes better use of existing infrastructure; and, improves energy efficiency of housing.

• Neighbourhood character - This is discussed at Section 4.2.2 of the report.

• Housing choice – The development proposes two, three and four bedroom dwellings.

• Integration with infrastructure – The site is located in a fully serviced area. Drainage plans will be required as a condition of any permit issued.

• Energy efficiency – This has been discussed at Clause 15.02 (Sustainable Development).

• Location – While the site is not located within an Activity Centre, this is a large site that has access to a number of urban services. Subject to modifications, the subject site is capable of accommodating the proposed dwellings whilst making a positive contribution to the character of the area. Refer to the assessment against Council’s Residential Development and Neighbourhood Character Policy at Section 4.2.2 below.

Clause 18 Transport – To create a safe and sustainable transport system by integrating land use and transport.

• The site is located within 300m of the following bus stops:

o The 697 bus route has a direct service between Belgrave and Belgrave South via Belgrave Heights. This service operates between 6:10am and 7:55pm Monday to Friday; and, between 8:16am and 12:30pm on Saturdays, at various intervals.

The 697 extended Tuesday bus route is a Dandenong Market Service that runs especially for those visiting Dandenong Market. This runs 9:45am – 2:00pm.

The 697 Thursday bus route is a Fountain Gate service and runs from Belgrave Station to Fountain Gate. This runs 10:30am – 2:40pm.

o The 681 bus route has a direct service between Lysterfield and Knox City (clockwise) via Wantirna, Scoresby and Rowville. This service operates between 6:10am and 10:15pm Monday to Friday; between 8:14am and 7:05pm on Saturdays and between 9:14am and 6:01pm on Sundays, at various intervals.


o The 682 bus route has a direct service between Lysterfield and Knox City (anti-clockwise) via Wantirna, Scoresby and Rowville. This service operates between 6:14am and 10:15pm Monday to Friday; between 8:10am and 7:45pm on Saturdays and between 8:10am and 7:45pm on Sundays, at various intervals.

4.2.2 Local Planning Policy Framework

Clause 21.01 Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS).- encourages planning and development occurring with the necessary consideration to such matters as managing population growth, encouraging sustainable development and influencing the urban form so that Knox itself becomes more sustainable.

All development therefore is encouraged within this clause to incorporate Ecologically Sustainable Design (ESD) and Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) principles to ensure that a sustainable urban environment is ultimately achieved with a strong use of existing infrastructure, and to reduce dependence on private vehicle travel.

• The site is located in an established urban area reasonably close to urban services and open space areas. The development provides additional housing on an existing residential allotment where existing infrastructure will be utilised.

• The submission of a satisfactory Sustainable Design Assessment would be a condition on any permit issued.

Clause 21.04 Urban Design - Municipal Strategic Statement (MSS) – (Amendment C131) To ensure that all development responds positively to the existing patterns of urban form and character, the landscape, qualities, historic and cultural elements and social aspirations of the Knox community.

• While the land is not in an Activity Centre, the proposal respects the preferred neighbourhood character and is consistent with the requirements of the MSS.

• An assessment against Council’s Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character Policy (Clause 22.07) is below. The development complies with the open space requirements of Amendment C131 providing opportunities for meaningful landscaping.

• As highlighted above, the site is located in an established urban area reasonably close to urban services and open space areas.


Clause 21.05 – Housing – (Amendment C131) This clause implements the Knox Housing Strategy 2015. In managing Knox’s current and future housing needs, Council supports a scaled approach to residential development. This scaled approach recognises that some parts of the City will need to accommodate change, due to population growth and the community’s changing household needs. Development in residential areas will need to respond positively to the desired future character of the local area and take account of the particular built form and natural environmental elements that make up the neighbourhood character of Knox. The strong landscape character is the unifying element of the neighbourhood character of Knox.

The subject site is located within a “Knox Neighbourhood” area, which has sense of spaciousness within the public and private realm. These areas will continue to be low-scale neighbourhoods, characterised by detached dwellings with large backyards which contribute to the area’s green and leafy character.

Objective 1 for Housing Objectives and Strategies is to support residential development in accordance with the Knox Housing Strategy 2013, which identifies a scaled approach to residential development. A Strategy is to direct housing growth toward Local Living and Activity Areas.

• The site is not located in an Activity Centre or key redevelopment site although the site is large and can comply with the requirements of the Knox Neighbourhood character area in terms of open space and ability to provide canopy planting.

Objective 2 is to support a diversity of housing choice in appropriate locations. Strategies include encouraging a diversity of housing styles, types, forms and sizes to cater for the changing needs of the community.

• The proposed development can contribute to the diversity of housing in Knox within the context of the changing household types described in the MSS. The development provides a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings.

Objective 3 is to ensure the quality of housing design in Knox is improved to better respond to neighbourhood identity and to create a stronger sense of place. Strategies include ensuring that residential development enhances the City’s “green and leafy” image, support development that makes a positive contribution to the preferred future character of the area and that is innovative, environmentally sustainable, accessible and site responsive.

• Each dwelling is provided with 100 square metres of open space and acceptable front setbacks. The site provides suitable opportunities to plant a substantial number of canopy trees.


Objective 4 is to protect and enhance the landscape and environmental values of the nature areas of significance within the municipality.

• The site is not located in an area of biological significance.

Objective 5 is to ensure that residential development better responds to the community’s current and future needs, and allows people to ‘age-in-place’ by supporting the provision of a diverse range of housing including smaller scale dwellings.

• The proposed development can contribute to the diversity of housing in Knox within the context of the changing household types described in the MSS. The development provides a mix of 2, 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings.

Clause 22.07 – Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character: Knox Neighbourhood Area – (Amendment C131) The desired future character of this area is to:

• Continue to be low-scale neighbourhoods, characterised by detached houses and dual occupancies; with some villa unit developments on larger blocks.

• Retain their green and leafy identity and character through the retention of front and back yards, and the establishment of a garden setting that includes canopy trees.

The key design objectives are:

To retain and enhance the streetscape by the planting of appropriate trees on private land.

• The Wellington Road frontage has been proposed with a 10 metre wide Tree Reserve. Vegetation within this area will help enhance the streetscape. In addition to this, a condition of any permit issued will require weed species and trees with poor health and / or structure to be removed and suitably replaced with native canopy trees.

• A landscape plan will be required as a condition of any permit issued; this will also detail landscaping to the Saltbush Court frontage.


To avoid dominance of buildings from the street.

• Dwellings are to be setback in excess of 10 metres from Wellington Road with tree reserve within this setback, therefore minimising the dominance of buildings from this perspective.

• Dwellings are well setback from Saltbush Court due to the site context / configuration. Landscaping is proposed either side of the driveway area. This will help integrate the development into the area.

To avoid loss of front and rear garden space.

• Dwellings are setback from all boundaries. The development provides adequate areas for the establishment of additional landscaping within private open space areas and within setbacks to both roads.

To avoid the dominance of car storage facilities from the street.

• Car parking facilities are located to the side or rear of each dwelling and are not considered to dominate the streetscape or the internal accessway.

To retain large backyards for landscaping and open space.

• Each dwelling is proposed with a minimum of 100sqm of open space; setbacks and open space areas within the proposed design provide opportunities to plant new canopy trees.

To ensure buildings reflect the prevailing scale of buildings in the street.

• Dwellings are not excessive in scale or bulk. Subject to conditions ensuring there is not the provision of two storey sheer walls within the development adjacent to adjoining properties, the upper floor areas are recessed to better integrate with the surrounds. One single storey dwelling has been provided on the site to reduce the impact of the development.


4.3 Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06 – Car Parking

Prior to a new use commencing or a new building being occupied the car parking spaces required under Clause 52.06-5 must be provided on the land or as approved under Clause 52.06-3 to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

Clause 52.06-5 outlines the requisite amount of parking to be provided as follows:

To each dwelling at a ratio of one car space to each one or two bedroom dwelling and two spaces for each dwelling with three or more bedrooms (with studies or studios that are separate rooms counted as bedrooms).

• Each two bedroom dwelling is provided with a single garage, which complies with Clause 52.06-2.

• Each three or more bedroom dwelling is provided with either a double garage or a single garage and tandem space; this complies with Clause 52.06.2.

• Four (4) visitor car parking spaces have been provided; this complies with Clause 52.06.2.

Clause 52.06-8 details the design standards for car parking. The provision of car parking should meet the design requirements of this Clause. An assessment of the design standards, including any areas of non-compliance are considered below:

Design Standard 1: Accessways – Can Comply. A condition would also require that the letter boxes have a maximum height of 900mm and that meter boxes are outside the driveway sightline splay area.

Design Standard 2: Car Parking Spaces – Can comply. A condition of any permit issued will require visitor spaces to be landmarked, sign posted and identifiable.

Design Standard 3: Gradients – Complies.

Design Standard 4: Mechanical Parking – Not applicable.

Design Standard 5: Urban Design – Complies.

Design Standard 6: Safety – Complies.

Design Standard 7: Landscaping – Complies.


Clause 52.17 – Native Vegetation

The purpose of Clause 52.17 is:

To encourage permitted clearing of native vegetation results in no net loss in the contribution made by vegetation to Victoria’s biodiversity. This is achieved through the following approach:

• Avoid the removal of native vegetation that makes a significant contribution to Victoria’s biodiversity.

• Minimise impact on Victoria’s biodiversity from the removal of native vegetation.

• Where native vegetation is permitted to be removed, ensure that an offset is provided in a manner that makes a contribution to Victoria’s biodiversity that is equivalent to the contribution made by the native vegetation to be removed.

A permit is required pursuant to Clause 52.17 for the removal of three (3) ‘scattered trees’ as well as an area identified as Habitat Zone 1.

An application to remove, destroy or lop native vegetation must be classified as one of the following risk-based pathways: low, medium or high as defined in the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines (Department of Environment and Primary Industries, September 2013). The application requirements and decisions guidelines included in this clause must be applied in accordance with the classified pathway.

The applicant has submitted an Ecological Assessment and No Net Loss Analysis for Proposed Residential Development at 1030 Wellington Road in accordance with the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines. This notes the subject application would fall within a ‘low risk’ pathway of assessment. This pathway does not require a referral to Department of Environment and Primary Industries.

A condition of permit will ensure that a ‘no net loss’ offset is provided in a manner that makes a contribution to Victoria’s biodiversity that is equivalent to the contribution made by the native vegetation to be removed.


Clause 52.29 – Land Adjacent to a Road Zone, Category 1, or a Public Acquisition Overlay for a Category 1 Road

The purpose of Clause 52.29 is:

• To ensure appropriate access to identified roads.

• To ensure appropriate subdivision of land adjacent to identified roads.

A planning permit is required to create or alter access to a Road Zone Category 1. As such, a planning permit is required to remove the existing crossover / access from Wellington Road.

An application that creates or alters access to a Road Zone Category 1 requires a mandatory referral to Vic Roads. It is noted earlier in this report that Vic Roads have no objection to the proposal subject to conditions of permit. Therefore it is considered that the proposal appropriate under this Clause.

4.4 Clause 55 – Two or More Dwellings on a Lot and Residential

Buildings (ResCode)

The proposal generally complies with the provisions of Clause 55 of the Knox Planning Scheme, an assessment of the key criteria; including any areas of non compliance are considered below:

Neighbourhood Character and Infrastructure

Neighbourhood Character –Complies. Refer to assessment and recommended conditions above at Section 4.2.2.

Residential Policy – Complies.

Dwelling Diversity – Complies.

Infrastructure – Complies. A drainage plan will be a condition on any permit issued.

Integration with the Street – Complies.

Site Layout and Building Massing

Street Setback – Complies. Development is well setback from Saltbush Court and Wellington Road.

Building Height – Complies. See General Residential Zone – Schedule 2 assessment.

Site Cover/permeability – Complies.

Energy Efficiency – Complies.

Safety – Complies.


Landscaping – Can comply. A condition on any permit issued will require a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Access – Complies.

Parking Location – Complies.

Amenity Impacts

Side and rear setbacks – Complies.

Walls on boundaries – Not applicable.

Daylight to existing windows/north facing windows – Complies.

Overshadowing open space – Complies.

Overlooking – Can comply. Windows within eastern and western elevations with the ability to overlook adjoining land have either been proposed with obscure glazing or raised to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level. A condition of any permit will require screened windows to be screened with fixed obscure glazing (non-openable) to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level. The window may be clear and openable above 1.7 metres. Adhesive film must not be used.

Internal views – Can comply. Some internal views to private open space areas are present and these windows would need to be screened to a minimum height of 1.7 metres above the finished floor level.

Noise – Complies.

On-Site Amenity and Facilities

Accessibility – Complies.

Dwelling Entry – Complies.

Daylight to new windows – Complies.

Private Open Space – Complies. See General Residential Zone – Schedule 2 assessment.

Solar access – Complies.

Storage – Complies. Storage shown in garages.


Detailed Design

Detailed Design – Can Comply. A condition of permit will require some upper floor levels to be further setback from ground floor level to ensure there are no two storey sheer walls proposed throughout the development, adjacent to residential development.

Front fence – Complies.

Common Property – Complies.

Site Services – Complies.

4.5 General Decision Guidelines

Clause 65 of the Knox Planning Scheme and Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 set out decision guidelines/matters which the responsible authority must consider when deciding any planning application.

• The decision guidelines of Clause 65 of the Knox Planning Scheme and Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) have been appropriately considered.

5. CONCLUSION

Clause 10.04 of the Knox Planning Scheme requires Council to balance relative policy objectives when making decisions to ensure resulting development is sustainable and achieves a net community gain. In this context, the development is appropriate given the following:

• The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives and policies of Amendment C131 as adopted by Council on 27 January 2015.

• The design of the new dwellings are generally consistent with Council’s Development in Residential Areas and Neighbourhood Character Policy (Clause 22.07 of Knox Planning Scheme) in that the dwelling heights reflect those found in the area, will be setback a reasonable distance from side boundaries and the open space areas will allow for landscaping opportunities. In addition to this, all dwellings are provided with usable areas of private open space and appropriate internal amenity.

• The development is consistent with State and Local Planning Policy Framework (including the Municipal Strategic Statement) and Clause 22.10 (Housing) of the Knox Planning Scheme.

• The development is generally compliant with ResCode and Clause 52.06 (Car Parking) subject to changes that could be conditioned on any permit issued. The proposal is consistent with the purpose of the General Residential Zone – Schedule 2.


• The future (post-development) two-way daily traffic volume on Saltbush Court will remain within the capacity of the existing road and there is adequate capacity on the surrounding road network and intersections to accommodate the additional generated traffic.

• The proposal responds appropriately to matters raised by VCAT for the previous application on this site.

• Subject to conditions the development can provide an appropriate balance between the need for additional housing within an established residential area while ensuring the amenity of occupants and adjoining residents is not compromised.

6. CONFIDENTIALITY

There are no confidentiality issues associated with this report. RECOMMENDATION

That Council issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Planning Permit for dwellings on the land (seventeen (17) double storey and one (1) single storey), removal of native vegetation and alteration of access to a Road Zone Catregory 1 at 1030 Wellington Road, Rowville, subject to the following conditions:

Amended Plans

1. Prior to the commencement of any buildings or works, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans submitted with application but modified to show:

1.1 Dwellings 3, 5 and 7’s bedrooms eastern facade to be setback a minimum of 1 metre from the ground floor level.

1.2 Dwellings 2 and 4 bedrooms western facade to be setback a minimum of 1 metre from the ground floor level.

1.3 Dwellings 3, 7, 9 and 15 to be provided with 60sqm of secluded private open space with a minimum dimension of 5 metres.

1.4 The width of the driveway outside garages 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 15, 17 to be widened to match the width of the opening of their respective garages.


Recommendation (cont’d)

1.5 Deletion of the footpath to the south of Dwelling 2, and landscaping shown in this area.

1.6 The width of the proposed crossover to be the same width as the Saltbush Court roadway.

1.7 Retaining walls, including height and materials to be shown clearer on elevation plans.

1.8 Retaining wall to be shown between Dwellings 8 and 10.

1.9 Visitor car parking spaces to be easily identifiable through the provision of line marking and signs.

1.10 Letterboxes and all other structures (including meter boxes) shall be constructed to a maximum height of 900mm or relocated clear of a splayed area (2m x 2.5m) in accordance with AS2890.1, Clause 3.2.4 to ensure safe sight distances. Letterboxes shall face towards the street frontage.

1.11 Location and details of letterboxes and metre boxes.

1.12 Habitable room windows shown to be obscured, to be screened with fixed obscure glazing (non-openable) to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level. The window may be clear and openable above 1.7 metres. Adhesive film must not be used.

1.13 Internal views to be obscured in accordance with Clause 55.04-7 (Internal Views) of the Knox Planning Scheme. Windows are to be screened with fixed obscure glazing (non-openable) to a height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level. The window may be clear and openable above 1.7 metres. Adhesive film must not be used.

1.14 Removal of the redundant crossover in Wellington Road and replacement with kerb and channel and nature strip reinstated to Council and Vic Roads standards.

1.15 Details of fencing to Wellington Road frontage and proposed Tree Reserve.

1.16 Deletion of fence to Saltbush Court.

1.17 Provision of footpath to south side of Saltbush Court, connecting to existing footpath adjacent to 4 Wellington Road.

1.18 Tree Protection Fencing for all trees to be retained in accordance with Conditions 22 – 27.



1.19 Drainage plans in accordance with Condition 2 of this Permit and any necessary modifications.

1.20 Landscape plans in accordance with Condition 3 of this Permit and any necessary modifications.

1.21 A Sustainable Design Assessment in accordance with Condition 18.

1.22 An Environmental Management Plan in accordance with Condition 6.

1.23 A Construction Management Plan in accordance with Condition 33.

1.24 A Tree Management Plan in accordance with Condition 11.

To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Drainage

2. Prior to commencement of any buildings or works, three copies of drainage plans and computations must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. Construction of the drainage is to be in accordance with these plans. The plans must show the following:

2.1 All stormwater drainage discharge from the site connected to a legal point of discharge.

2.2 The internal drains of the dwellings to be independent of each other.

2.3 An on-site detention system designed by a suitably qualified Civil Engineering Consultant to ensure no net increase in stormwater discharge from the proposed development.

2.4 The on-site detention system to be installed in a suitable location for easy access and maintenance.

2.5 A suitable overland flow path for the entire site to the

satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Details of the overland flow path are to be included on the plans.

2.6 All levels to be to AHD (Australian Height Datum).



2.7 The use of water quality improvement systems is required to be provided for this development. The use of rainwater tanks, bioretention systems and vegetated swales can be used and these are to be incorporated in the stormwater drainage design plans.


Landscaping

3. Prior to the commencement of any buildings or works, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must show:

3.1 A survey (including botanical names, height and width) of all existing vegetation to be retained and / or removed.

3.2 The identification and removal of all vegetation identified as an environmental weed in Knox (as outlined in Appendix 2 of Council’s Landscape Guidelines for Planning Permits).

3.3 Buildings and trees (including botanical names, height and width) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary.

3.4 Details of the surface finishes of pathways and driveways.

3.5 Details and location of all existing and proposed services including above and below ground lines, cables and pipes.

3.6 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.

3.7 Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site (including additional planting within open space areas of the existing dwelling/s).

3.8 Any relevant water quality improvement systems in accordance with condition 2.7.

3.9 All vegetation to be removed.

3.10 The proportion of indigenous and native plants of the plant schedule should be at least 80% across all plant forms.



3.11 Weed species and trees with poor health and / or structure will be required to be removed and suitably replaced with native canopy trees.

3.12 Removal of trees with poor health and / or structure within Tree Reserve.

3.13 Canopy tree planting and understorey for the proposed Wellington Road Tree Reserve is to be indigenous and native only.

3.14 Pistacia chinensis and Pathenocissus tricupspidata to be removed from the plant schedule and replaced with appropriate native species.

3.15 Detail of any independent post and wire trellis shown on the plan for any climbing plants.

3.16 Landscaping notes such as soil preparation, maintenance of plant and garden beds.

3.17 Landscaping and planting is to occur within all open areas of the site and road reserve around the vicinity of the proposed shared path leading to Wellington Road. Plants to be chosen from Appendix 4 of Council’s Landscape Guidelines for Planning Permits.


4. Before the occupation of the development, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. Any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

Environmental Management Plan (Tree Reserve)

6. Prior to the commencement of buildings and works, an Environmental Management Plan for Proposed Tree Reserve must be provided to Council. The plan must include:

6.1 Vegetation management and protection. 6.2 Tree Protection. 6.3 Removal of trees with poor health and / or structure and

replacement planting (native canopy trees) 6.4 Weed management. 6.5 Tree Protection Fencing.

To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority



7. Prior to the Tree Reserve being transferred into Council ownership, works outlined in the approved Environmental Management Plan must be completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Prior to any works commencing, the Proposed Tree Reserve must be fenced off in accordance with the Environmental Management Plan required by Condition 7 of this permit.

9. Temporary Signage is to be affixed to the fence around the Proposed Tree Reserve advising that the area is a Tree Protection Zone and a no-go development area with the exception of footpath construction.

10. Before works start, the permit holder must advise all persons undertaking the (vegetation removal/works) on site of all relevant conditions of this permit.

11. Prior to the commencement of works, a Tree Management Plan prepared by a Qualified Arborist as per Section 5 of the Arborist Report prepared by Constructive Arboriculture dated August 2015 must be submitted for approval by the Responsible Authority. This Plan must be submitted in conjunction with the Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. This report must also state that the Arboricultural Consultant be onsite and supervise whenever works are to take place within the Tree Protection Zone areas of existing trees within the subject site and no neighbouring properties, where the Tree Protection Zone is located within the subject site.

12. Native Vegetation Offsets

A total of three (3) ‘scattered trees’ as well as the area identified as Habitat Zone 1, are considered lost due to the permitted development of this land. This was determined using the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines or Appendix E of this handbook. This is either a direct physical loss or an anticipated loss over time given that the vegetation will be retained within the proposed development. Such retention is not considered secure in the long term given that a permit under Clause 52.17 will not be required in the future on an allotment less than 0.4 ha. The extent of the loss of native vegetation and the location in which it occurs, results in a low risk-based pathway under DEPI (2013).



12.1 Offset requirement

A general offset will be required:

In order to offset the removal of 0.010 hectares of native vegetation and three (3) scattered trees approved as part of this permit, the applicant must provide a native vegetation offset that meets the following requirements, and is in accordance with the Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native vegetation gain scoring manual.

12.1.1 General offset The offset must:

• contribute gain of 0.008 general biodiversity equivalence units

• be located within the Port Phillip and Westernport Catchment Management Authority] boundary or Knox City Council municipal district

• have a strategic biodiversity score of at least 0.80

12.2 Offset evidence

Before any native vegetation is removed evidence that an offset has been secured must be provided to the satisfaction of the responsible authority. This offset must meet the offset requirements set out in this permit and be in accordance with the requirements of Permitted clearing of native vegetation – Biodiversity assessment guidelines and the Native vegetation gain scoring manual. Offset evidence can be either: • a security agreement, to the required standard, for the offset

site or sites, including a 10 year offset management plan. • a credit register extract from the Native Vegetation Credit

Register.

12.3 Monitoring and reporting on onsite offset implementation

In the event that a security agreement is entered into as per condition 12.2, the applicant must provide notification to the responsible authority of the management actions undertaken towards the implementation of the offset management plan each anniversary of the security agreement for ten years. An offset site condition statement, including photographs must be included in this notification.


Recommendation (cont’d) General

13. All development must be in accordance with the endorsed plans.

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

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

16. Prior to the occupation of the dwellings the development is to be completed in accordance with the endorsed plan/s to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

17. All walls on the boundaries of adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Sustainable Design Assessment

18. Prior to the commencement of any buildings or works, a Sustainable Design Assessment detailing Sustainable Design initiatives to be incorporated into the development must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The Sustainable Design Assessment must outline the proposed sustainable design initiatives to be incorporated throughout the development such as (but not limited to) energy efficiency, water conservation, stormwater quality, waste management and material selection, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

19. Prior to the occupation of the development, the development must be constructed in accordance with the Sustainable Design Assessment.

Tree Protection

20. All works, including excavation, within the critical root zone areas of the tree/s to be retained and other critical root zones on the land must be undertaken under the supervision of a qualified Arborist to ensure that there is no unreasonable damage to the root system of trees to be retained and/or protected, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

21. Before the development starts, the owner must submit to the Responsible Authority details of the name of the Arborist who will supervise the works and the tasks to be undertaken by the Arborist, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.



22. Prior to any works commencing on the site, all trees and vegetation to be retained including other critical root zones must be fenced off to create a protection zone. The protection zone must extend around the trees canopy drip-line unless an alternative tree protection zone has been approved by the responsible authority.

23. The fence is to be chain link or wire mesh, comprise either wooden or steel posts set into the ground or on concrete pads, and be a minimum height of 1.4 metres. Signage is to be affixed to the fence advising that the area is a tree protection zone and a no-go development area.

24. The fence and signage is to be maintained throughout the construction period and the signage removed at the completion of all works.

25. No temporary removal of the fence, or encroachment into the protection zone is permitted without the written consent of the responsible authority.

26. The following activities are prohibited from the tree protection area, without the written consent of the responsible authority: 26.1 Construction activities. 26.2 Dumping and/or storage of materials, goods and/or soil. 26.3 Trenching or excavation. 26.4 Lopping branches, nailing or affixing signs, service lines,

lights etc to the trees.

27. Prior to any works commencing on site, the Responsible Authority must be contacted to inspect the Tree Protection fencing.


Recommendation (cont’d) Car Parking & Accessways

28. Before the dwellings are occupied, driveways and car parking areas must be:

28.1 Fully constructed to the minimum standard of 100mm reinforced concrete and available for use in accordance with the plans submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority; and

28.2 Formed to such levels and drained so that they can be used in accordance with the approved plan; and

28.3 Treated with an all-weather seal or some other durable surface; and

28.4 Line-marked or provided with some other adequate means of showing the car parking spaces.


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

30. Visitor spaces are to be accessible to visitors at all times and are to be line marked/paved and signed.

Fencing

31. All costs associated with the provision of the fencing are to be borne by the owner/developer under this permit.

32. Prior to the occupancy of the development all fencing shall be in a good condition to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Construction Management Plan

33. Prior to the development commencing a Construction Management Plan covering matters such as hours of construction, traffic control, parking of vehicles associated with the development, control of noise, dust and airborne matter, damage to public assets, control of run-off, contact numbers for complaints, etc. must be prepared to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

34. Construction activity at the site is to accord with this approved Construction Management Plan.



Amenity During Construction

35. Upon commencement and until conclusion of the development, the developer shall ensure that the development does not adversely affect the amenity of the area in any way, including:

35.1 The appearance of building, works or materials on the land

35.2 Parking of motor vehicles

35.3 Transporting of materials or goods to or from the site

35.4 Hours of operation

35.5 Stockpiling of top soil or fill materials

35.6 Air borne dust emanating from the site

35.7 Noise

35.8 Rubbish and litter

35.9 Sediment runoff

35.10 Vibration

Should the development cause undue detriment to the amenity of the area then immediate remedial measures must be undertaken to address the issue as directed by, and to the satisfaction of, the Responsible Authority.

Stormwater

36. Stormwater runoff from all buildings and hard standing surfaces shall be properly collected and discharged in a complete and effective system of drains within the property and shall not cause or create a nuisance to abutting properties.

Vic Roads Conditions

37. The existing/redundant crossover along wellington Road must be reinstated to kerb and channel the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and at no cost to VicRoads and the Responsible Authority.


Recommendation (cont’d) Permit Expiry

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

38.1 The development is not started within two years of the date of this permit.

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

Pursuant to Section 69 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987, the Responsible Authority may extend:

• The commencement date referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or within six (6) months afterwards.

• The completion date referred to if a request is made in writing within 12 months after the permit expires and the development started lawfully before the permit expired.

NOTES Drainage Notes (to be read in conjunction with the above drainage conditions): • Applicant shall engage a certified Engineering Consultant to

analyse the site’s existing drainage to determine type and size of the Onsite Detention (OSD) system. This shall be designed in accordance with the Knox City Council (Responsible Authority) Stormwater Drainage Guidelines, (copy available on request), and approved drainage design methods specified in the current edition of Australian Rainfall and Runoff. It should be located preferably in a common area to the dwellings, and be easily accessible for maintenance.

• Applicant is to direct all stormwater via a complete and effective system of drains and connected to the Council drainage system in the south-east corner of the property as this represents the Legal Point of Discharge (LPD) for the property. Applicant is to verify this on site. Connect all stormwater discharge from the site to the LPD via an Onsite Detention (OSD) system. The internal drains for the dwellings are to be independent of each other.

• The total Permissible Site Discharge for the property including all dwellings is 37.2 L/s to the existing Council drainage system for a 5 year ARI event.



• The Applicant is required to use Australian Height Datum (AHD) to

present levels in all future plans. Applicant must ensure that levels on the plan are accurate.

• Drainage works in the Road reserve or in the Council easement will require a road opening permit.

• Drainage system designed so as to avoid impact on any vegetation shown on the endorsed plans as being retained.

• Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) should be addressed as part of this development, e.g. water storage tanks, swale drains, etc.

Other Notes: • Road Opening Permit shall be required for any works within or

affecting the road reserve. • Council encourages the consideration of water storage tanks for all

existing and proposed residential developments. • A building permit must be obtained before development is

commenced. • Buildings are not allowed to be built over Council easements. • The dwelling/s must achieve a minimum 6-Star Energy Rating. • In accordance with Council policy, an 8.5% public open space

contribution may apply in the event of the subdivision of the land. • Dwelling numbers as shown on the endorsed plans do not

necessarily indicate any future street numbers. Property (street) numbering shall be in accordance with Council’s Property (Street) Numbering Policy. Information regarding this can be obtained from Council’s Property and Revenue Services Department on 9298 8215.

• All letterboxes shall face towards the street frontage and if located adjacent to the driveway the letterboxes and any associated structures shall not be greater than 900mm in height.

• Internal public lighting shall be provided to the satisfaction of the relevant authority and in accordance with AS1158. This would generally be low height or bollard type lighting to avoid spill-over into adjacent properties. It may be sensor activated, to avoid all night running costs.

• Raised concrete slabs on the existing footpath fronting the site should be grounded.

• All litter and rubbish associated with the construction must be contained on site at all times.


COUNCIL RESOLUTION MOVED: CR. SEYMOUR SECONDED: CR. PEARCE That the recommendation be adopted. CARRIED


TIRHATUAN WARD

6.3 APPLICATION TO END TWO (2) SECTION 173 AGREEMENTS AND APPLY A NEW SECTION 173 AGREEMENT FOR LOT B7 ON PS705529, HARCREST ESTATE AT 525 STUD ROAD, WANTIRNA SOUTH, Melway Ref. 72/K2

1. SUMMARY: Land: 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South Applicant: Mirvac Property Trust Proposal: Ending of two (2) Section 173

Agreements and apply a new Section 173 agreement for lot B7 on PS705529.

Existing Land Use: Harcrest Residential Estate – under development

Estate Area: 56.195 hectares Zoning: General Residential Zone – Schedule 1 Overlays: Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 8

Environmental Audit Overlay Application Received: 28 October 2015 Number of Objections: N/A PCC Meeting N/A

Mirvac Property Trust has applied to Council pursuant to Section 178A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to end two Section 173 Agreements from Lot B7 of Harcrest Estate. A new Section 173 Agreement is to be applied to Lot B7 to maintain the ongoing requirements of the previous Agreements.

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on the 13 December 2005, Council resolved to seek authorisation from the Minister to rezone 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South from Industrial 1 to Residential 1 and apply Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 8 incorporating a Section 173 Agreement (AF636445X) to cover the provision of Social Housing. This agreement was registered on the 8 February, 2008.

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council on the 24 August, 2010 Council resolved to sign and seal a second Section 173 Agreement (AH503122A) which outlines the obligations of the owner of the land to make contributions to public open space, provide wetlands and stormwater works (amongst other things) as part of the Harcrest Estate approved under Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 8. This agreement was registered on the 17 September, 2010.

The two existing Section 173 Agreements now contain obsolete conditions on the land and should be ended. A new Section 173 Agreement should be applied to Lot B7 to ensure that the ongoing requirements from the previous agreements continue to apply to the property owner.

60 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.3 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South (cont’d)

2. BACKGROUND

2.1 Site History

The location of the subject site is shown in Appendix A.

The Harcrest Estate is currently under development by Mirvac Property Trust at 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South. The site formerly operated as the Austral Bricks Quarry which carried out clay extraction and brick manufacturing.

The site is being developed in stages with multiple stages already completed in accordance with the approved development plan. The site contains a neighbourhood activity centre, residential housing, a residential display centre, parks and wetlands.

Two Section 173 Agreements have been registered on the title at 525 Stud Road, Wantirna South which ensure the outcome of the estate aligns with the approved development plan.

For reference, the two Section 173 Agreements require the following outcomes with respect to the development of the estate:

• Agreement AF636445X – requires the provision of Social Housing within the estate via contributions of land and/or dwellings to the Director of Housing.

• Agreement AH503122A – requires the achievement of a number of specific requirements in the development of the estate as required by the Development Plan Overlay – Schedule 8. The specific requirements of this agreement are outlined in Section 4 of this report. This agreement also requires Council to agree to the removal of the agreement at the time new titles are issued for the subdivision of any stage.

Planning Permit No. P/2011/6972 was issued on 3 July 2012 allowing the staged subdivision of land (Stages 4 - 10), creation and removal of easements, access to a Category 1 Road, construction of a dwelling on lots less than 300sqm and construction of roads and infrastructure.

The subdivision of Lot B7 (balance parcel) is yet to be finalised. A Statement of Compliance has not been issued for any stages within Lot B7 as the relevant works have not been completed.

Unless removed, the two existing 173 Agreements will apply completed and expired requirements to each of subdivided lots when the subdivision is registered, and would then apply to all successors in title (or new owners).

Council has previously agreed to end the two Section 173 Agreements as they applied to the created lots within the completed stages 1-5 and 8 of the estate.


2.2 The Proposal

Pursuant to Section 178A of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the owner has applied to Council to end agreements AF636445X and AH503122A over B7 of Harcrest Estate (also known as Stages 6,7,9 & 10) on subdivision plan PS 705529Y (refer Appendix B).

The applicant seeks to end the agreements for Lot B7 on PS705529Y. Agreements listed above contain obsolete conditions and requirements that have already been satisfied within previous stages of the Estate.

Ongoing conditions and requirements are to be included within the new Section 173 Agreement.

Removing the existing agreements and replacing with a new agreement is to effectively clean up the requirements and maintain an uncomplicated and clear indication of ongoing conditions to property owners and Council, within one agreement.

3. CONSULTATION

3.1 Advertising Pursuant to Section 178C of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, the request to end the agreements for the land in Stage B7 was not advertised to the other parties outside of the agreement nor is it considered that detriment would be caused to other persons as:

• The only party other than Council to the agreement is Mirvac Property Trust who is the applicant to end the agreement.

• It considered that there will not be any detriment caused to other persons by the ending of the agreements as the requirements within the agreements (other than the Telecommunications Tower) have expired, been completed, are dealt with by Permit conditions in Planning Permit P/2011/6972, or further enforced via the new Section 173 Agreement.

• In terms of the requirement to cease the use/removal of the Telecommunications Tower, Telstra has enacted its rights under the Federal Telecommunications Act (1997), which Council’s Lawyers have advised override all State Legislation, including Planning Legislation. This is further discussed in section 4 of this report.


4. DISCUSSION

The applicant requests the ending of the Section 173 Agreements from part of the land, being Lot B7 on PS705529Y. As there are some ongoing conditions from the Planning Permit No. P/2011/6972 and existing agreements, it is proposed that these conditions are incorporated into the new Section 173 Agreement to be listed on the Title of Lot B7. Lot B7 is the remaining balance parcel of land at the Harcrest Estate (i.e. Stages 6, 7, 9 & 10), which have not been completed at this time.

The matters covered by agreements and their relevance to Lot B7 of the estate are discussed below:

a) The provision of Social Housing (AF636445X).

• The provision of Social Housing within the Harcrest Estate in accordance with the Section 173 Agreement has been the subject of much discussion between Council, Mirvac and the State Government Department of Housing. The agreement can be satisfied by:

o The Director of Housing purchasing land at a discounted rate; or o Mirvac providing land to the Director of Housing; or o Mirvac providing land and dwellings to the Director of Housing; or o Mirvac providing a cash contribution to the Director of Housing.

• The provision of Social Housing is proposed to be satisfied within Stage 10 of the Estate.

• As Stage 10 is located within Lot B7, the conditions and obligations of Agreement AF636445X are to be included within the new Section 173 Agreement.

• It is therefore recommended that upon the lodgement of the new Section 173 agreement, that agreement (AF636445X) be ended.

b) The provision of a 10m wide tree reserve buffer along Stud Road (AH503122A).

• The 10m tree reserve buffer was created in Stages 1, 2, 3, 8 and 10. All buffer land was vested in Knox City Council for Stages 1,2,3 & 8. As statement of compliance has not been issued for stage 10, this condition will remain in the new agreement.


c) The developer must vest in Council the areas of Public Open Space: The 10m buffer does not form part of the Public Open Space area (AH503122A).

• Whilst Public Open Space areas for Lot B7 are yet to be approved, the requirement for a 10% open space contribution is contained within the approved Development Plan and Permits issued for the site. Some Public Open Space Reserves have already been provided on site, with the remainder to be provided with the future development of the estate (i.e. in later stages). Therefore, it is appropriate that this condition remains in the new agreement.

d) The developer must pay Council $125,000 towards a community facility (AH503122A).

• This payment was made to Council in January 2011. This requirement is therefore removed from the new agreement.

e) The developer must install a signalized intersection at Mockridge Street and Stud Road (AH503122A).

• The intersection is nearing completion and is required to be completed before Stage 10 of the estate can be released. As this requirement is now covered by permit conditions (the statement of compliance for Stage 10 will not be issued until the works are finished), this requirement can be removed from the new agreement.

f) The developer must provide a Geotechnical report for each stage (AH503122A).

• The geotechnical report will be required for stages with Lot B7. This condition will remain in the new agreement.

g) The developer must maintain the wetlands and stormwater works and prepare a wetlands and stormwater operation plan prior to hand over to Council (AH503122A).

• The wetlands must be maintained for a period of 2 years after the completion of all roadworks. As the works have not finished, this condition will remain in the new agreement.


h) The developer must cease use of the Mobile Phone Tower by 22 December 2014 and must remove the Mobile Phone Tower from the site by 22 June 2015 (AH503122A).

• The mobile phone tower is located at the south west corner of the site within Stage 10.

• Council has been advised by Mirvac that Telstra has exercised their rights under the Telecommunications Act (1997) and will continue to use the existing tower. It is noted that Mirvac were supportive of the removal of the Telecommunications Tower, however could not force the removal due to the requirements of the Telecommunications Act (1997).

• Council’s solicitor (Maddocks) has advised that despite the terms of the Section 173 Agreement, Council has no legal standing to force the land owner to remove the tower, as the Telecommunications Act (1997) overrides the requirements of any state law in respect to planning, land use or occupancy. As such, this requirement is proposed to be removed from the new agreement, as it cannot be enforced.

i) The developer must provide an approved buffer from the Mobile Phone Tower to the new development whilst the Mobile Phone Tower is in use (AH503122A).

• Telstra has exercised their rights under the Telecommunications Act (1997) and will continue to use the existing tower.

• As the tower is to remain, the property developer supplied an independent Environmental Electromagnetic Energy (EME) report which outlined that the electromagnetic emissions from the tower are well within the limits prescribed within the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) RF Standard.

• To help decipher this report, Maddocks Lawyers, on behalf of Council, referred the report to ARPANSA directly for comment. It was determined that the mobile phone tower at Harcrest would not exceed 1/100th (1%) of the limits set by the ARPANSA RF Standard. The limits in the ARPANSA Standard are designed to provide protection for all ages, including children, on a continuous basis (24 hours a day, 7 days a week).

Therefore, it is deemed that the mobile phone tower does not pose a risk to the health of people within the vicinity of the tower.


• A 5 metre setback to any dwelling has been proposed by Mirvac, and shall be enforced within the Development Permit in Stage 10AC. It should be noted that Mirvac has designed the dwelling nearest the tower to face away from the tower, including any habitable room windows (see Appendix D).

• Given the above, this requirement is recommended to be removed from the new agreement.

Therefore, it is recommended that the following conditions (including the requirements outlined above) will be retained in the new S173 Agreement for Lot B7 (balance of the land) and the requirements will be satisfied in the future stages of the estate to ensure that it is developed in accordance with the approved development plan, including:

• Social Housing requirements.

• The 10m wide tree reserve buffer along Stud Road.

• Road and reserve landscaping works.

• The wetlands and intersection works.

• Geotechnical information reports.

• Maintenance of wetlands and stormwater works.

• Wetlands Operation Plan.

The following lists the conditions that are obsolete or have been satisfied and will not be required within any new agreement:

• Developer contributions to a community facility.

• Intersection works at Stud Road and Mockridge Street.

• Removal of Mobile Phone tower.

• Mobile Phone tower buffer zones.


4.1 Section 178B(2) of the Planning and Environment Act (1987)

Section 178B(2) of the Planning and Environment Act (1987) outlines the matters that must be considered by the Responsible Authority when considering a proposal to end an agreement. These matters are:

• The purpose of the agreement; As outlined above, the two agreements require a number of outcomes with respect to the development of the estate to ensure that it aligns with the approved development plan. The requirements of the agreements are all being addressed and will be satisfied by the completion of the estate, and/or transferred over to the new Section 173 Agreement.

• Whether and why the agreement is no longer required; The two agreements contain conditions that are now obsolete as they have been completed, or have lapsed. A new Section 173 Agreement has been drafted to ensure that the development of the remainder of the estate aligns with the approved development plan. In terms of the Telecommunications Tower, as outlined above, the federal Telecommunications Act (1997) overrides all state Planning Legislation, including the Planning and Environment Act (1987), and therefore, such requirement within the agreement has no legal standing, and should be removed from the new agreement.

• Whether the ending of the agreement would disadvantage any person, whether or not a party to the agreement; The ending of the agreements for the land within Lot B7 will not disadvantage any person as requirements of the agreement have been satisfied in previous stages of development, or are carried over to the new agreement. While it is considered that the retention of the Telecommunications Tower on site may visually impact on the residents of the Harcrest Estate and existing residents to the south of the site, in Joelson Avenue, it is clear that the Telecommunications Act (1987) overrides all other State Planning Legislation, and therefore this requirement cannot be enforced and should be removed.

• The reasons why the Responsible Authority entered into the agreement; The Responsible Authority entered into the agreements to ensure that the estate is developed in accordance with the approved development plan, and to achieve an acceptable level of affordable housing on site. It is considered that some requirements of the agreements have been satisfied, and therefore are recommended to be removed from the new agreement. Any outstanding items, required for the future stages of development, will be retained in the new agreement.


• Any relevant permit or other requirements the land is subject to under the Subdivision Act 1988; The requirements of the agreements are repeated as conditions of Planning Permit P/2011/6972 to ensure the relevant works are completed before titles are issued on each stage, as required. This, in combination with the proposed new Agreement, will ensure that the site continues to be developed in accordance with the Development Plan.

• Any other prescribed matter; There are no other prescribed matters relevant to the proposal.

5. CONCLUSION

The request to end Section 173 Agreements AF636445X and AH503122A over Lot B7 on PS705529 has been made to remove the completed, obsolete or lapsed requirements.

Ending of these agreements for the proposed lots will not end the requirements over the remainder of the land as a new Section 173 Agreement is to be applied and the ongoing requirements of the agreements are to be satisfied in future stages of the development. This combined with conditions outlined in the subdivision permit, will allow the site to continue to be developed in accordance with the development plan.

It is considered that ending the agreements from the Lot B7 of the estate will not disadvantage any person. While it was not originally envisaged that the telecommunications tower be retained, this requirement is obsolete due to legal reasons and evidence has been provided to demonstrate that the emissions from the tower will not pose a risk to public health or safety.

It is therefore recommended that Council end the two Section 173 Agreements and endorse a new Section 173 Agreement for the land covered by Lot B7 on PS705529 of the development.

6. CONFIDENTIALITY

There are no confidentiality issues associated with this report.


7. RECOMMENDATION

That Council resolve:

1. To endorse the application of a new Section 173 Agreement including the conditions listed within this report to Lot B7 on PS705529;

2. To end Section 173 Agreement AH503122A for Lot B7 on PS705529;

3. To end Section 173 Agreement AF636445X for Lot B7 on PS705529;

4. That Council notify all owners and occupiers located within 100 metres of the Telecommunications Tower that the requirement to remove the tower could not be enforced due to Telstra requiring that the tower remain on site under the provisions of the Federal Telecommunications Act (1997).

COUNCIL RESOLUTION MOVED: CR. SEYMOUR SECONDED: CR. MORTIMORE That the recommendation be adopted. CARRIED


ALL WARDS

6.4 PLAN MELBOURNE REFRESH – KNOX SUBMISSION

SUMMARY: Senior Strategic Planner (Stevie Meyer)

The State Government has released a Discussion Paper titled 'Plan Melbourne Refresh' and is seeking feedback on this to assist in revising the 'Plan Melbourne 2014' Metropolitan Planning Strategy. A draft submission has been prepared in response to the Discussion Paper on behalf of Knox City Council. Submissions are due by 18 December 2015.

This report provides an overview of the Discussion Paper and Knox's draft submission. The draft submission addresses both points raised in the Discussion Paper and recommendations of the Plan Melbourne 2015 Ministerial Advisory Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:

1. Endorse the submission to the Discussion Paper 'Plan Melbourne Refresh' as shown at Appendix A and forward the submission to the State Government by 18 December 2015.

2. Authorise the Director - City Development to make minor changes to the submission that do not alter the purpose or intent of the content.

1. INTRODUCTION

On 22 October 2015 the State Government released the Plan Melbourne Refresh Discussion Paper (Discussion Paper) for public comment, along with the 'Plan Melbourne 2015 Review - Report by the Ministerial Advisory Committee, June 2015' (MAC 2015 Report) and the Government's response to the MAC 2015 Report recommendations.

This report covers the background, the Discussion Paper, the MAC 2015 report and Knox’s response to the Discussion Paper.

The Discussion Paper and Knox's proposed response were discussed at the 1 December 2015 Council Issues Briefing session. Feedback received from Councillors at this session has been incorporated in the draft submission at Appendix A.

73 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.4 Plan Melbourne Refresh - Knox Submission (cont'd)

2. DISCUSSION

2.1 Background

The former State Government released a draft 'Plan Melbourne: Metropolitan Planning Strategy' for comment in October 2013. Council made a submission as part of this process (refer to Council report on 26 November 2013).

Plan Melbourne 2014 was released in May 2014 and covers matters relating to housing, employment, transport, infrastructure and the environment to guide the city's development and growth to 2050.

Councillors were advised by a memorandum on 28 July 2014 that only a limited number of recommendations made by Council in its original submission were included in the final Plan Melbourne.

On 27 March 2015 the State Government announced the Government's intention to refresh Plan Melbourne and reconvene the Ministerial Advisory Committee (MAC) that developed the original plan to provide independent expert advice on how to refresh Plan Melbourne.

The primary reasons given by the State Government for updating Plan Melbourne 2014 was to ensure it adequately addressed a number of issues omitted from the plan that were raised via community input or expert advice and to ensure it is a long-term plan for the city, reflecting key priorities and projects with bipartisan support.

The Discussion Paper and the MAC 2015 report were released on 22 October 2015. Submissions on the Discussion Paper close 18 December 2015.

2.2 Overview of the 'Plan Melbourne 2015 Review - Report by the Ministerial Advisory Committee, June 2015' (MAC 2015 Report)

The MAC 2015 Report made 93 recommendations to update Plan Melbourne 2014. They focus on matters raised in consultation that were left out of Plan Melbourne 2015, along with specific advice on policy options to address housing affordability, the impacts of climate change and opportunities to support energy efficient urban design. The recommendations comprise options for implementation accompanied by initiatives and actions.

These recommendations informed the Plan Melbourne Refresh - Discussion Paper 2015 (the Discussion Paper) and its 62 discussion points.


The Discussion Paper includes in its Appendix A (pages 97 – 119) the State Government's response to the MAC 2015 Report recommendations which identified those that are either:

• Addressed in the Discussion Paper;

• Were to be incorporated in Plan Melbourne 2016;

• Were underway with a concurrent process;

• Were out of scope of the refresh; and

• Not supported.

Only three recommendations are not supported by the State Government, including making the Metropolitan Planning Authority the 'voice' of metropolitan Melbourne at significant VCAT and planning panels, adopting a development levy to apply to all additional dwellings across the metropolitan region and examining beneficiary pays principles in the development of funding models for major urban transport projects and growth area developments.

Recommendations that are addressed in the Discussion Paper, including any implications for Knox of MAC 2015 recommendations that are considered 'out of scope' or 'not supported' by the State Government are discussed in Council's submission (Appendix A).

2.3 Overview of Plan Melbourne Refresh Discussion Paper, October 2015

The Discussion Paper notes the refresh is not intended to comprehensively revise Plan Melbourne 2014 as there is bipartisan support for much of the current plan. Accordingly much of Plan Melbourne 2014 is to be maintained, including but not limited to locating jobs in the central city and designated locations across suburbs, a fixed Urban Growth Boundary, increased housing growth and density and the protection of Victoria's natural and agricultural values on the city fringe.

The refresh aims to clarify some fundamental principles and concepts to meet our city's growth challenges, including the need to build Melbourne's capacity to maintain and improve the standard of living of all people as the population doubles over the next few decades (almost 8 million people at 2051).

One key focus is increasing housing supply in established areas rich in infrastructure and services that best support population growth, while retaining neighbourhood character and improving liveability.

The refresh will also strengthen focus on climate change, energy efficiency and housing diversity and affordability, while reflecting current transport network priorities, with longer-term actions, implementation and incorporating current transport commitments.


The Discussion Paper asks for feedback on 62 discussion points which outline options and proposals to change Plan Melbourne 2014 and other implementation methods. The discussion points include, among others:

• Locking down the existing Urban Growth Boundary;

• Introducing a 70/30 target for housing supply, with 70% to come from established areas and 30% from Greenfield areas;

• Setting housing targets for Metropolitan Melbourne and its sub-regions;

• Clarifying locations that support housing growth and removing the requirement to apply the Neighbourhood Residential Zone to at least 50% of residential land;

• Redefining the "20-minute neighbourhood" to mean walking time and excluding employment

• Removing the Integrated Economic Triangle and move towards a polycentric structure;

• Developing clearer criteria for identification of activity centres;

• Mandating or facilitating or providing incentives to increase social and affordable housing supply;

• Supporting a State Government integrated planning and building approach to Environmentally Sustainable Design;

• Developing new planning tools to better implement policies.

2.4 Summary of Submission

In summary, the proposed Plan Melbourne Refresh seeks to better respond to key challenges our city is facing and addresses key issues raised by Council's previous submission that were omitted by the final Plan Melbourne 2014.

The draft submission responds directly to each of the 62 discussion points raised in the Discussion Paper. They include statements ranging from general policy support to detailed matters relating to policy implications and implementation. Knox's response to the submission is therefore drafted for an audience of planning practitioners, rather than the general public.

The submission also provides comments on the recommendations of the MAC 2015 Report and the State Government's response, including for advocacy purposes.


A copy of the draft Knox submission to the Discussion Paper is included in Appendix A.

The key points raised in the submission include:

• Identifying important medium and long-term actions and aiming for bipartisan support should be key aspects of an enduring metropolitan strategy;

• In making permanent the metropolitan urban boundary, the Waverley Golf Course land and surrounds in Rowville should be included;

• The values of green wedge and peri-urban land should go beyond the value of agricultural production to include landscape values, amenity, rural tourism, biodiversity and conservation;

• A long-term visionary plan must nominate transport projects in the plan and set out a need to protect the option. This should include the extension of tram service number 75 to Knox Central, the Rowville Rail link and the Dorset Road extension;

• The principle of sustainable development is supported, with increased densities close to public transport and services, across all metropolitan municipalities;

• The target 70/30 ratio should not be used to favour inappropriate development as not all established area locations are equally suitable for increased densities;

• A stronger focus on how the planning system might better facilitate the supply of social and affordable housing is welcome;

• Greater clarity and definition in the role and strategic directions for activity centres which recognises that all activity centres are different, offering different opportunities and constraints. Mountain Gate should be recognised as a lower-order centre;

• Stronger mechanisms to deal with and give protection to residential encroachment of former landfills, quarries and waste recovery/transfer stations.


2.5 Next Stages

Submissions to the Discussion Paper are due to be submitted to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning by the 18 December 2015 closing date.

The revised Plan Melbourne 2016 is due to be released in the first half of 2016, along with the plan being introduced into planning schemes.

3. CONSULTATION

Councillors were consulted on the Plan Melbourne Refresh - Knox Submission at an Issues Briefing on 1 December 2015 and provided guidance and input into the development of the submission.

Given Council meeting and reporting timeframes and the submission's deadline, internal consultation with various Knox Advisory Committees has been limited. However, feedback on the Discussion Paper has been sought from across the organisation, including the Knox Active Ageing Advisory Committee. The submission also reflects Council's earlier submissions on Plan Melbourne and Council’s adopted strategies and policies.

In addition to this submission, officers are inputting into other submissions such as that proposed by the Municipal Association of Victoria and the Eastern Alliance for Greenhouse Action and the Melbourne East Regional Economic Development Managers Group.

Notification of the Plan Melbourne Refresh Discussion Paper to the Knox community by the State Government is via a dedicated website allowing online submissions and a survey.

4. ENVIRONMENTAL/AMENITY ISSUES

The revised Metropolitan Planning Strategy will have implications for both the environment and amenity of Knox. The discussion points indicate the revision will have housing and activity centre growth implications; however the details are unknown at this stage.

5. FINANCIAL & ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS

There may be some resource implications for Knox associated with Plan Melbourne 2016, including changes to the Knox Planning Scheme and related incorporated/reference documents. The details of this are unknown at this time and the Minister has advised that it is unlikely resources or funding will be made available to Local Government.


6. SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

There will be social implications associated with how Melbourne progresses over the next 35 years for the Knox community; particularly with the shift in focus for established urban areas to accommodate a greater share of the housing growth and initiatives to support social and affordable housing.

7. RELEVANCE TO CITY PLAN 2013-17 (INCORPORATING THE COUNCIL PLAN)

The revised Metropolitan Planning Strategy 'Plan Melbourne 2016' will have a critical relationship with the City Plan 2013-17 (Incorporating the Council Plan).

8. CONCLUSION

The Plan Melbourne Refresh is intended to revise the metropolitan strategy to address policy gaps relating to housing affordability, climate change and transport priorities and to better clarify fundamental planning principles and concepts that respond to Melbourne's growth challenges.

This provides Council with an opportunity to have a say on how Melbourne will grow and reaffirm its position on key issues affecting Knox that were omitted by Plan Melbourne 2014.

The report seeks Council’s endorsement of its submission, as outlined in Appendix A, to be forwarded to the State Government prior to 18 December 2015.

9. CONFIDENTIALITY

There are no matters of a confidential nature associated with this report.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION MOVED: CR. LOCKWOOD SECONDED: CR. PEARCE

That Council:

1. Endorse the submission to the Discussion Paper 'Plan Melbourne Refresh' as shown at Appendix A and forward the submission to the State Government by 18 December 2015.

2. Authorise the Director - City Development to make minor changes to the submission that do not alter the purpose or intent of the content.

CARRIED

79 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Submission to Plan Melbourne Refresh - Discussion Paper October 2015 - Knox City Council November 2015

Key messages

1. Identifying important medium and long-term actions and aiming for bipartisan support should be key aspects of an enduring metropolitan strategy.

2. In making permanent the Urban Growth Boundary, Council recommends the inclusion of the Waverley Golf Course land and surrounds in Rowville to be included within the Urban Growth Boundary.

3. Council would welcome a focus on defining the values of green wedge and peri-urban land within the Urban Growth Boundary that goes beyond the value of agricultural production to include landscape values, amenity, rural tourism, biodiversity and conservation.

4. With a new focus on increased densities in established urban areas, implementation of a development levy that applies to all additional dwellings across the metropolitan region is imperative to meeting shortfalls in social and physical infrastructure.

5. A long-term visionary plan must nominate transport projects in the plan and set out a need to protect the option. Knox has identified three transport options in need of recognition and protection including the extension of tram service number 75 to Knox, the Rowville Rail link and the Dorset Road extension. This should also extend to future infrastructure for alternative forms of transport, like bike paths/routes.

6. Knox supports the principle of sustainable development, with increased densities close to the Principal Public Transport Network and activity centres, across all metropolitan municipalities in areas that are not restricted by high landscape values or environmental restrictions.

7. It's important to ensure the target 70/30 ratio is not used to favour inappropriate development as not all established area locations are equally suitable for increased densities. Knox has real constraints to increased densities for our residential areas and activity centres in the Dandenong foothills which include maintaining a state significant landscape asset, biological significance and increased bushfire risk. Consideration should also be given to the role of regional cities and towns in attracting and catering for the expected population growth.

8. A stronger focus on how the planning system might better facilitate the supply of social and affordable housing is welcome. 9. Council welcomes greater clarity and definition in the role and strategic directions for activity centres which recognises that all activity

centres are different, offering different opportunities and constraints. Council requests that Mountain Gate be recognised as a lower-order centre.

10. Council would welcome stronger mechanisms to deal with and give protection to residential encroachment of former landfills, quarries and waste treatment or waste recovery/transfer stations.

Appendix A


Map 1(above) - Knox City Council, in the context of Metropolitan Melbourne Map 2 (left) - Knox's position between Dandenong Creek Valley and Dandenong Ranges, showing the extent of the Dandenong foothills region (shaded dots).

81 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Chapter 2 - Growth Challenges, Fundamental Principles and Key Concepts 2.1 An enduring strategy Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

1. Revise Plan Melbourne 2014 to articulate an enduring strategy with a long-term focus supported by a ‘rolling’ implementation plan and updated State Planning Policy Framework

Support. Identifying important medium and long-term actions, aiming for bipartisan support, should be a key aspect of an enduring metropolitan strategy. Council previously submitted that the draft Plan Melbourne was heavily weighted with short-term actions (p.21 of 2013 Knox submission). The actions should be specific rather than vague or generalised to increase future accountability and discourage under-delivery of long-term actions. Further, cross-government commitment and an integrated approach to implementation is critical to success.

2. Align Plan Melbourne 2014 and the implementation plan with current government strategies, priorities and policy reviews.

Support. Clear policy gaps and contradictions should be rectified; however a metropolitan strategy should endure beyond government terms.

3. Edit Plan Melbourne 2014 to provide a clearer narrative, reduce repetition, limit content that describes existing conditions and align text with more relevant graphics and maps.

Support.

4. Remove unnecessary content that does not assist in the use of Plan Melbourne 2014 as a statutory planning document (such as vox pops, quotes, case studies).

Support in principle. The role of a metropolitan strategy goes beyond its status as a statutory document as, in conceptual terms it is a strategic plan for managing change in Melbourne with multiple audiences. Alternative or additional documentation should be prepared to assist broader understanding.

82 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 2.2 Key opportunities and challenges Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

5. Better define the key opportunities and challenges for developing Melbourne.

Support in principle. The 'Growth and changing demographics' challenge should specifically detail the drivers of change in demographic trends and the need to cater for this by facilitating housing diversity flexibility and innovative housing options for smaller dwellings. The 'Low suburban density' challenge should take into account that not all low density suburban areas as undesirable and should instead focus on the nature of the challenge which is to reduce urban sprawl. Knox's adopted Housing Strategy identifies areas of low-density detached houses where the characteristics and attributes of the area (i.e. the Dandenong Foothills) are important to retain and which have poorer access to public transport infrastructure and other services. Other Opportunity/Challenge suggestions:

• Identify the tension between increased development and loss of biodiversity/habitat and canopy trees. Discuss how Plan Melbourne enables or supports people's connection to nature in the city and suburbs.

• Discuss how there are significant opportunities to improve health and wellbeing through better urban planning and design. E.g. Increasing mental health issues, obesity, chronic disease, family violence and alcohol and drug issues which are exacerbated by lack of affordable housing, social and geographical isolation, discrimination, socio-economic disadvantage, employment and education. Obesity is a result of complex range of factors which includes increasingly sedentary behaviours which are exacerbated by poor city, housing, transport and employment design, as well as lack of access to affordable, nutritious and healthy food.

• Consider options like introducing healthy design as a standard for development similar to environmentally sustainable design.

• Consider utilising Liveability Index Framework and monitoring to identify future opportunities and challenges.

83 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 2.3 Strategic principles N/A 2.4 Sustainable Development Goals Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

6. Include the UN Sustainable Development Goals in Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support. Plan Melbourne will need to articulate these goals to be clear about what this means in practice.

84 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 2.5 Shaping the city Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

7. Lock down the existing Urban Growth Boundary and modify the action to reflect this.

Support in principle. In making permanent the metropolitan urban boundary, Council recommends the inclusion of the Waverley Golf Course land and surrounds in Rowville to be included within the metropolitan urban boundary. This was recommended Council's previous submission to Plan Melbourne (p.132-3 of Knox 2013 submission). Council supports the approach on locking down the boundary as recommended by MAC 2015 report (Rec. 13) to take into account the views of local government.

Image: Waverley Golf Club - 82 Bergins Road, Rowville


8. More clearly articulate the values of green wedge and peri-urban areas to be protected and safeguarded.

Support. Council would welcome a focus on defining the values of green wedge and peri-urban land within the Urban Growth Boundary that goes beyond the value of agricultural production to include landscape values, amenity, rural tourism, biodiversity and conservation. This will aid Council's commitment to complete a strategic review of rural and green wedge land to allow Council to better understand the productivity and economy of agricultural land, conservation and protection of landscape character and amenity, and provide strategic justification for any necessary changes to the Knox Planning Scheme as articulated in Action 3.4.1 of the Integrated City Strategy and Implementation Plan 2015-17. Support articulating value of green wedges for not only environmental factors but also for positive mental health benefits as well as increasing opportunities for active and passive physical activity such as walking, jogging, riding, bird watching, swimming, kayaking , outdoor play etc. Council previously submitted that there needs to be adequate guidance and protection of green wedge land (p.34 of Knox 2013 submission).

9. Remove the Integrated Economic Triangle and replace it with a high-level 2050 concept map for Melbourne.

Support in principle. Council supports moving away from the Integrated Economic Triangle that is largely defined by the road network to a more integrated spatial recognition of the polycentric city model. Focus on integrated transport improvements and job provision should be maintained.


10. Better define the concepts of the polycentric city and 20-minute neighbourhoods—particularly the ability to meet daily (non-work) needs locally, primarily within a 20-minute walk—and include the polycentric city as a key concept.

Support. Council welcomes clarifying the definition and policy implications of the polycentric city and 20-minute neighbourhood model. We support the concept of 20 minute walkable neighbourhoods for sustainable development, improving safety (passive surveillance), increasing social connection and physical activity in the community, education and local job creation. Key considerations: Strategic planning:

• The criteria for identifying these neighbourhood centres and the implications of promoting them for further growth should be made clear. Density should be able to be tailored to suit local circumstances given neighbourhood centres have different attributes and constraints (e.g. lack of public transport, accessibility, environmental/landscape restrictions).

• Guidance on appropriate zone application for these centres should be developed. • The commercial zones may undermine the polycentric city concept. For example,

allowing supermarkets 'as of right' in Commercial 2 Zone parcels along highways. • Funding is critical to support local government in development of structure plans

and policies, particularly given the new rate-capped environment. Definition:

• The concept of removing 'employment' from the definition of the 20-minute neighbourhood can be unclear; given their growth will support more local job opportunities. Further, it should be recognised that some higher-order activity centres provide significant employment, retail and civic functions (e.g. Knox Central). Council supports the approach that all 20-minute cities need not provide an important employment function however this requires a more nuanced definition.

• In defining the polycentric city, consideration should be given to opportunities for manipulation of the concept. Council has experience with development applications for less than ideal locations (e.g. supermarket on highway away from town centre) reversing this concept in their favour. For example, an argument can be made that there are shops and services within an accessible distance (20min walk) of the


proposal, yet they are spread out in different directions/locations. • It should be recognised that the 20-minute neighbourhood is more difficult to be

realised for all land in the outer suburbs particularly when accounting for movement barriers and constraints like road layouts and major roads, waterways, parks.

• There is limited reference to importance of retaining/celebrating/incorporating culture and heritage into the 20-minute neighbourhood.

Accessibility: • In redefining the 20-minute neighbourhood to be walkable, consideration should be

given to helping local government fund and deliver pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure, bridges/underpasses and prioritising pedestrians and cyclists at key major intersections to improve accessibility and safety.

Other considerations: • The 'healthy' 20-minute neighbourhood concept is vulnerable to be undermined by a

lack of a range of services/daily needs establishing within centres, including the potential proliferation of fast food/take away shops.

2.6 Housing – a key concept Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

11. Strengthen housing affordability and choice as a key concept and better explain the key linkages throughout Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support. A stronger focus on how the planning system might facilitate the supply of social and affordable housing in accessible locations in Plan Melbourne 2016 is welcome. Council is committed to promoting affordable and social housing through its Knox Affordable Housing Action Plan 2015-20 and Action 3.1 of the Integrated City Strategy and Implementation Plan 2015-17.

88 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 2.7 Climate change – a key concept Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

12. Identify the challenges of climate change for Melbourne’s development and define how the city can best mitigate, adapt and respond to its projected impacts.

Support. Stronger climate-related policy and clearer resilience and mitigation measures are supported for Plan Melbourne 2016. This will support Council's planning for adapting to a changing climate when considering the impact of changes to the environment on the Knox community as articulated in Council's Integrated City Strategy and Implementation Plan 2015-17 (Action 7.3.4): "Ensure that the implications of a changing climate and guidance on future development design in response to these issues are adequately reflected in the Knox Planning Scheme")

13. Add climate change as a key concept and better explain the key linkages throughout Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support.

2.8 People, place and identity – a key concept Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

14. Add as a key concept, the importance of people in Melbourne’s identity and the role of place making as a planning process, and embed it throughout Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support. (As below)


15. 15A. Retain the Directions relating to ‘place and identity’ in the Liveable Communities and Neighbourhoods chapter, add other elements from the MAC (2013) report omitted from Plan Melbourne 2014 and recognise the role of people in planning. OR 15B. Introduce a new ‘Place and Identity’ chapter incorporating policy directions outlined in Direction 4.5 - Make Our City Greener, Direction 4.6 - Create More Great Public Places Throughout Melbourne, Direction 4.7 - Respect our Heritage as We Build for the Future and Direction 4.8 - Achieve and Promote Design Excellence and other elements from the MAC (2013) report omitted from Plan Melbourne 2014.

Support option 15B rather than 15A. Council supports reinforcing place-making as a key concept to the success of planning. Council recognises that strong sense of place and identity, including promoting high quality and innovative architecture and urban design and enhancing Knox's green and leafy image is key to its liveability and economic success. Place making enables greater integration of design and development which supports the health and wellbeing of a local population/community. It should be discussed, however, how embracing place-making as a planning process would be implemented and how it would influence planning decisions beyond the existing framework.

Council applies place-based approaches to planning and programs which, in partnership with community and other key stakeholders, implements structure plans and local area based implementation plans to create local village feel and prosperity through local activities, new investment, infrastructure, services and facilities (as at Action 1.2.1 the Integrated City Strategy and Implementation Plan 2015-17).

It is considered that Melbourne's strength is its variety and distinctiveness throughout different parts of the city. As such there is merit in recognising and supporting differences in local communities and places.

More broadly, the following questions should be considered in fostering place and identity in Melbourne:

• What does the identity/uniqueness of places in Melbourne mean? • What is the definition of place – is it more than the built environment? • How can planning help to cultivate the creativity that Melbourne is renowned for

to better contribute towards a sense of place in public spaces? - Exploring public art's role in a sense of place and identity and as a means of

improving the urban fabric of cities. One example includes Copenhagen's creative public spaces i.e. Superkilen Park, public street furniture including trampolines and hammocks.


16. Better recognise the contribution of Aboriginal values and perspectives to the planning of our built and natural environments.

Support. Council has welcomed in recent years, a greater incidence of voluntary recognition and enthusiasm within the development industry, exceeding current requirements under the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006. However, there is a need for greater awareness of the importance of aboriginal cultural heritage recognition within planning policy and decision making. There must be continued education of government, developers and the community about the principles and protections of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 and their joint responsibility to protect and facilitate the enhancement of indigenous culture. To better recognise the contribution of aboriginal perspectives in the planning of our built environment, there must be a greater focus on the outcomes beyond a Cultural Heritage Management Plan process that requires developments to exhibit sensitivity to the aboriginal heritage and its broader environment in the layout and built form of the development. For example, in planning for the Stamford Park redevelopment site in Rowville, Council has required a detailed landscape plan aligning planting to enhance views to Mt Corhanwarrabul to respect its importance in aboriginal culture and the provision of an information board detailing the history of the traditional owners by agreement with Council and the Wurundjeri people.

2.9 Partnerships with local government – a key concept Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

17. Recognise and reinforce the importance of partnership with local government in sub-regional planning and the implementation of Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support. Support and consideration of alternative sources of funding for local government to implement key aspects of Plan Melbourne 2016 must be recognised in a rate-capped environment.

91 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 MAC 2015 Recommendations not addressed in Discussion Paper: - Growth Challenges and Key Concepts MAC Recommendation Government’s response, as outlined in

Discussion Paper Knox City Council Comments

Recommendation 81 Require the MPA to be the ‘voice’ of metropolitan Melbourne when that voice is required, for example at significant VCAT and planning panels where consistency of proposals against metropolitan objectives is being tested.

Not supported. The MPA and DELWP work in partnership to provide consistent planning outcomes.

Do not support Government's response. There is merit in the MPA representing, delivering and monitoring consistency of proposals against Plan Melbourne in various forums, including VCAT and Planning Panels. The roles and responsibilities of both MPA and DELWP should be made clear.

Recommendation 86 Adopt the recommendation of the Standard Development Contributions Advisory Committee (2013) that a development levy apply to all additional dwellings across the metropolitan region at a rate of $3,000 per net additional dwelling (based on $2012).

The Victorian Government will be implementing standard levies for areas of high growth across the State, initially in greenfield growth areas and strategic redevelopment sites in both metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas, followed by the Melbourne CBD.

Do not support Government's response. Support MAC Recommendation 86 for a levy to apply to all urban areas. The current system of Councils preparing, implementing and operating their own DCPs is overly onerous and time consuming as it's a regimented system based on individual infrastructure projects and the cost of preparing DCPs. This is burdensome on Councils in a rate-capped environment and will result in inconsistent introduction of DCPs across Metropolitan Melbourne.

92 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Recommendation 36 Reword Initiative 4.3.1 and its actions as follows: Initiative 4.3.1: Implement healthy design guidelines • Update the State Planning Policy

Framework to support the application of the National Heart Foundation’s Healthy by Design Guidelines in the planning and development process.

• Develop tools (such as those developed by the National Heart Foundation) to inform the review of the Precinct Structure Planning Guidelines and any future urban renewal structure planning guidelines.

• Develop a Healthy City Planning checklist based on the National Heart Foundations ‘Health by Design Guidelines’ to assist local councils in assessing development applications and designing new neighbourhoods in terms of health and community wellbeing.

Underway/concurrent process. Being considered as part of structure planning guidelines review. Healthy communities also discussed as part of 20–minute neighbourhoods under Growth challenges, fundamental principles and key concepts.

Support the Government’s response. Health by design guidelines should carry greater weight in the planning and development process. These should also be considered in greyfield precinct redevelopment areas.

93 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 3 Delivering jobs and investment Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

18. Ensure commercial development opportunities are preserved and early delivery of key transport infrastructure in central city urban renewal precincts.

Support.

19. Rename National Employment Clusters to National Employment and Innovation Clusters to distinguish their significance in the metropolitan context, and use the term consistently throughout Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support.

20. Revise the Delivering Jobs and Investment chapter to ensure the significance and roles of the National Employment Clusters as places of innovation and knowledge-based employment are clear.

Support.

21. A: Focus planning for National Employment Clusters on core institutions and businesses. OR B: Take a broader approach to planning for National Employment Clusters that looks beyond the core institutions and businesses.

Support Option B. A concentrated focus on core institutions and businesses may be limiting in the long term and restrict innovation and adaptation to future conditions. Council supports a broader approach that looks beyond the core institutions and business, however acknowledges the importance of their presence in these areas.

22. Broaden the East Werribee National Employment Cluster to call it the Werribee National Employment Cluster in order to encompass the full range of activities and employment activities that make up Werribee. This could include the Werribee Activity Centre and the Werribee Park Tourism Precinct.

Support.


23. Broaden the Dandenong South National Employment Cluster to call it the Dandenong National Employment Cluster in order to encompass the full range of activities and employment activities that make up Dandenong. This could include the Dandenong Metropolitan Activity Centre and Chisholm Institute of TAFE.

Support.

3.1 National Employment Clusters and innovation N/A

95 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 3.2 Designation of Activity Centres Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

24. Update the Metropolitan Melbourne Structure Plan (Table 1 and Map 8 in Plan Melbourne 2014) to remove any anomalies and reincorporate the list of activity centres into the Victoria Planning Provisions and planning schemes.

Support in principle. Listing Activity Centres in VPP and Planning Schemes

Council supports the listing of Activity Centres in the Victorian Planning Provisions and planning schemes. Activity Centres in Knox are listed in Council’s Municipal Strategic Statement in order to provide policy guidance for their role and function. Removing anomalies

In 2013, Council made a submission to the draft Plan Melbourne 2014 that Activity Centre status for Mountain Gate was inappropriate. Council requested that Plan Melbourne 2014 “Remove references to Mountain Gate being an ‘Activity Centre,’ as this centre with its lack of public transport sits more comfortably as a Neighbourhood Activity Centre (paragraph 41).” MAC Recommendation 8 specifies a number of requirements for new Activity Centres, including:

• Be well-served by a range of transport options (including public transport), with priority given to new centres that are developed based on transit-oriented-development principles

• Increase the density and diversity of housing in a walkable catchment where appropriate (a 400–metre walkable catchment is a guide, but will depend on local conditions)

Mountain Gate cannot be considered to be well-serviced by a range of transport options and increasing the density and diversity of housing in the surrounding areas will be limited. The Knox Housing Strategy 2015 has now been adopted by Council and is currently being implemented through Knox Amendment C131. The strategy adopted a localised approach to estimation of housing capacity, concluding that there was capacity for 448 additional dwellings in Mountain Gate, significantly less


capacity that other Activity Centres (Bayswater – 1,715, Boronia – 2,626, Rowville – 751, Knox Central – 2,000). The analysis adopted a methodology of:

• Likelihood of residential redevelopment (zone allows, landowner take-up etc); • Height limitations • Potential density of 1:150 per level.

For these reasons, Council requests that Mountain Gate be recognised as a lower order centre.

25. Reclassify Toolern and Lockerbie as Future Emerging Activity Centres (local significant element) in the Metropolitan Melbourne Structure Plan (rather than as Future Emerging Metropolitan Activity Centres).

Support.

26. Reinstate Greenvale and Truganina as Activity Centres (local significant element) in the Metropolitan Melbourne Structure Plan.

Support.

27. Separately list emerging Activity Centres as part of the Metropolitan Melbourne Structure Plan.

Support.

28. Revise the strategic direction for Activity Centres to remove reference to growth associated with the removal of floorspace caps for retail and office development.

Support in principle. Council welcomes greater clarity and definition in the role and strategic directions for Activity Centres. Council submits that floorspace caps across Activity Centres should be at the discretion of Council, based on local information and evidence.

97 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 3.3 Criteria for new activity centres Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

29. Develop clearer activity centre policy and a practice note for identification and establishment of new activity centres based on the final criteria included in Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support in principle. Council welcomes clearer Activity Centre policy which recognises that all Activity Centres are different, offering different opportunities and constraints. Council has had a long-standing policy of directing increased development to its activity centres, including Bayswater, Knox Central and Boronia. However many parts of Knox are restricted by development constraints, including a number of Neighbourhood Activity Centres. Upper Ferntree Gully, Ferntree Gully, The Basin and Alchester Village are all located within the Dandenong Foothills setting. Height, density and vegetation protection controls are currently in place across the foothills to protect the landscape amenity and environmental values of these areas. In these areas, matters such as bushfire risk and slope also limit the density and scale of residential development that can be achieved around the existing Neighbourhood Activity Centres. The Knox Integrated City Strategy 2015 seeks to retain the capability to “foster viable and accessible Activity Centres commensurate with their role and function to meet community needs” (Area of focus 11.4). Council’s Housing Policy 2015 also recognises and responds to the different areas by applying the residential zones commensurate with the capacity for change. Council does not wish to see important strategic work undertaken and existing local policies undermined by a ‘blanket’ approach to scale and density of development in and around activity centres. Council supports MAC Recommendation 8, which includes requirements for new activity centres to be have capacity to:

• Meet an identified market gap • Be well-served by a range of transport options (including public transport), with


priority given to new centres that are developed based on transit-oriented-development principles

• Have capacity to establish a wider mix of uses and subsequently develop into an Activity Centre

• Increase the density and diversity of housing in a walkable catchment where appropriate (a 400–metre walkable catchment is a guide, but will depend on local conditions)

• Contribute to the delivery of a network of 20–minute neighbourhoods. Activity Centre policy should consider these requirements and recognise that the degree to which activity centres can support change are commensurate with the degree to which they meet these criteria.

30. Modify the existing criteria in Plan Melbourne (at Initiative 1.1.1) for identifying new activity centres to explicitly include:

• Meet an identified market gap

• Contribute to the delivery of a network of 20-minute neighbourhoods.

Support in principle.

99 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 3.4 Protecting strategic agricultural land Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

31. Evaluate the range of planning mechanisms available to protect strategic agricultural land.

Support. Council welcomes a review of the planning mechanisms available to protect strategic agricultural land. With respect to this objective, Council encourages an approach which considers the value of strategic agricultural land from both an economic productivity perspective as well as its value for landscape character and amenity. The Knox Integrated City Strategy (2015) includes the following:

Area of focus: 3.4 Ensure rural and urban areas are planned for, and their landscape character and amenity are protected, by understanding the value of agricultural land and providing policy guidance.

Other factors to consider include identifying the importance and protection of strategic agricultural land for local employment, cultural and food supply needs is important. E.g. local and sustainable access to a supply of fresh fruit and vegetables to Victorians at affordable prices.

3.5 Extractive industries Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

32. Implement the outcomes of the Extractive Industries Taskforce through the planning scheme, including Regional Growth Plans, to affirm that extractive industries resources are protected to provide an economic supply of materials for construction and road industries.

Support. Council recommends that the Victorian Government investigate mechanisms to protect separation distances for all important existing facilities that create adverse amenity impacts to support this.

100 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 MAC 2015 Recommendations not addressed in Discussion Paper: Delivering Jobs and Investment MAC Recommendation Government’s response, as outlined in


Liveable Communities and Neighbourhoods Recommendation 31 Reinstate MAC 2013 action in Initiative 4.1.1:

• Review relevant regulations and other obstacles deterring the use of upper level floor space in neighbourhood activity centres for more residential, commercial, community-based uses and work with councils to help unlock these underutilised spaces.

Out of scope. Beyond the nominated scope of the refresh. To be considered as part of the 5–year Plan Melbourne 2016 review.

Council accepts the Government’s response and supports the consideration of this matter as part of the 5-year Plan Melbourne 2016 Review.

101 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Chapter 4 - A more connected Melbourne 4.1 Updating transport commitments Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

33. Include future transport options in Plan Melbourne 2016 as areas for further development and assessment through transport planning and Infrastructure Victoria’s advisory role.

Support in principle. Public Transport The Rowville Rail link identified in Plan Melbourne 2014 should be maintained and protected for the future. The reservation of land for this purpose should be made a short-term rather than medium-term action, as previously submitted by Council (p.46 of Knox submission 2013). As discussed in Section 2.1 of the discussion paper, a long-term visionary plan must identify what will be required in 2051 and the nomination of a transport project in the plan sets out a need to protect the option, not bind the government to build it now or in the near future. Knox has identified a future transport option for the extension of tram service number 75 to Knox. Council recommends that Map 33 - Eastern Subregion in Plan Melbourne be amended to include a potential tram extension of route 75, which currently terminates in Vermont South, to Knox. This would safeguard an important sustainable transport option from various activity centres, employment and education facilities (including Tally Ho Business Park and Deakin University) to Knox Westfield and Swinburne University. Council previously requested identification of a tram to Upper Ferntree Gully (p. 45, 47, 48, 77, 78, 79, 81-83 of Knox 2013 submission). To support the route 75 extension, it is recommended that it be listed for feasibility studies as a short-term action under the recommended initiative 3.1.3-5 (MAC 2015 Rec.40) "Extend tram lines to E-Gate and Fishermans Bend and investigate the feasibility of completing the missing tram link between Dynon and Footscray" and land be reserved in the short-term for this purpose.


Road The Dorset Road extension project connecting Burwood Highway and Napolean Road (which is a project identified by VicRoads in their Strategic Network Capacity Improvement program) is Knox’s highest arterial road project priority. In November 2013 the Minister for Public Transport & Roads advised Council that an extension of Dorset Road would be considered for future funding along with other transport projects in the context of ‘Plan Melbourne’. Council requests that this road extension be identified in Plan Melbourne 2016 as a road initiative on Map 33 – Eastern subregion. Alternative transport Future transport options should also be identified for alternative forms of transport in a strategic, metropolitan-wide and long-term manner. Plan Melbourne 2016 should incorporate the Principal Bicycle Network including potential bicycle network enhancements into its future transport options for wider metropolitan Melbourne (subregion maps), rather than just the central city (as shown in Map 21 of Plan Melbourne 2014).

103 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 4.2 Transit corridors and the Principal Public Transport Network Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

34. Include the Principal Public Transport Network (PPTN) in Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support. Inclusion of the PPTN in Plan Melbourne will clarify key public transport routes connecting activity centres to help plan for future sustainable growth. In planning for a more polycentric city, the bus network should consider better linking to neighbourhood activity centres to provide greater accessibility for seniors and the physically impaired and where mobility barriers are identified (e.g. major highways). The PPTN should incorporate the work being undertaken by Public Transport Victoria on the Bus Plan into the PPTN. Council would appreciate the opportunity to input into this process. Further, consideration should be given to including the Principal Bicycle Network in the PPTN. This helps to identify alternative transport options in areas poorly serviced by public transport and to identify key roads that require bike path separation measures for the future.

104 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 4.3 Active Transport Victoria Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

35. Incorporate references to Active Transport Victoria and linkages to land use outcomes in Plan Melbourne 2016.

Support. Knox City Council is committed to enabling improved transport choices supported by integrated and sustainable transport systems an infrastructure. The Knox Integrated Transport Plan 2015 - 2025 outlines various actions to enhance access to sustainable transport services, including reviewing and developing pedestrian, cycling and walking plans and delivering high-quality local infrastructure. Behaviour change programs and initiatives should ideally go hand in hand with the infrastructure improvements.

MAC 2015 Recommendations not addressed in Discussion Paper: Transport MAC Recommendation Government’s response, as outlined in


Recommendation 10 Designate a set of strategic public transport corridors that are suited for transit oriented development, these being major radial and trunk public transport corridors that connect NEICs, join NEICs to the Central City, join NEICs to growth corridors or are corridors already showing strong characteristics of transit oriented development.

Out of scope. A significant task with major investment and land use implications, including more intensive development in middle and outer areas. To be considered as part of the 5-year Plan Melbourne 2016 review. Discussed further under A More Connected Melbourne and in the context of transport project details and the development of a Network Development Strategy.

Support the Government's response that this be considered as part of the 5-year review.

105 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Recommendation 88 Examine beneficiary pays principles in the development of funding models for major urban transport projects and growth area developments.

Not supported. Refer to Initiative 7.3.3 in Plan Melbourne 2014 in relation to growth area developments. Refer for consideration to the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources and Infrastructure Victoria.

Do not support Government's response. Support MAC recommendation 88. Although the beneficiary pays principle should not be used as a primary source of funding, all alternative methods of improved transport funding should be examined as a multiple-method approach may achieve best outcomes as long as this remains fair, practical and transparent.

Recommendation 47 Consistent with Infrastructure Australia’s recommendation that “there is a need for serious public discussion about infrastructure service levels and funding”, the Victorian Government should initiate a community consultation program into the way transport use is priced, as part of a wider program to ensure that resources used in land transport are used as efficiently as possible.

Underway/concurrent process. Beyond the nominated scope of the refresh. Referred for consideration in the establishment of Infrastructure Victoria.

As above.

106 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Recommendation 42 Under Direction 3.2, add the following actions for Initiative 3.2.2 which could be implemented in the first ten years of PM Refresh: 3.2.2-1: Commence the transformation of bus service into a three tier network, starting with the outer western, outer northern, outer south eastern and bayside suburbs, and provide better information including improved way-finding and real time service information. This will include improving sections of the SmartBus route between Sunshine and Mentone, and services along Blackburn and Springvale Roads to a ten minute frequency at key times. 3.2.2-2: As part of the new bus franchise agreement, reallocate services to better meet demand for access to job rich areas including Monash, Melbourne Airport, Latrobe University, Footscray and Sunshine. 3.2.2-3: Continue with the introduction of low floor buses and better stops and road crossing facilities to improve bus accessibility, particularly for those who have personal mobility difficulties. 3.2.2-4: Provide greater on-road priority for buses, starting with approaches to interchanges and along Blackburn Road. This work will continue into the medium term on the bus routes between Greensborough and Tullamarine, Rowville and Monash, Dandenong and Ringwood, Springvale Road, Warrigal Road and key routes serving Latrobe University.

Underway/concurrent process. Referred for consideration as part of transport network planning.

Support in principle.

• Frequency of the 900 and 901 SmartBuses should also be improved. Patronage is strong on both and the 900 should match train frequency (MAC Recommendation 3.2.2-1).

• Accessible bus stops should also include access across the road as you inevitably need to cross the road for one part of your journey (MAC Recommendation 3.2.2-3).

• Need to ensure that any potential changes to bus routes don’t isolate or disadvantage sections of the community (MAC Recommendation 3.2.2-5).

107 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 3.2.2-5: Continue to improve and adjust service levels to best meet demand and regularly review the network to ensure that services provided offer the best value for money. This includes upgrading premium and connector services to higher frequencies, and upgrade connector services to a premium service level based on potential to grow patronage. Neighbourhood services will also be improved in terms of their frequency and efficiency.

108 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 5 Housing 5.1 The balance between established and growth area development Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

36. Increase established area housing supply by one or more of:

• A. Establish a 70/30 target where established areas provide 70 per cent of Melbourne’s new housing supply and greenfield growth areas provide 30 per cent.

• B. Investigate a mechanism to manage the sequence and density of the remaining Precinct Structure Plans based on land supply needs.

• C. Focus metropolitan planning on unlocking housing supply in established areas, particularly within areas specifically targeted for growth and intensification.

• D. Identify planning tools and reforms to boost established area housing supply.

Support in principle - Option 36A. It is recognised that the city is already achieving a 70/30 target. The MAC 2015 report intends that the 70% target be focused on the inner and middle ring of suburbs that have greater better access to public transport, links to the city and significant opportunities for denser and mixed-use development: "The large proportion of Melbourne which makes up the middle suburbs is rich in jobs, services, community facilities and public transport. This is where most of us live, and wish to live. PM Refresh should introduce actions where the new forms of housing that we need may be integrated within the existing suburbs" (p.29 of MAC 2015 report). As an 'outer suburbs' municipality, it is unclear how this will affect Knox and its Housing Strategy. Targets should be mindful of the MAC 2015 intention to unlock greater housing infill capacity in the inner and middle ring of suburbs; however Knox supports the principle of sustainable development, with increased densities close to the Principal Public Transport Network and activity centres, across all metropolitan municipalities. Nevertheless, in implementing this policy, it's important to ensure the target ratio is not used to favour inappropriate development as not all established area locations are equally suitable for increased densities. Knox has real constraints to increased densities - the Dandenong foothills (land east of Dorset Road) constraints include maintaining a state significant landscape asset, biological significance and increased bushfire risk (see photos below). Knox's Housing Strategy reflects this and provides for increased housing growth and capacity in its Activity Centres outside the foothills and strategic redevelopment sites. With greater infill development expected to occur across Melbourne, greater


recognition should be given to implementing a state-wide approach to covering the shortfalls in existing physical and social infrastructure in infill areas. In line with this, Council supports the ability to apply a state-wide standard development contribution across existing 'urban areas'. This was recommended by MAC 2015 (Recs. 85-87) as key to support the increased urban infill development identified in Plan Melbourne 2016. Consideration should also be given to the role of regional cities and towns in attracting and catering for the expected population growth. 36B: The consequences of sequenced release of land to maintain the 70/30 target ratio must be further investigated, with local government consultation. However, in principle, the concept of sequencing the release of Precinct Structure Plans to ensure basic community services and public transport needs are provided in a timely manner is supported. 36C: Support in principle. Councils need to be consulted in the identification of target areas for growth and intensification. 36D: Support in principle. Red-tape reduction for appropriate development is supported in principle, but only the investigation of options for this purpose should be included in Plan Melbourne. The identification and proposal of appropriate mechanisms should be subject to a thorough consultation process first.


Image 1: Views to the Dandenong Foothills, as seen from Ferntree Gully.

Image 2: Koolamara Waters, in Knox with Dandenong Foothills in the background

111 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 5.2 Population growth and housing Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

37. Better define and communicate Melbourne’s housing needs by either:

• A: Setting housing targets for metropolitan Melbourne and each sub-region relating to housing diversity, supply and affordability.

OR • B: Developing a metropolitan Housing Strategy

that includes a Housing Plan which: • Identifies preferred housing outcomes (rather than

targets)

• Specifies key Victorian and local government actions

• Includes preferred housing scenarios for sub-regions and defined locations.

37A: Support. The concept of introducing housing targets in consultation with local governments is supported. This will help council to better plan for predicted future growth and clarify the scale of the housing challenge to the community. Evaluation mechanisms should be developed to ensure all metropolitan councils are meeting their housing targets. Council supports MAC recommendation 17 that the targets take into consideration work already done by councils on their municipal housing strategies. In calculating projected housing form and typology, it's important to consider a finer-grain look at demand vs supply to distinguish between what we can accommodate and what the community's housing preferences are. This will have housing diversity and location implications. Knox's recent Housing Strategy establishes that there will be adequate capacity of land that could theoretically be built in accordance with the Housing Strategy (36,362 dwellings) in Knox to meet estimated future demand (12,041 dwellings; Victoria in Future, 2014). 37B: Support in principle. A metropolitan Housing Strategy is supported in that it can provide overall directions for a consistent and integrated approach to increasing housing supply across the city, departing from the current haphazard approach. However, it's important this strategy does not detract from the important work of Councils in developing local Housing Strategies that reflect community views, local opportunities and constraints.

112 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 5.3 Clarify locations that support population growth and new housing Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

38. Introduce a policy statement in Plan Melbourne 2016:

• To support population and housing growth in defined locations

• That acknowledges that some areas within defined locations will require planning protection based on their valued character.

38: Support in principle. Councils should be consulted in identifying locations for population housing growth. Council supports planning protection of valued character for areas of state significance like the Dandenong Ranges and its foothills.

39. Clarify the direction to ‘protect the suburbs’. 39: Support in principle. Council supports resolving ambiguity and contradictions in Plan Melbourne 2014 by clarifying this concept. When identifying the rationale for protection, Knox-relevant considerations should be accommodated. These include:

Characteristic Why protect? Protect from?

Significant biological and landscape values (e.g. The Dandenong Foothills).

To protect the environment, the retention of native vegetation and the bush-suburban lifestyle.

Development greater than dual occupancy. E.g. Villa units, townhouses and apartments/mixed use.

High value low-density neighbourhood character, where justified.

To protect the highly valued character of green and leafy streets, backyards and mostly detached houses that are not in close proximity to services and transport.

Townhouses and apartments/mixed use.


The Knox Housing Strategy that has been adopted by Council facilitates protection of such areas with a scaled approach to housing development across different parts of Knox. Areas identified with the above characteristics include Bush Suburban and Knox Neighbourhood Areas with preferred housing types set out. This is balanced by the Housing Strategy also encouraging and enabling increased density and capacity in Activity Centres and strategic redevelopment sites. The Knox Housing Strategy was developed following extensive community consultation. Over 10,000 people made a submission to Knox@50 and 400 submissions were received on the draft Housing Strategy and associated planning scheme amendment. Council is committed to strengthening and protecting local character and landscape values in Knox, as identified in the below actions in The Integrated City and Implementation Plan 2015-17 Strategy to promote good quality sustainable urban design outcomes and creating a greener city:

• Action 1.4.2: "Promote and facilitate good quality and sustainable urban design outcomes for new development in Knox."

• Action 1.4.3: "Create a greener city with more trees and indigenous vegetation in public spaces, and thriving significant plant species."

114 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 5.4 Housing diversity Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

40. Clarify the action to apply the Neighbourhood Residential Zone to at least 50 per cent of residential land by:

• A - Deleting the action and replacing it with a direction that clarifies how the residential zones should be applied to respect valued character and deliver housing diversity.

OR

• B - Retain at least 50 per cent as a guide but expand the criteria to be applied in variations between municipalities.

Support in principle - Option 40A. This type of direction however needs to go beyond a statement to better support application of zones in line with 'protect the suburbs' rationale, as mentioned in discussion point 39. Clearer rationale and requirements to identify neighbourhood character should be developed to ensure the Neighbourhood Residential Zone is applied to the intended areas.

41. Introduce a policy statement in Plan Melbourne 2016 supporting greyfield renewal and investigate planning scheme mechanisms to achieve coordinated and sustainable renewal of established suburbs. (Greyfields are residential areas where the building stock is near or ending its physical life and land values make redevelopment attractive)

41: Support in principle. A precinct-based approach to renewal of older and under-utilised building stock is supported if undertaken by or in close collaboration with local government.


42. Include an action in Plan Melbourne 2016 to investigate how the building and planning system can facilitate housing that readily adapts to the changing needs of households over the life of a dwelling.

42: Support in principle. Flexibility in housing is supported, particularly in creating opportunities for shared living with an intergenerational focus, enabling self-contained living within existing houses for seniors. This investigation should not be limited to flexible internal design. There is a distinct lack of innovative and diverse housing form for higher-density development, with recent developments maintaining a trichotomy of housing types: detached houses, two-storey townhouses (often detached) and towering apartment blocks. A greater range of 'low-rise, high-density' housing with good quality and family-friendly amenities would help to promote downsizing, affordable family dwellings and facilitation of modestly-scaled, infill residential development. Knox is committed to planning for and responding to changing family/living structures and other drivers of change by facilitating and advocating for housing diversity and choice in appropriate locations to achieve accessible, sustainable and more affordable housing options (as at Action 3.1 of the Integrated City Strategy and Implementation Plan 2015-17). Knox supports updating the housing diversity definition to include consideration of accessibility to accommodate people with special needs and seniors. A stronger emphasis on universal design principles and their application should also be considered.

116 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 5.5 Affordable housing Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

43. Affirm that the Minister for Planning should be the responsible authority for social housing planning applications recommended by the Director of Housing (and include definitions of housing affordability and social and affordable housing in planning schemes).

Do not support. Although Council supports efficient provision of social housing, treating social housing differently to other residential development may increase social stigmatisation of social housing in the community. Council has a history of successfully supporting social housing applications in the past and has developed its Knox Affordable Housing Action Plan 2015-20, with a key focus on increasing the supply of social housing.

44. Introduce expedited planning approvals processes for selected social housing projects, including modified third-party appeal rights.

Do not support. As above.

45. • 45A Consider introducing planning tools that

mandate or facilitate or provide incentives to increase social and affordable housing supply.

• 45B Evaluate the pilot affordable housing initiative on land sold by government to determine whether to extend this to other suitable land sold by government.

• 45C Identify planning scheme requirements that could be waived or reduced without compromising the amenity of social and affordable housing or neighbouring properties.

Support Options 45A and B. Inclusionary zoning should be investigated further as a means for increasing the supply of social and affordable housing for large developments. This should be a whole-of-government approach however, as effectiveness may rely on financial schemes. For example, Wandsworth City Council in London requires 33% affordable housing for developments of 10+ dwellings subject to viability testing and secured by legal agreements. However, most affordable housing provided to date has been for shared ownership (part buy/part rent) housing. Shared ownership schemes are provided by housing associations - both government-backed & privately operated and afforded to households on low to average incomes). 45C. Do not support. Waiving requirements and reducing standards may result in poor outcomes for those least-able to choose their preferred standard of accommodation.

117 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 MAC 2015 Recommendations not addressed in Discussion Paper: Housing related MAC Recommendation Government’s response, as outlined in


Recommendation 14 Replace the definition of Affordable Housing in the Glossary with the following: Housing where the cost (rent or mortgage payments) is no more than 30% of gross income for households in the bottom two quintiles for area (ie Greater Melbourne) median income.

Addressed in discussion paper. Issues discussed under Housing.

Knox Affordable Housing Action Plan 2015-2020 defines affordable housing as follows: "Housing where the cost (whether mortgage repayment or rent) is no more than 30 % of that household’s net income. Exceeding the mark places one under ‘housing stress’, particularly in the lower 40% of the income distribution scale. This housing should well-located housing and appropriate to the needs of a given household."

Recommendation 34 Delete Direction 4.2: Protect Melbourne and its suburbs from inappropriate development and its associated actions.

Out of scope. Beyond the nominated scope of the refresh.

Support the Government’s response in principle. Although Council submits this direction could be better defined, it's important to maintain protection for high-value suburban areas and areas with poor public transport from inappropriate development density.

6 A more resilient and environmentally sustainable Melbourne 6.1 Challenges and Opportunities NA 6.2 City Structure NA

118 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.3 Strategic Environmental Principles Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

46. Introduce the Strategic Environmental Principles in Plan Melbourne 2016 to guide implementation of environment, climate change and water initiatives.

Support.

6.4 Melbourne: A resilient city prepared for climate change Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

47. In consultation with land and emergency management authorities, review policy and hazard management planning tools (such as overlays) to ensure the planning system responds to climate change challenges.

Support. Council supports this approach and MAC Recommendation 51, in particular, the actions to update the planning system to:

• Identify at risk areas and reduce their vulnerability. • Ensure settlement planning in peri-urban regions responds to natural hazards.

This is generally in line with the Knox Integrated City Strategy 2015, in particular: Area of focus 7.3 Plan for Council’s risks in relation to a changing climate.

And, more specifically: Action 7.3.4 Ensure that the implications of a changing climate and guidance on future development design in response to these issues are adequately reflected in the Knox Planning Scheme.


48. Update hazard mapping based on the best available climate change science and review risk management actions to promote resilience and avoid unacceptable risks.

Support. Council supports hazard mapping based on the best available climate change science and recognises its important role in developing local area responses. Council would also like to take this opportunity to request that, in consideration of ‘hazard mapping,’ Plan Melbourne 2016 includes the specific impacts of climate change driven events, as listed in the Discussion Paper as:

• Heatwaves (hazard mapping across metropolitan Melbourne for areas particularly susceptible to ‘heat island effects’)

• Bushfires • Drought • Coastal Inundation • Flooding

Council would also welcome a state-led approach to implementation of hazard mapping through planning scheme controls, consistent with the Knox Integrated City Strategy 2015, in particular: Action 7.3.4 Ensure that the implications of a changing climate and guidance on future development design in response to these issues are adequately reflected in the Knox Planning Scheme.

49. Update the legislative and policy framework so the best available climate change science and data at regional and local spatial scales is periodically incorporated into the planning system.

Support.


50. Incorporate natural hazard management criteria into Victorian planning schemes to improve planning in areas exposed to climate change and environmental risks.

Support, in part. Council supports the intention to incorporate land use planning responses to managing hazards in planning schemes. The proposed Hazard Response Hierarchy (Table 4, page 74) includes some land use planning responses that can be addressed through the Victorian Planning System, such as Avoid, Resist and Respond. However land management responses (fuel reduction/seawalls/infrastructure) and React (education and individual emergency plans) are not best placed within Victorian planning schemes. Listing such actions in planning schemes may create unrealistic expectations within the community about how natural hazards can be managed through the planning system. It may also create a perception that government will undertake these actions irrespective of the risk posed.

51. Investigate consideration of climate change risks in infrastructure planning in the land use planning system, including consideration of an ‘infrastructure resilience test’.

Support. Council supports MAC Recommendation 52 that an infrastructure resilience test be developed for new major capital works. The Knox Climate Change Response Plan 2012 – 2022 outlines that increased storm events and heatwaves affect Council’s building assets, as well as critical infrastructure across the municipality. On a regional scale, the train network has failed to cope with temperature extremes, which in turn puts pressure on the road network. Residents are relying on air conditioners to provide relief from excessive heat have resulted in blackouts in the middle of heat waves. To ensure that new buildings and infrastructure are resilient to climate change impacts, Council supports a second area for investigation which could require authorities to apply the new Australian Standard ‘Climate change adaptation for settlements and infrastructure – A risk based approach.’ Plan Melbourne 2016 should also align with the Resilient Melbourne Strategy being developed by Melbourne City Council as part of the international 100 Resilient Cities initiative by the Rockerfeller Foundation.

121 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.5 Natural habitats Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

52. Strengthen high-priority habitat corridors throughout Melbourne and its peri-urban areas to improve long-term health of key flora and fauna habitats.

Support. In addition to parks, waterways, natural features and open spaces, the role of Green wedge land and pockets of other rural land across metropolitan Melbourne should be considered for its contribution to providing green breaks and opportunities for fauna to migrate through the landscape. The review should consider broadening the focus from endangered species to supporting natural systems overall and enhancing the health and wellbeing outcomes for people as well as native flora and fauna.

122 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.6 Cooling a hot city Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

53. Adopt strategies to encourage the:

• Increase of tree canopy, vegetated ground cover and permeable surfaces throughout Melbourne

• Use of Water Sensitive Urban Design and irrigation with various water sources to cool the city by providing water features, supporting trees and vegetation.

Support. Council supports MAC Recommendation 51, which, further to increased tree canopy, vegetated ground cover and permeable surfaces, includes planting urban forests (in appropriate locations where bushfire risk is minimal). Strategies to encourage the increase of tree canopy and vegetated ground cover are generally consistent with the Knox Integrated City Strategy 2015, in particular: Area of focus 4.4 Create a greener city with more trees and indigenous vegetation in public and private spaces, and thriving significant plant species.

Tree canopy targets, local policies and overlays (Design and Development Overlays and Development Plan Overlays) are suggested in the Discussion Paper as strategies to support greening the city. Council does not support a blanket approach to tree canopy targets. Localised conditions and environmental constraints must be taken into account, as well as cost implications. The Knox Housing Strategy 2015 and Knox Amendment C131 seek to introduce canopy tree requirements as part of new developments. Council also submits that Plan Melbourne should recognise the barriers to implementation of increasing tree canopy, such as opposition to street tree planting from Vic Roads.

54. Introduce strategies to encourage the uptake of green roofs, facades and walls, as appropriate materials used for pavements and buildings with low heat-absorption properties.

Support.

123 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.7 Supporting renewable energy through precinct scale planning Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

55. Seek lead partners in research, property investment or government to facilitate innovative demonstration projects in greenfield and urban renewal precincts.

Support. Knox Council's Stamford Park development (Council owned land to be developed by private sector) is a mandatory 5-star Green Star Community (Green Building Council of Australia) which will be a demonstration project in a suburban context. Requirements include:

• Solar-powered electric vehicle recharge points in all dwellings and a recharging station in apartment building;

• Designing and implementing an integrated water management system, including recycled water;

• Aspiration to achieve a net zero carbon emissions housing estate by various means, including provision of carbon sink planting, solar panels, green roofs and permaculture vegetable garden (reduced food miles).

56. 56A Investigate opportunities in the land use planning system, such as strong supporting planning policy, to facilitate the increased uptake of renewable and low-emission energy in Melbourne and its peri-urban areas 56B Strengthen the structure planning process to facilitate future renewable and low emission energy generation technologies in greenfield and urban renewal precincts. 56C Strengthen the structure planning process to require consideration of the costs and benefits of renewable or low-emission energy options across a precinct.

Support Option 56A. Council would also like to draw attention to: MAC Recommendation 59, in particular, the suggestion that Plan Melbourne supports local government and the private sector in their efforts to promote energy efficiency through the following actions:

• As part of a whole-of-government policy framework, investigate opportunities for local generation of electricity in growth areas and strategic sites around the city.

• Prepare template commercial agreements for shared use of co-generation and tri-generation facilities to relieve developers and their customers of the high costs that can be incurred in obtaining commercial and legal advice associated with creating and participating in shared facilities.


As well as MAC Recommendation 60, which includes the following initiatives and actions:

• Investigate as part of a comprehensive assessment of the economic and investment opportunities available in Melbourne’s peri-urban area the potential for renewable energy enterprises and, where appropriate, work with councils to identify areas where such activities could be encouraged to locate.

• Prepare a planning policy which recognises the role of renewable energy technologies in transitioning Melbourne to become a low carbon city and encourages greater use of solar energy in all new development.

• As the price of solar power decreases, identify opportunities for the installation of commercially viable solar photo voltaics along freeways to support lighting, Intelligent Transport Systems and signage for users of these roads as well as opportunities to feed this energy back into the metropolitan grid.

• Reduce energy use in buildings and encourage precinct based energy initiatives

• Investigate opportunities and constraints for precinct scale use of renewable energy resources and develop a long-term transition plan for improving energy efficiency of all existing buildings, both at the individual building and precinct levels.

• Advocate through national forums higher building energy standards that are consistent with broader energy efficiency policy.

Council supports each of the actions and initiatives suggested by the MAC.

125 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 6.8 Environmentally sustainable design Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

57. Support a Victorian Government integrated planning and building approach to strengthen Environmentally Sustainable Design, including consideration of costs and benefits.

Support. Council, as a member of the Council Alliance for a Sustainable Built Environment (CASBE) supports the inclusion of ESD principles in the planning system and higher standards for buildings. In response to opportunities identified as part of the recommendations of the Ministerial Advisory Committee which considered ESD policy in individual planning schemes, a local ESD policy has been drafted for inclusion into the Knox Planning Scheme. It is anticipated that this will be implemented through the upcoming planning scheme rewrite. An integrated planning and building approach will ensure that all new buildings would require more consideration of ESD principles, which would be a superior outcome than changes to the planning system alone. Council also supports MAC Recommendation 56, which would be to require water retention systems for buildings with a floor area in excess of 3,000m2, however such a requirement would be better placed as a change to the Victorian Planning Provisions, rather than as part of a metropolitan strategy.

126 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 MAC 2015 Recommendations not addressed in Discussion Paper: A more resilient and sustainable Melbourne MAC Recommendation

Government’s response, as outlined in Discussion Paper

Knox City Council Comments

Recommendation 55 Add a new action to Initiative 5.4.1 as follows: 5.4.1-2: Strengthen mechanisms (such as clearer standards and guidance) to protect separation, buffer and interface distances for existing facilities and uses which create noise and air quality issues.

Out of scope. Beyond the nominated scope of the refresh.

Do not support Government's response. An emerging planning issue is residential encroachment of former landfills, quarries and waste recovery /transfer stations. A lack of a strong buffer can cause poor amenity, odour, noise and risks to the residential occupants and/or force existing facilities to close. There is currently no widely accepted practice on how to implement buffers in the planning system and in which circumstances they are justified. This will require technical input from the Environment Protection Authority on the level of risk to new sensitive development (noise/odour/pollutant) and appropriate buffer distances to justify imposing controls that limit sensitive land uses/development in these areas. The Metropolitan Waste and Resource Recovery Management Group (MWRRG) is currently undertaking a ‘Local Government Buffer Support Program,’ which, among its objectives, includes the following:

• Develop a suite of land use planning policies, tools and controls that can be used by local planning authorities to define protect and maintain buffers to waste and resource recovery facilities.

While the project is focused on reverse buffers for landfills and waste and resource recovery, it may aid in the development of effective reverse buffer controls applicable to other uses which create noise and air quality issues, including extractive industries. This was identified as a planning policy gap in Knox City’s recent (2015) planning scheme review. Council recommends that the Victorian Government investigate mechanisms to protect separation distances for all important existing facilities that create adverse amenity impacts.

127 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 7 New planning tools Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

58. Evaluate whether:

• 58A New zone(s) are needed for National Employment Clusters and urban renewal areas

OR • 58B Existing zones (and overlays), possibly with

standardised schedule templates, can provide effective planning frameworks.

Support in principle. Council supports being consulted on options for revised or new zones for National Employment Clusters and strategic urban renewal areas. However, existing zones and standardised schedules should be investigated first for effectiveness in achieving the intended result before introducing new tools to reduce burdening and over-complicating the planning system.

59. Evaluate the merits of code assessment for multi-unit development, taking into account the findings from the ‘Better Apartments’ process, to either:

• 59A Replace ResCode with a codified process for multi-unit development

OR • 59B Identify ResCode standards that can be

codified.

Do not support. Although it is acknowledged that this option may provide a greater degree of certainty for multi-unit developments, Council supports public notification for multi-unit developments as appropriate.

128 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 8 Implementation Options for discussion Knox City Council Comments

60. Review the existing Central Sub-region boundary to better align with the Central City planning area.

Not applicable to Knox. Council has no issues with the boundary of the eastern sub-region identified in Plan Melbourne 2014.

61. Review and refresh Plan Melbourne 2014 actions to form the basis of a new ‘rolling’ implementation plan.

Support. Council recommends including short, medium and long-term actions in the implementation plan to increase accountability. A 'rolling' implementation plan that is updated at the end of each year would be an effective communication mechanism providing greater transparency Plan Melbourne 2016's implementation. Support and funding for local government to implement key aspects of Plan Melbourne 2016 must be recognised in a rate-capped environment.

62. Rationalise and update indicators, including addressing gaps relating to environment and climate change.

Support.

8.1 Metropolitan sub-regions 8.2 Implementation plan 8.3 Performance monitoring

129 COUNCIL – CITY DEVELOPMENT 15 December 2015 Overall Knox City Council Comments Topic Knox City Council Comments

Informing the community

• Better enable outcomes for Plan Melbourne 2016 (i.e. increasing density in established areas) by assisting the change of community attitudes for increased densities/an altered city. Social marketing should be considered.

• Need to assist/improve people’s confidence in the planning system.

Crime prevention • We encourage Plan Melbourne 2016 to describe crime prevention through environmental design principles as important/critical to enabling community safety outcomes for Melbourne.

Views to Dandenong Foothills/Ranges In 2013, Knox made a submission to the draft Plan Melbourne 2014 requesting that it “identify the importance of protecting views towards Dandenong Foothills/Ranges.” Council maintains this position and submits that views to the Dandenong Foothills and Ranges are important for many parts of metropolitan Melbourne as they provide a natural backdrop.

Image 3: Dandenong Ranges as a backdrop to Melbourne - aerial view, looking east along Burwood Highway


The importance of this natural backdrop could be incorporated into Map 26 – Open space, natural features and biodiversity conservation.

Biodiversity Plan Melbourne should emphasise the strong connection between biodiversity, connecting to nature and community health and wellbeing.

State significant elements: Naming Broaden the current Plan Melbourne 2014 recognition of the health precinct in Wantirna from “Knox Private Hospital” to the “Wantirna Health Precinct”. Council is currently partnering with the MPA to plan for this State Significant health precinct. The precinct is larger than the Knox Hospital site and consists of substantial tracks of Department of Health land. Recent approval of Planning Scheme Amendment C132 for the Knox Private Hospital to facilitate its expansion into Victoria’s second largest private hospital (after Epworth Richmond) will broaden the reach and opportunities for this health precinct. This affects pages 31 & 181, Map 33 of Plan Melbourne 2014


State significant elements: Partnerships Initiative 4.4.1 of the Plan Melbourne 2014 talks about supporting the creation of health and education precincts by structure planning these areas. Instead of structure planning help from the MPA (which is what they have offered), what we really need is a long-term, partnership approach from the State Government, with a clear ‘whole-of-government’ mandate to encourage Department of Health, VicRoads and Dept of Economic Development to work together. The Refresh does state that (p.4): “2) More focus will be given to the importance of partnership with local government in sub-regional planning and the implementation of Plan Melbourne 2016.” Council recommends that Initiative 4.4.1 include initiatives such as: “Create partnerships with government agencies and the private sector to support an integrated, cohesive approach to the development and ongoing growth and promotion of health precincts.”


State significant elements : Land sales A key focus area for the Wantirna Health Precinct is the approximate 10 hectares of VicRoads land within the Precinct boundary that VicRoads has signalled are probably redundant. Health and economic demand analysis currently being carried out for the Precinct indicates that these large state-owned land parcels are located within the core of the Precinct, strategically located adjacent to existing medical and education facilities and land reserved by the Department of Health and Human Services. Economic analysis further indicates that the VicRoads land will be required to meet likely demand for health uses within the Precinct over the next 20 years, even assuming low levels of sector growth and minimal intervention by State and local agencies. The issue of commercial land being lost to residential development is identified in the Plan Melbourne Refresh (p.31). This issue should be broadened to include State Significant health or employment precincts, and not just the central city. The Plan Melbourne Refresh proposes to separate out implementation items into a 10 year rolling plan. The VicRoads (706 Boronia Rd and 760 Boronia Rd) and Dept of Health land (251 Mountain Hwy, Wantirna) could be specifically identified as a health infrastructure project.

knox city council...knox city council planning applications decided by responsible officer 1...

Documents