Planning & Amenity Committee Agenda - bayside.vic.gov.au · Planning & Amenity Committee Agenda...

For a meeting of the

Planning & Amenity Committee

to be held in the Council Chambers, Civic Centre, Boxshall Street, Brighton

on

Tuesday, 9 June 2015

Commencing at 7:00pm

Chairperson: Cr Alex del Porto

Councillors: Cr Felicity Frederico (Mayor) Cr Laurence Evans

Cr Michael Heffernan Cr James Long BM JP Cr Bruce Lowe

Cr Heather Stewart

Planning & Amenity Committee Agenda

Page 1 of 141

Members of the Gallery Your attention is drawn to Section 92 of Council’s Governance Local Law No 1. Section 92 The Chair’s Duties and Discretions In addition to the duties and discretions provided in this Local Law, the Chair - (a) must not accept any motion, question or statement which is derogatory, or defamatory of

any Councillor, member of Council staff, or member of the community;

(b) may demand retraction of any inappropriate statement or unsubstantiated allegation;

(c) must ensure silence is preserved in the public gallery during any meeting;

(d) must call to order any member of the public gallery who approaches the Council or Committee table during the meeting, unless invited by the Chair to do so; and

(e) must call to order any person who is disruptive or unruly during any meeting.

An Authorised Officer must, if directed to do so by the Chairperson, remove from a meeting any Councillor or other person who has committed such an offence. In the absence of an Authorised Officer the Chairperson may cause to be removed from a meeting any Councillor or other person who has committed such an offence. Your co-operation is appreciated Chairperson of Committee

Planning & Amenity Committee – Schedule of Meetings

Tuesday 14 July 2015 Tuesday 11 August 2015

Tuesday 8 September 2015 Tuesday 13 October 2015

Tuesday 17 November 2015 Monday 7 December 2015

Page 2 of 141

BAYSIDE CITY COUNCIL

Planning & AMENITY COMMITTEE Meeting Tuesday, 9 JUNE 2015

Planning & Amenity Committee Meeting

Planning & Amenity Committee Charter To deal with all matters relating to consideration of statutory planning, tree removal applications, traffic and parking matters.

This Committee has the full delegated authority of Council to finally determine upon planning applications.

Membership of the Committee All Councillors

Index

1. Apologies

2. Declarations of Interest

3. Confirmation of the minutes of the Planning & Amenity Committee held on 12 May 2015

4. Matters for Decision

4.1 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION - 1/57 BONANZA ROAD BEAUMARIS 5

4.2 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION - 3 BANKS AVENUE HAMPTON 14

4.3 TREE REMOVAL APPLICATION - 22 DENDY STREET BRIGHTON 22

4.4 28 TENNYSON STREET SANDRINGHAM

NOTICE OF DECISION TO GRANT A PERMIT

APPLICATION NO: 2011/377/2 WARD: SOUTHERN

31

4.5 1 FLORIDA AVENUE BEAUMARIS



56

4.6 103 DALGETTY ROAD BEAUMARIS



82

Page 3 of 141

BAYSIDE CITY COUNCIL

PLANNING & AMENITY COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, 9 JUNE 2015

4.7 23 CLOYNE STREET HIGHETT


APPLICATION NO: 2014/468/1 WARD: CENTRAL

102

4.8 4 BEENAK AVENUE BRIGHTON EAST


APPLICATION NO: 2014/425/1 WARD: CENTRAL

121

Page 4 of 141

Planning & Amenity Committee Meeting Tuesday, 9 June 2015

4.1 Tree Removal Application - 1/57 Bonanza Road Beaumaris

Infrastructure Services - Amenity Protection

File No: 2015/104

1. Purpose of the Report

To consider a resident’s appeal to Council to allow the removal of a Peppercorn (Schinus molle) tree located at 1/57 Bonanza Road, Beaumaris. This tree is protected by Local Law No. 2 and has been assessed in accordance with Council’s Management of Tree Protection on Private Property Policy 2012. The report outlines the reasons why the tree removal permit application has been refused.

2. Background

An application to remove a Peppercorn (Schinus molle) which is located at 1/57 Bonanza Road, Beaumaris has been refused. The application was submitted by the owner of the tree. Attachment 1 provides pictures of the tree including its location on the property.

The property owner applied to have the subject tree removed in 2012 and the permit was not approved. An application to remove the same tree was received in 2014 and was not granted. Council received a written submission from the applicant on 22 February 2015 seeking Council’s review of the decision to refuse the tree removal permit.

Clause 16 of Local Law No. 2 – Neighbourhood Amenity provides that any person can appeal to Council for a review of their tree removal application if a tree removal permit is not granted by a Council Officer.

Council’s policy for the Management of Local Law Permits for Trees on Private Property is in the process of being reviewed. The community’s views are being gathered on the revised Policy prior to presenting it to Council later in 2015. The applicant has requested that this matter be presented to Council as soon as possible for determination and this report is based on the existing Policy.

3. Discussion

3.1 The Applicant’s Tree Removal Application

The property owner applied to Council to remove the Peppercorn tree because of his concerns about the following:

• the tree is too large for the property and close to power lines;

• the roots have caused damaged the concrete driveway and garage door and repairs have cost $6398;

• the roots have damaged the low brick front fence (figure 3);

• tree roots may damage or block drains and lift footpaths;

• Constant leaf litter; and

• That the tree is an invasive weed (Victorian Resources On-line List provided with application) and the applicant would prefer to plant a native.

The applicant has provided details of the rectification works undertaken; these include installation of root barriers. It is considered that the root barriers and construction methods undertaken to repair the damage will minimise any future tree root damage to the garage or driveway.

All trees drop leaves and it is expected that in an urban environment some tree maintenance is required to be undertaken by property owners.

Page 5 of 141


The Victorian Resources On-line lists a Peppercorn tree as invasive weed in environments such as riverbanks, forests and abandoned farms, however this tree is not considered a weed in a built urban environment. A Peppercorn tree is not listed as a noxious week in Victoria or Council’s Local Law No. 2 Neighbourhood Amenity.

3.2 Inspection and Review by Council’s Arborist The Peppercorn tree has been inspected by Council’s Arborist during the application and appeal stages. The tree was consistently assessed as providing a high level of amenity with no apparent structural defects. The tree was of fair health and fair structure. Attachment 2 provides tree assessment definitions. The Peppercorn tree it is approximately 10 m high with a canopy width of approximately 10 m.

The tree owner has not supplied any information from a professional to support his claims that the tree needs to be removed in order to undertake repairs to front brick fence or prevent damage to drains. The low brick fence could be repaired without removing the tree. The footpath will be assessed for any trip hazards and repaired in accordance with Council’s footpath maintenance program. The property owner has installed root barriers to prevent further damage to his driveway. The tree removal application has been assessed in accordance with the current Policy and a tree removal permit was not granted.

If in the future the health or structure of the tree declines to low levels it would be appropriate to issue a tree removal permit conditional of replacement planting of a native tree (Vegetation Protection Overlay Zone). The tree showed no signs of structural defects that may present as a safety risk.

If Council were to support the removal of this tree a condition of removal should be to provide replacement planting of an indigenous tree capable of reaching a minimum mature height of 7 m with a minimum width of 6 m. It is noted that it is likely to be at least ten years before replacement planting will provide any amenity benefit.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council’s Management of Tree Protection on Private Property Policy 2012 has been developed to protect, promote and improve retention of Bayside’s highly valued tree canopy in the municipality. This policy provides guidance on the application of the tree provisions of Local Law No.2. Council’s Plan 2013-2017 Goal 4 Strategy 4.1.4 -“A Sustainable and natural environment” A key strategy over the next 4 years is protecting and enhancing vegetation (increase indigenous plant usage) on private and public land and the Local Law is administered in accordance with Council’s policies and guidelines.

The tree removal application for this Local Law protected tree, Peppercorn (Schinus molle), has been refused in 2012 and 2014, in recognition of the contribution it makes to the neighbourhood character, local amenity and environment of Bayside.

4.2. Legal/Statutory requirements

This matter has been considered in accordance with the provisions of Bayside Local Law No. 2 – Environment, the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 and the Local Government Act 1989.

4.3. Financial and resource implications

The assessment and review of tree removal applications is an ongoing service provided by Council. If the tree is retained there may be costs to the owner for maintenance. If Council were to approve the issuing of a tree removal permit the tree owner would be obliged to cover the cost of tree removal and any replacement planting required.

Page 6 of 141


4.4. Environmental impacts

Trees are a key element of the neighbourhood character and local amenity of Bayside. If the tree is removed this would negatively impact on the environmental benefit this large canopy tree provides to the amenity of the area.

4.5. Social impacts

This tree can be viewed by neighbouring properties and the social and environmental impact of the tree being retained has been assessed as positive for the overall community.

5. Consultation and engagement

The applicant has been informed of the outcome of his application including the reasons a tree removal permit was not granted.

The applicant has requested the appeal to proceed directly to Council for determination.

6. Summary

The Peppercorn (Schinus molle) has been assessed by three Council arborists as providing a high level of amenity. The tree was of fair health and structure and did not have any structural issues that may cause a safety concern. The arborists did not find arboricultural grounds that support the removal of this tree.

The applicant has installed root barriers to reduce the likelihood of further damage to his driveway and garage. The property owner did not provide information from a suitably qualified professional to indicate that the Peppercorn tree (Schinus molle) needed to be removed to prevent property damage. The tree showed no signs of structural defects that may present as a safety risk.

Recommendation

That Council

resolves not to grant a permit for the removal of the Peppercorn (Schinus molle) tree located at 1/57 Bonanza Road, Beaumaris ;and

resolves to grant a permit which allows for pruning of the tree roots of the Peppercorn (Schinus molle) tree located at 1/57 Bonanza Road, Beaumaris.

Page 7 of 141


Attachment 1

Figure 1: Subject tree is identified by the white highlight.

Figure 2: Subject site identified by red highlight.

Page 8 of 141


Figure 3: The Peppercorn provides a high level of amenity to the local area.

Page 9 of 141


Figure 4: The subject tree following repairs to the drive. Tree roots removed from the tree are seen stacked at the base of the tree.

Page 10 of 141


Attachment 2

Tree assessment definitions Origin (I) Indigenous The tree is endemic to the local area and has been naturally occurring since recordings of flora commenced. (V) Victorian The tree is endemic to the state of Victoria and has been naturally occurring since recordings of flora commenced. (A) Australian The tree is endemic to mainland Australia and has been naturally occurring since recordings of flora commenced. (E) Exotic The tree is not endemic to any part of mainland Australia.

Health Tree health is based on vigour and vitality. In assessing health, observations are made of the following: - foliage characteristics - extension growth - wound wood development - extent of predation or disease In many instances correct application of arboricultural management practices can revitalise a tree and extend its ability to provide a value to the community. (G) Good - Tree displays 71-100% live canopy mass - Foliage exhibits near optimal foliage characteristics in size, colour and density - Tree may have low levels of tip dieback - Tree may exhibit low levels of pest/pathogen infestation that is not expected to have a significant impact on the long term health of the tree (F) Fair - Tree displays 51-70% live canopy mass - Foliage may be stunted or discoloured - Tree exhibits less than optimal extension growth - Tree has moderate pest/pathogen infestation which may be retarding growth and impacting on health levels, it is expected that the tree can recover with or without intervention (P) Poor - Tree displays <50% live canopy mass - Tree exhibits low levels of extension growth - Tree has extensive pest/pathogen infestation and is not expected to recover from such infestation even with intervention - Tree may be senescent (D) Dead - Tree has no live vascular tissue

Structure Structure refers to the physical integrity of the tree. Natural species form may not constitute poor structure. Pest/pathogen damage is not directly a structural issue, however may contribute to structural issues/faults.

Page 11 of 141


In assessing structure, observations are made of the following: - Branch attachment and union formation - Damage to trunk/roots/unions/branches - Trunk/scaffold/tertiary branch taper In many instances correct application of arboricultural management practices can reduce likelihood of failure to an acceptable level and extend a tree’s ability to provide a value to the community. (G) Good - Tree has good branch attachment and well formed unions - Tree has good trunk and scaffold branch taper - Tree may have poor tertiary branch taper - Tree may exhibit structural defects on tertiary branches and attachments - Complete tree failure or major structural failure under normal environmental conditions is unlikely - Remedial pruning works may improve the structural rating of the tree (F) Fair - Tree may have poor scaffold branch/stem taper - Tree may have poor tertiary branch taper - Tree may have minor structural root damage/severance - Tree may exhibit structural defects to the trunk or scaffold branches - Majority of structural defects may be managed through current recognised arboricultural practices (P) Poor - Tree may exhibit major structural defects to trunk and/or scaffold branch attachments and/or roots (H) Hazardous - Complete or major structural failure is imminent

Amenity Value The visual contribution the tree makes to the neighbourhood character. (L) Low - Tree has poor health and/or - Tree provides little visual contribution to the neighbourhood character (M) Moderate - Tree has fair/good/excellent health and/or - Tree is easily viewed from the street (H) High - Tree has fair/good/excellent health - Tree is highly visible from the street - Tree is visible from other streets in the area (N/A) Not Applicable

Useful Life Expectancy The period of time that the tree is expected to maintain a positive contribution to the neighbourhood character. 20 yrs + Tree is likely a semi-mature or mature tree that is in good health and structure and is expected to maintain current levels of amenity for a minimum of 20 years. 10-19 yrs Tree is likely a mature tree that is in good health and/or structure and is expected to maintain current levels of amenity for a minimum of 10 years.

Page 12 of 141


4-9 yrs Tree is likely a mature tree that is in fair health and/or structure and is likely declining. It is expected that the tree is not likely to maintain current levels of amenity for more than 9 years. 0-3 yrs Tree is likely a mature tree that is in poor health and/or structure and is likely declining. It is expected that the tree is not likely to maintain current levels of amenity for more than 3 years.

Retention Value The value of the tree when considering the tree as a whole. The health, structure, amenity value and life expectancy are considered when determining this factor. The tree location on the subject site or a development proposal is not a consideration for determining retention value. (H) High The tree is generally in good health and structure, provides high levels of amenity and is likely to do so for more than 20 years. Tree may have historic or cultural significance. (M) Medium The tree is generally in fair to good health and structure, provides high levels of amenity and is likely to do so for up to 20 years. (L) Low The tree is generally in fair health and structure, provides low levels of amenity and may do so for up to 10 years. The tree may be juvenile or otherwise small and easily replaced by advanced plantings or plantings that will provide similar amenity value in a reasonable timeframe. (N) None The tree has no features that would promote retention for any reason, such as a dead tree or one that provides no amenity value. (O) Trees on other property Any tree located outside the subject site is to be retained and protected.

Page 13 of 141


4.2 Tree Removal Application - 3 Banks Avenue Hampton


File No: PSF/15/271


To consider a resident’s appeal to Council to allow the removal of a Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) tree on their property, located at 3 Banks Avenue Hampton. This tree is protected by Local Law No. 2 and has been assessed in accordance with Council’s Management of Tree Protection on Private Property Policy 2012. The report outlines the reasons why the tree removal permit application has been refused.

2. Background

An application to remove a Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) and a Narrow-leaved Black Peppermint (Eucalyptus nicholii) located at 3 Banks Street, Hampton was received by Council. A permit has been issued to remove the Narrow-leaved Black Peppermint (Eucalyptus nicholii) located adjacent to the north boundary and approximately 4m from the west boundary. A permit has not been granted to remove the Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua). Attachment 1 includes pictures of the tree and its location on the property.

Council received a written submission from the applicant on 15 January 2015 seeking Council’s review of the decision to refuse the tree removal permit.


Council’s policy for the Management of Local Law Permits for Trees on Private Property is in the process of being reviewed. The community’s views are being gathered on the revised Policy prior to presenting it to Council in August 2015. The applicant has requested that this matter be presented to Council as soon as possible for determination.

3. Discussion

The Applicant’s Tree Removal Application

The property owner applied to Council to remove the Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) because of his concerns about the following:

the tree roots blocking water pipes, and damaging the front fence, uplifting the driveway thereby causing a tripping hazard;

the costs associated with replacing the driveway;

the potential for damage to the foundations of the house;

the power lines running through the Liquidambar’s foliage causing a potential fire risk;

the structure of the tree being poor due to it having two bifurcated trunks rather than one trunk;

the leaf litter dropping onto his house and parked cars as the tree has a large canopy;

the woody seed capsules dropping onto the driveway and footpath in front of his property causing a tripping hazard; and

his liability if someone is injured as a result of the tree or tripping on any exposed roots. A report from a professional such as a private arborist or engineer to substantiate the concerns listed above was not provided to Council, despite being requested by Council staff. The property owner has provided emails from South East Water which indicates that the last blockage that was reported to them and caused by the roots was November 2010. No further plumbing reports have been provided by the property owner.

Page 14 of 141


A letter has been received from a neighbour in support of the tree’s removal. Tree Removal Assessment by Council Officers

The Sweet Gum tree is mature, approximately 17 m in height with its base 7 m from the house. The tree was assessed as having good health and fair structure, providing a high level of amenity to the area, and having a life expectancy estimated as ten plus years.. Definitions of tree assessment criteria are provided in Attachment 2.

Council Arborists identified some movement of brickwork in the single car space and in the concrete and brick pathways in the vicinity of the tree, as well as minor cracking in the retaining wall at the street frontage. The owner did not provide a report by a professional such as an engineer or arborist to indicate the probable cause of this damage or that whole tree removal is required to rectify the built form issues; this includes potential for damage to the footings of the dwelling. Tree maintenance and root management can be undertaken in most cases to prevent damage to surrounding paths and buildings.

The trip hazards associated with pathways could be rectified by replacing the paths and do not require the whole tree to be removed. There may be a requirement to remove a small part of the root system and this would likely be appropriate given the small amount of root system observed in the area of the path.

A Quantified Tree Risk Assessment (QTRA) was undertaken to determine the risk of harm rating of the tree to people passing under the tree and nearby property. A tree is assessed using the QTRA to determine the risk of harm. If the risk of harm is in the range of 1 in 1 to 1 in 9,999 a tree is considered hazardous and removal is permitted.

For a tree-failure hazard to exist there must be potential for failure of the tree and potential for injury or damage to result. The QTRA considers the likelihood of a combination of tree failure, harm to people and property and the likely severity of the harm. Refer to Attachment 3.The QTRA for the Liquidambar resulted in a risk of harm rating ranging less than 1 in 300,000. The risk posed is considered acceptable and can be controlled with pruning measures.

The property owner was notified that his tree removal application was application was refused as the tree is assessed as posing an acceptable risk with a low chance of failure.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council’s Management of Tree Protection on Private Property Policy 2012 has been developed to protect, promote and improve retention of Bayside’s highly valued tree canopy in the municipality. This policy provides guidance on the application of the tree provisions of Local Law No.2. Council’s Plan 2013-2017 Goal 4 Strategy 4.1.4 -“A Sustainable and natural environment” A key strategy over the next 4 years is Protecting and enhancing vegetation (increase indigenous plant usage) on private and public land and the Local Law is administered in accordance with Council’s policies and guidelines.

The tree removal application for this Local Law protected tree, a Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) has been refused, in recognition of the contribution it makes to the neighbourhood character, local amenity and environment of Bayside.



Page 15 of 141






4.5. Social impacts



The applicant and neighbour has been involved in discussions regarding this tree and has been informed of Council Officers’ decision not to support a tree removal permit.

The applicant has requested the appeal to proceed directly to Council for determination.

6. Summary

An application to remove a Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) located at 3 Banks Street, Hampton, has been refused as it does not meet the criteria for tree removal.

The tree has been inspected by three of Council’s qualified arborists. There are no arboricultural grounds that support the removal of the Sweet Gum tree. Tree maintenance and pruning can be undertaken by the property owner to maintain the health of the tree and reduce the risk of root damage to driveways and fences. The subject tree is in the front yard and has high amenity value for the surrounding area. There were no observed defects or areas of compromised wood strength in the tree that indicate an increase likelihood of failure. The tree has been assessed as being safe and posing an acceptable level of risk to persons and property with a low chance of failure.

Recommendation

That Council:

resolves not to grant a permit for the removal of a Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) located at 3 Banks Street, Hampton; and

resolves to grant a permit which allows for pruning of the tree roots upon request by the applicant of the Sweet Gum (Liquidambar styraciflua) located at l3 Banks Avenue, Hampton.

Page 16 of 141


Attachment 1

Figure 1: Subject tree has a large visible canopy.

Figure 2: Subject tree provides high levels of amenity to the local area. Page 17 of 141


Figure 5: Basal flare indicates good structural root development and absence of compromised tissue at union indicates low chance of failure.

Figure 3: Tree base is approximately 7 m from dwelling.

Page 18 of 141


Attachment 2


Health Tree health is based on vigour and vitality. In assessing health, observations are made of the following: - foliage characteristics - extension growth - wound wood development - extent of predation or disease

In many instances correct application of arboricultural management practices can revitalise a tree and extend its ability to provide a value to the community. (G) Good - Tree displays 71-100% live canopy mass - Foliage exhibits near optimal foliage characteristics in size, colour and density - Tree may have low levels of tip dieback - Tree may exhibit low levels of pest/pathogen infestation that is not expected to have a

significant impact on the long term health of the tree (F) Fair - Tree displays 51-70% live canopy mass - Foliage may be stunted or discoloured - Tree exhibits less than optimal extension growth - Tree has moderate pest/pathogen infestation which may be retarding growth and

impacting on health levels, it is expected that the tree can recover with or without intervention (P) Poor - Tree displays <50% live canopy mass - Tree exhibits low levels of extension growth - Tree has extensive pest/pathogen infestation and is not expected to recover from such

infestation even with intervention - Tree may be senescent (D) Dead - Tree has no live vascular tissue


Page 19 of 141


In assessing structure, observations are made of the following: - Branch attachment and union formation - Damage to trunk/roots/unions/branches - Trunk/scaffold/tertiary branch taper In many instances correct application of arboricultural management practices can reduce likelihood of failure to an acceptable level and extend a tree’s ability to provide a value to the community. (G) Good - Tree has good branch attachment and well formed unions - Tree has good trunk and scaffold branch taper - Tree may have poor tertiary branch taper - Tree may exhibit structural defects on tertiary branches and attachments - Complete tree failure or major structural failure under normal environmental conditions is

unlikely - Remedial pruning works may improve the structural rating of the tree (F) Fair - Tree may have poor scaffold branch/stem taper - Tree may have poor tertiary branch taper - Tree may have minor structural root damage/severance - Tree may exhibit structural defects to the trunk or scaffold branches - Majority of structural defects may be managed through current recognised arboricultural

practices (P) Poor - Tree may exhibit major structural defects to trunk and/or scaffold branch attachments

and/or roots (H) Hazardous - Complete or major structural failure is imminent



Page 20 of 141


Attachment 3

Quantified Risk Assessment

Tree safety management involves limiting the risk of harm from tree failure while maintaining the benefits conferred by trees.

The Quantified Tree Risk Assessment (QTRA) system quantifies the risk of significant harm from tree failure in a way that enables tree managers to balance safety with tree values and operate to predetermine limits of tolerable or acceptable risk. Council’s arborist have a licence to undertake a QTRA.

By quantifying the risk from tree failure as a probability, Quantified Tree Risk Assessment (QTRA) enables a tree owner or manager to manage the risk in accordance with widely applied and internationally recognised levels of risk tolerance. It provides a Risk level against which mitigation strategies can be balanced to determine appropriate actions

QTRA advisory risk thresholds

Threshold Description Action

1/1- 1/9,999 Unacceptable

(where imposed on others)

Risks will not ordinarily be tolerated

Control the risk

Review the risk

Tolerable

(by agreement)

Risks may be tolerated if those exposed to the risk accept it, or the tree has exceptional value

Control the risk unless there is broad stakeholder agreement to tolerate it, or the tree has exceptional value

Review the risk

1/10,000 – 1/999,999 Tolerable

(where imposed on others)

Risks are tolerable if as low as reasonably practical (ALARP)

Assess costs and benefits of risk control

Control the risk only where a significant benefit might be achieved at reasonable cost

Review the cost

1/1,000000 or less risk Broadly Acceptable

Risk is already ALARP

No action currently required

Review the risk

Page 21 of 141


4.3 Tree Removal Application - 22 Dendy Street Brighton


File No: PSF/14/5238


To consider a resident’s appeal to Council to allow the removal of a Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) tree on their property, located at 22 Dendy Street, Brighton. This tree is protected by Local Law No. 2 and has been assessed in accordance with Council’s Management of Tree Protection on Private Property Policy 2012. The report outlines the reasons why the tree removal permit application has been refused.

2. Background

An application to remove a Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) located at 22 Dendy Street, Brighton has been refused. The application was submitted by the owner of the tree. Attachment 1 provides pictures of the tree including its location on the property.

Council received a written submission from the applicant on 11 May 2015 seeking Council’s review of the decision to refuse the tree removal permit.


Council’s policy for the Management of Local Law Permits for Trees on Private Property is in the process of being reviewed. The community’s views are being gathered on the revised Policy prior to presenting it to Council later in 2015. The applicant has requested that this matter be presented to Council as soon as possible for determination and this report is based on the existing Policy.

3. Discussion

3.1 The Applicant’s Tree Removal Application The property owner applied to Council to remove the Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) because of her concerns about the following:

the tree is too large for the property and close to power lines;

the tree branches may fail in high winds and cause injury or cause further damage to her property;

the roots have caused cracks in the brick fences including the fence separating her property from her neighbour’s;

the tree is old with numerous defects;

the reduced light entering her property due to the large tree canopy;

danger of tree limbs failing and injuring her elderly mother or children. The property owner has stated that she will be ‘holding the Bayside City Council responsible’ if the tree fails in the future.

her liability if someone is injured as a result of the tree or tripping on any exposed roots.

A neighbour has notified Council’s Arborist that he is concerned the tree may be a safety risk, as it leans towards his property and house.

The applicant has provided an independent Arborist and Engineer’s report with her application.

Consultant Arborist’s report The tree was assessed by an Arborist engaged by the property owner. The tree is described as a mature and large specimen of an exotic species of Pin Oak in fair condition.

Page 22 of 141


The tree is considered to be of medium retention value due to its fair health, structure and its relatively long Useful Life Expectancy (ULE). Attachment 2 provides tree assessment definitions. The tree does provide moderate impact to the surrounding landscape. The tree had been pruned for low voltage electrical line clearances.

The Arborist report states that given the close proximity of the cracked wall to the tree it is likely that this cracking is due to the growth of the tree. Further investigation via non-destructive methods would be required to locate any tree roots to give guidance for possible remedial works to the wall. This has not been completed by the property owner.

The Arborist has identified decay in portions of the trunk and in a section of multiple branch attachment possibly from decay in old wounds from past limbs, however he states that the tree is still relatively healthy and is considered to be of a fair structure. Minor deadwood and some minor crossings of branches could be pruned.

The independent Arborist recommendations include:

1. to retain the tree; and

2. to periodically inspect and monitor the tree; and

3. future monitoring of the tree should be performed by a suitably qualified person and any works performed in accordance with the Australian Standards for the pruning of Amenity Trees (AS4373).

Engineer’s report The property owner provided an engineer’s report with her tree removal application. An inspection hole was excavated on site adjacent to the boundary walls. The inspection hole revealed that there are multiple large tree roots growing underneath the affected walls (Attachment 1). It was the engineer’s opinion that the “cracking and bulging on the masonry fencing is being caused by the tree roots heaving the masonry walls footings” (Branson Dilettoso Daglas Engineering Pty Ltd). The report does not include information on the measures that can be undertaken to prevent further root damage. Tree removal permits are not granted for trees where its roots are found to be damaging fences. Council’s arborists have recommended to the property owner that she engages an Arborist to prune tree roots as required and to install a root barrier to prevent damage to fences.

3.2 Inspection and Review by Council’s Arborist

Council’s Senior Arborist agrees with the consultant Arborist’s assessment and recommendations in relation to managing the tree (included in section 3.1). The tree was assessed as having good health, a fair structure, and providing a high level of amenity to the area. It was noted that the tree was mature, 15 m in height and having a life expectancy of ten plus years. It was also noted that the tree had previously been pruned by the power line company.

Cracking was evident in the neighbour’s boundary brick fence which is located to the west of the tree. It has not been established whether the tree roots are the direct cause of the cracking. Direct root contact was evident on the adjacent brick fence; however there was no cracking present near the roots. In addition, no evidence has been submitted to justify that the whole tree removal would be the only measure to rectify the problem. Pruning may be an option.

A Quantified Tree Risk Assessment was not completed, to determine the risk of harm to persons or property, because the applicant did not provide the required information necessary for an assessment. However, there were no observed defects or areas of compromised wood strength in the tree that indicate it is likely to fail or have significant limb failure.

The property owner was notified that his tree removal application was refused as it did not meet the criteria for removal.

Page 23 of 141


Inspection and review by Delegated Officer The applicant appealed the initial refusal and the Delegated Officer and Coordinator Investigations attended the site and met with the applicant.

It was acknowledged that the tree is a large and the neighbour's boundary brick fence has cracking and branches are close to the power lines. Pruning options were discussed with the applicant. Removal of a healthy tree that provides a high level of amenity to facilitate landscape works was not supported.

If Council were to support the removal of this tree a condition of removal should be to provide replacement planting of an indigenous tree capable of reaching a minimum mature height of 11 m with at a minimum of 6 m from the front setback. It is noted that it is likely to be at least ten years before replacement planting will provide amenity benefit.

4. Implications

4.1. Policy

Council’s Management of Tree Protection on Private Property Policy 2012 has been developed to protect, promote and improve retention of Bayside’s highly valued tree canopy in the municipality. This policy provides guidance on the application of the tree provisions of Local Law No.2. Council’s Plan 2013-2017 Goal 4 Strategy 4.1.4 -“A Sustainable and natural environment” A key strategy over the next 4 years is Protecting and enhancing vegetation (increase indigenous plant usage) on private and public land and the Local Law is administered in accordance with Council’s policies and guidelines.

The tree removal application for this Local Law protected tree, Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) has been refused, in recognition of the contribution it makes to the neighbourhood character, local amenity and environment of Bayside.







4.5. Social impacts



The applicant has been involved in discussions regarding this tree and has been informed of Council Officers’ decision not to support a tree removal permit. A neighbour has discussed his concerns about the tree’s stability as it is leaning towards his property.

Page 24 of 141


The applicant has requested the appeal proceed directly to Council for determination.

6. Summary

An application to remove a Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) which is located at 22 Dendy Street Brighton has been refused.

The tree has been inspected by Council’s qualified arborists and the assessment results are consistent with the Consultant Arborist report provided by the applicant for the tree removal permit. There are no arborcultural grounds that support the removal of the subject tree. The subject tree has high amenity value for the surrounding area. There were no observed defects or areas of compromised wood strength in the tree. The tree has been assessed as having a low chance of limb or whole tree failure.

Recommendation

That Council:

resolves not to grant a permit for the removal of the Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) located at 22 Dendy Street, Brighton; and

resolves to grant a permit which allows for pruning of the tree roots of the Pin Oak (Eucalyptus cinerea) upon request by the applicant of the located at 22 Dendy Street, Brighton.

Page 25 of 141


Attachment 1

Figure 1 Aerial view of subject tree

Figure 2 Subject tree after dwelling demolition – March 2015

Page 26 of 141


Figure 3 Subject tree before dwelling demolition – Nov 2014

Figure 3

Figure 4 Neighbours front wall damage

Page 27 of 141


Attachment 2


Health Tree health is based on vigour and vitality. In assessing health, observations are made of the following: - foliage characteristics - extension growth - wound wood development - extent of predation or disease In many instances correct application of arboricultural management practices can revitalise a tree and extend its ability to provide a value to the community. (G) Good - Tree displays 71-100% live canopy mass - Foliage exhibits near optimal foliage characteristics in size, colour and density - Tree may have low levels of tip dieback - Tree may exhibit low levels of pest/pathogen infestation that is not expected to have a significant impact on the long term health of the tree (F) Fair - Tree displays 51-70% live canopy mass - Foliage may be stunted or discoloured - Tree exhibits less than optimal extension growth - Tree has moderate pest/pathogen infestation which may be retarding growth and impacting on health levels, it is expected that the tree can recover with or without intervention (P) Poor - Tree displays <50% live canopy mass - Tree exhibits low levels of extension growth - Tree has extensive pest/pathogen infestation and is not expected to recover from such infestation even with intervention - Tree may be senescent (D) Dead - Tree has no live vascular tissue


Page 28 of 141


In assessing structure, observations are made of the following: - Branch attachment and union formation - Damage to trunk/roots/unions/branches - Trunk/scaffold/tertiary branch taper In many instances correct application of arboricultural management practices can reduce likelihood of failure to an acceptable level and extend a tree’s ability to provide a value to the community. (G) Good - Tree has good branch attachment and well formed unions - Tree has good trunk and scaffold branch taper - Tree may have poor tertiary branch taper - Tree may exhibit structural defects on tertiary branches and attachments - Complete tree failure or major structural failure under normal environmental conditions is unlikely - Remedial pruning works may improve the structural rating of the tree (F) Fair - Tree may have poor scaffold branch/stem taper - Tree may have poor tertiary branch taper - Tree may have minor structural root damage/severance - Tree may exhibit structural defects to the trunk or scaffold branches - Majority of structural defects may be managed through current recognised arboricultural practices (P) Poor - Tree may exhibit major structural defects to trunk and/or scaffold branch attachments and/or roots (H) Hazardous - Complete or major structural failure is imminent



Page 29 of 141


4-9 yrs Tree is likely a mature tree that is in fair health and/or structure and is likely declining. It is expected that the tree is not likely to maintain current levels of amenity for more than 9 years. 0-3 yrs Tree is likely a mature tree that is in poor health and/or structure and is likely declining. It is expected that the tree is not likely to maintain current levels of amenity for more than 3 years.

Retention Value The value of the tree when considering the tree as a whole. The health, structure, amenity value and life expectancy are considered when determining this factor. The tree location on the subject site or a development proposal is not a consideration for determining retention value. (H) High The tree is generally in good health and structure, provides high levels of amenity and is likely to do so for more than 20 years. Tree may have historic or cultural significance. (M) Medium The tree is generally in fair to good health and structure, provides high levels of amenity and is likely to do so for up to 20 years. (L) Low The tree is generally in fair health and structure, provides low levels of amenity and may do so for up to 10 years. The tree may be juvenile or otherwise small and easily replaced by advanced plantings or plantings that will provide similar amenity value in a reasonable timeframe. (N) None The tree has no features that would promote retention for any reason, such as a dead tree or one that provides no amenity value. (O) Trees on other property Any tree located outside the subject site is to be retained and protected.

Page 30 of 141



4.4

28 Tennyson Street Sandringham Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit Application No: 2011/377/2 Ward: Southern

City Strategy - Statutory Planning

File No: 2011/377/2

APPLICATION DETAILS

Land/Address: 28 Tennyson Street Sandringham

Application is for: Section 72 amendment to an additional dwelling on a lot approved by Planning Permit 2011/377/1

Melway Reference: 76/H10

Ward: Southern Ward

Application Number: 2011/377/2

Applicant's/Owner's Name: Urban Solutions

Date Received: 13 August 2014

Statutory Days Expiry: 2 February 2015

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone, Schedule 3 (NRZ3)

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 1 (DDO1)

Under what clauses is a permit required? Clause 32.09 - Neighbourhood Residential Zone.

Restrictions on the title? Yes

Current use and development: Vacant site

Objections: Three

SUMMARY ADDENDUM

On 12 May 2015, the Planning and Amenity Committee deferred consideration of this application to allow the permit applicant time to confirm who the property owner was at the time the application was made.

The signed declaration on the planning permit form noted that on the date the application was made (13 August 2014), Martin and Nina Patane were the property owners.

Mr. and Mrs. Patane objected to the application presented to the 12 May 2015 Planning and Amenity Committee meeting and advised that as owners they were not notified of the application being made as is required and as was noted on the application form.

The applicant has now submitted a copy of title which confirms that the owners as at the date the application was made was in fact Jane and David Amling. This title is dated 1 August 2014 and the application was made on 13 August 2014. To this end, Mr. and Mrs. Patane should be considered objectors to the application and not the property owners.

At the 12 May 2015 Committee meeting Councillors also requested clarification of certain matters including:

- The setback of the dwelling from Tennyson Street.

These setbacks are a minimum of 5.34 metres at ground floor level and a minimum of 4.5 metres at first floor level.

Page 31 of 141



- The setbacks of the dwelling from the north-eastern property boundary and how this differs from the previous approved dwelling on site.

At ground floor level, the previous approved dwelling was setback 1.72 metres from 30 Fernhill Road. The dwelling now proposed is setback a maximum of 2.27 metres from 30 Fernhill Road. Where this setback is directly opposite the facing wall of 30 Fernhill Road, this is 550mm more than previously approved.

At first floor level, the previous approved dwelling was setback 3.15 metres from 30 Fernhill Road. At first floor level the proposed dwelling will be setback 2.27 metres from the facing wall of 30 Fernhill Road. This is 850mm less than previously approved.

- The location of pool equipment and the noise generated by this equipment.

The plans do not show where pool equipment will be located however recommended Condition 1(i) requires details of the pool equipment to be submitted. This equipment must be located away from the habitable room windows of neighbouring dwellings.

- Which windows require screening?

All first floor north-east and south-west facing habitable room windows are required to be screened to prevent overlooking. Both the north-east and south-west sides of the first floor alfresco are also required to be screened. Recommended Condition 1(b) lists all windows and open spaces to be screened.

PROPOSITION

It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant an Amended Permit be issued subject to conditions.

BACKGROUND

Planning Permit 2011/377/1 was issued on 24 April 2012 for the “construction of one additional double storey dwelling”. An extension of time was granted to extend the commencement date for development to 24 April 2016. This application seeks approval to amend this dwelling.

The lot on which the second dwelling is to be located has been subdivided in accordance with Planning Permit 2012/4362/2.

PROPOSAL

This application seeks approval to construct a different dwelling at the rear of the site to that previously approved by Planning Permit No. 2011/377/1.

This new double storey dwelling is setback between 5.34 metres and 15.48 metres from the Tennyson Street frontage at ground floor level and 4.5 metres from the frontage at first floor level. The frontage will be defined by a 1.8 metre high timber paling fence.

At ground floor, the dwelling will comprise a double garage, theatre, games room, laundry and two bedrooms with ensuites. The first floor comprises the main living areas including an open plan kitchen, dining and living area with access to a north facing al fresco. A pool and spa will adjoin this al fresco. The remainder of the first floor living accommodation comprises a study, powder room and master bedroom with dressing room and ensuite bathroom.

The dwelling adopts a contemporary, modular design with a flat roof. The ground floor presents a brick and rendered finish whilst the first floor is framed with Scyon Matrix Cladding and a paint

Page 32 of 141



finish. The first floor balcony will be finished in Corten steel to conceal views of the pool. The dwelling will stand to a maximum height of 7.9 metres.

There are no works proposed to the existing front dwelling onto Fernhill Road.

SUBJECT SITE & LOCALITY

An inspection of the site and the surrounding area has been undertaken. The subject site forms Lot 2 on Plan of Subdivision PS 711463 and is located on the southern side of Tennyson Street near the corner of Fernhill Road. The site is generally regular in shape apart from an angled frontage to Tennyson Street. Measuring 484.84 square metres, the site is currently vacant.

The site is encumbered by four easements. E-1 is 1.2 metres wide and extends along the eastern boundary. This easement provides light and air to boundary windows of the front dwelling. The three remaining easements provide for drainage and sewerage.

The main locality characteristics are:

To the north of the site at 28 Fernhill Road is a double storey dwelling which is subject to a Heritage Overlay;

To the east of the site at 30 Fernhill Road is a double storey brick dwelling;

To the south-east of the site at 32 Fernhill Road is a double storey dwelling; and

To the west of the site at 26 Tennyson Street is a double storey dwelling and at 5 Campbell Street to the south-west is a single storey dwelling which sits at a lower natural ground level than the subject site.

PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

Title and Covenants

The applicant has submitted a copy of title for the subject site, issued by the titles office on 1 August 2014. The title is burdened by a Section 173 Agreement (AL100958E) dated 22 May 2014 which requires the site to be subdivided in accordance with the development approved by Planning Permit No. 2011/377/1 or any amendments to the endorsed plans of this permit.

This application seeks to amend the endorsed plans. The S173 agreement is the reason why this application has been lodged as an amendment to Planning Permit 2011/377/1 rather than as a new application.

It is considered that the proposal does not result in a breach of the agreement.

Background

The following planning applications have been determined for the subject site:

App. No. Proposal Determination Date

2012/4362/2 Amendment to approved Planning Permit for two lot subdivision. Amendments relate to removal of a visibility splay and the inclusion of a requirement for an open space contribution should Lot 1 be further subdivided.

Permit (Delegate)

30/10/2012

2012/4362/1 Two lot subdivision in accordance with Planning Permit 2011/377/1

Permit (Delegate)

30/08/2012

Page 33 of 141



2011/377/1 Construction of one additional double storey dwelling Extension of time extending the date by which the development must commence to 24 April 2016.

Permit (Council) Permit (Delegate)

24/04/2012

30/04/2015

2006/333/1 Two lot subdivision Permit (Delegate)

05/09/2006

2004/870/1 Construction of a double storey dwelling to the rear of an existing dwelling, including a roof deck

Permit (Council) 12/09/2005

Permit now expired.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION

The application has been advertised pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, by:

Sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land; and

Placing a sign on site.

The notification has been carried out correctly and Council has received three objections to date.

Page 34 of 141



Locality Plan

Legend

Subject Site

Objector

The key issues that have been raised in the objections are:

The presentation of the pool / spa and the al fresco area to Tennyson Street;

Visual bulk to Tennyson Street and adjoining properties;

The development is unresponsive to the prevailing neighbourhood character and wider area with several heritage properties;

Overlooking; and

Noise.

CONSULTATION

The applicant declined an invitation to a consultation meeting as they considered it unlikely changes could be made which would satisfy the concerns of objectors.

Page 35 of 141



REFERRALS

The application was referred to the following Council Departments for comments.

Internal Referral Response

Arborist No objection, subject to conditions.

Drainage Engineer No objection, subject to conditions.

Traffic Engineer No objection, subject to conditions.

Street Tree Arborist No objection, subject to conditions.

ASSESSMENT

State Planning Policy Framework

Clause 9 - Plan Melbourne - Amendment VC30 was gazetted on 30 May 2014. The amendment introduces Plan Melbourne into all planning schemes state wide. The objectives of Plan Melbourne are listed in a re-ordered Clause 11. These objectives are:

To create a city structure that drives productivity, supports investment through certainty and creates more jobs.

To provide a diversity of housing in defined locations that cater for different households and are close to jobs and services.

To provide an integrated transport system connecting people to jobs and services, and goods to markets.

To create healthy and active neighbourhoods and maintain Melbourne’s identity as one of the world’s most liveable cities.

To protect natural assets and better plan our water, energy and waste management systems to create a sustainable city.

To maximise the growth potential of Victoria by developing a state of cities which delivers choice, opportunity and global competitiveness.

Clause 10 Operation of the State Planning Policy Framework - The purpose of State planning policy is to inform responsible authorities of the aspects to be considered and given effect in administering the planning scheme. The State Planning Policy Framework provides a context for decision making by responsible authorities. The planning policies are directed to land use and development, as circumscribed by the Planning and Environment Act 1987, a primary objective of which is to provide for the fair, orderly, economic and sustainable use and development of land.

Clause 11 Settlement - The objective of planning is to anticipate and respond to the need of existing and future communities. Planning should recognise the need for and as far as practicable contribute towards, the health and safety, diversity of choice, adaption in response to changing technology, economic viability, a high standard of urban design and amenity, energy efficiency, prevention of pollution to land, water and air, protection of environmentally sensitive areas and natural resources, accessibility and land use and transport integration.

Clause 15 Built Environment and Heritage - All new land use and development should appropriately respond to its landscape, valued built form and cultural context, and protect places and sites with significant heritage, architectural, aesthetic, scientific and cultural value. Quality built environments should be created that achieve high quality urban design and architecture that:

Contributes positively to local urban character and sense of place;

Page 36 of 141



Reflects the particular characteristics, aspirations and cultural identity of the community;

Enhances liveability, diversity, amenity and safety of the public realm;

Promotes attractiveness of towns and cities within broader strategic contexts; and

Minimises detrimental impact on neighbouring properties.

Clause 16 Housing - Planning should provide for housing diversity, including affordable housing, and ensure the efficient provision of supporting infrastructure. New housing should have access to services and be planned for long term sustainability, including walkability to activity centres, public transport, schools and open space.

Local Planning Policy Framework

Clause 21.02 Bayside Key Issues and Strategic Vision – Aims to encourage development that responds to the vision, key issues and overarching goals of Bayside City Council.

Clause 21.03 Settlement and Housing – Aims to accommodate population increases and to ensure that a range of accommodation options are provided to meet the needs of the existing and future populations throughout the various life stages, and to direct new medium density housing to Major Activity Centres, large Neighbourhood Activity Centres and residential opportunity areas, particularly those with good access to public transport routes as identified in the Strategic Land Use Framework Plan.

Clause 21.06 - Built Environment and Heritage – Aims to achieve quality design outcomes which improve the image of land use and development in Bayside and contribute to a sense of place appropriate to Bayside’s character and maintains, strengthens and enhances local character.

Clause 22.06-1 Neighbourhood Character Policy – Aims to encourage development in the area that responds to the particular built form and natural environment elements that make up the neighbourhood character of Bayside.

Clause 22.06-2 Neighbourhood Character Objectives – Aim to ensure that development is responsive to the preferred future character of the area and to retain and enhance the identified elements that contribute to the character of the area.

Clause 22.08 Water Sensitive Urban Design – Seeks to promote the use of water sensitive urban design, including stormwater re-use, to protect the surface water and ground waters in the Port Phillip Bay catchment from stormwater pollutants, and to reduce the impacts of peak stormwater flows to integrate stormwater treatment measures into the landscape to reduce the entry of pollutants into stormwater run-off.

Zone

Clause 32.09-5 Neighbourhood Residential Zone - Aims to recognise areas of predominantly single and double storey residential development and to limit opportunities for increased residential development. The zone aims to manage and ensure that development respects the identified neighbourhood character, heritage, environmental or landscape characteristics and to implement neighbourhood character policy and adopted neighbourhood character guidelines.

A planning permit is required to construct one dwelling on a lot pursuant to Clause 32.09-4 of this provision. It is further noted the Section 173 Agreement on the title requires the consent of Council to amend the permit.

Overlays

Clause 43.02 Design and Development Overlay Schedule 1 – Aims to protect and enhance

Page 37 of 141



the foreshore environment and views of Bayside from Port Phillip Bay and to relate the scale and form of any new development to the landform of the coast. The overlay aims to maintain a pedestrian scale along Beach Road and to maintain consistency with urban design and development objectives in the Bayside Coastal Strategy 1997 and the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2002. The policy seeks to protect the foreshore from overshadowing, to manage the increased pressure for higher buildings along the coast and to protect the amenity and privacy of residential properties. A planning permit is not required pursuant to this provision as the floor to floor / ceiling heights do not exceed 3.5 metres and no roof deck is proposed. It is noted the raised ceilings above the first floor master bedroom and living area are considered architectural voids and do not require a planning permit pursuant to this provision.

Particular Provisions

Clause 52.06 Car Parking – Aims to ensure the provision of an appropriate number of car parking spaces having regard to the activities on the land and the nature of the locality, to ensure that the design and location of the car parking areas do not adversely affect the amenity of the locality and enables easy and efficient use.

The number of car parking spaces provided on site complies with the requirements of this provision.

Clause 54 Construction and extension of one dwelling on a lot - Specifies objectives and standards for the construction and extension of a dwelling on a lot under 500 square metres within a Neighbourhood Residential Zone. Included within are requirements pertaining to the design response, neighbourhood character and infrastructure, site layout and building massing, on-site amenity and amenity impacts of the proposal.

General Provisions

Clause 65 Decision Guidelines – Sets out decision guidelines for the responsible authority to consider in ensuring acceptable outcomes in terms of State Planning Policies and Local Planning Policies.

SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES

An assessment of the key planning issues and matters raised by objectors follows.

Neighbourhood Character

The subject site is located within Neighbourhood Character Precinct F1 pursuant to Clause 22.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme.

The Preferred Future Character Statement of the precinct reads:

The dwellings, including a continued frequent presence of pre WW2 dwellings, sit within garden settings. Buildings are occasionally built to the side boundary, however the impression of the streetscape is of informality and openness due to the open front fencing, and well articulated building designs. Buildings and gardens are clearly visible from the street despite the presence of front fences, and these are appropriate to the building era. Buildings fronting the foreshore reflect their setting and provide a visually attractive built form interface with the reserve.

Page 38 of 141



Objective Design Response Avoid

To encourage the retention of

dwellings that contribute to the

valued character of the Precinct in

the design of development

proposals.

Attempt to retain wherever possible

intact and good condition dwellings that

contribute to the valued character of the

Precinct in designing new development.

Alterations and extensions should retain

the front of these dwellings and be

appropriate to the building era.

Demolition of dwellings that

contribute to the valued

character of the Precinct.

To maintain and enhance the

garden settings of the dwellings,

and enhance the bayside

vegetation character.

Retain established trees and vegetation.

Replace any trees removed with species

that will grow to a similar height.

Encourage replanting of indigenous

sandbelt vegetation.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany

all applications for new dwellings that

includes substantial trees and shrubs,

and indigenous coastal vegetation.

Lack of landscaping and

substantial vegetation.

Removal of trees.

Planting of environmental

weeds.

To ensure the building setbacks

reflect the existing spacious visual

separation of buildings and

contribute to the informality of the

dwelling setting.

Buildings should be sited to allow space

for the planting of trees and shrubs.

Buildings should be sited to create the

appearance of space between buildings

and accommodate substantial

vegetation.

Loss of front garden space.

To minimise the loss of front

garden spaces and the

dominance of car parking

structures.

Locate garages and carports behind the

line of the dwelling.

Underground car parking accessed from

the front of the site should only be

provided where other options are not

possible due to site constraints, the

garage doors do not dominate the

façade and the front setback area is

retained as predominantly garden

space.

Car parking structures that

dominate the façade or view of

the dwelling.

To ensure that new buildings and

extensions do not dominate the

streetscape.

Recess second storey elements from

the front façade.

High pitched or mansard roof

forms with dormer windows.

To respect the identified heritage

qualities of adjoining buildings.

Where adjoining an identified heritage

building, respect the height, building

forms, siting and materials, in the new

building design.

Large bulky buildings with flat,

poorly articulated front wall

surfaces.

To reflect the lightness of the

streetscape created through the

use of a mix of appropriate

building materials and finishes.

Incorporate a variety of timber or other

non-masonry wall materials where

possible.

Heavy materials and design

detailing (eg. Large masonry

columns and piers).

To maintain the openness of the

streetscape and views to the

Provide open style front fences, other

than along heavily trafficked roads.

High, solid front fencing.

Page 39 of 141




dwellings. Front fence style should be appropriate

to the building era.

To create a visually interesting

and attractive built form interface

with the foreshore reserve.

Articulate the form buildings and

elements, particularly front facades, and

include elements that lighten the

building form such as balconies,

verandahs, non-reflective glazing and

light-transparent balustrading.

Use a mix of contemporary and

traditional coastal materials, textures

and finishes, including render, timber,

non-masonry sheeting, glazing, stone

and brick.

Provide articulated roof forms to create

an interesting skyline when viewed from

the beach.

Buildings that have no

relationship to the foreshore

setting.

Poorly articulated roof and

building forms.

Highly reflective materials or

glazing.

The area surrounding the subject site contains a mix of dwelling styles ranging from low scale 1930s/1940s single storey pitched roof dwellings (some subject to Heritage Overlay), to more recent contemporary double storey infill development.

Whilst the preferred neighbourhood character encourages first floor elements to be recessed from the ground floor, this policy also encourages the articulation of front facades. The proposal will marginally cantilever the ground floor built form. This design response will provide a highly articulated front façade with a mix of materials and finishes including brick, Corten steel cladding and render. The first floor is heavily glazed and will provide a ‘lightness’ to the upper floor to ensure the dwelling does not dominate the streetscape. This is subject to the deletion of the frame above the al fresco and pool/ spa.

Policy specifically discourages masonry columns and piers. The proposed piers create a commercial feel which does not reflect architectural styles adopted elsewhere within the streetscape. Should a permit issue, it is recommended that a condition be included requiring the frame to be deleted and the ground floor supporting structures finished in a mix of contemporary and traditional coastal materials including render, timber, non-masonry sheeting, glazing, stone and brick.

The proposed dwelling will be detached from the existing dwelling at 30 Fernhill Road to the east to provide visual separation between the built forms. Although the dwelling will abut the adjoining dwelling to the west, the abutting element on this boundary will only occur at ground floor level and will be setback 15.48 metres from the site frontage. The upper storey will be setback 2.4 to 2.9 metres. Due to the shape of the lot, a ground floor side setback of one to 1.67 metres and 1.67 to 2.77 metres at first floor continues to maintain a degree of visual separation with the adjoining property at 26 Tennyson Street. It is further noted all vegetation, apart from one tree, has previously been removed and the proposed works include well sited and meaningful landscaping in all open areas of the site which will assist in softening the appearance of the dwelling.

A new 1.8 metre high timber paling fence is also proposed along the Tennyson Street frontage. It is recommended that this height be reduced to 1.2 metres to maintain the openness of the streetscape and views of the dwelling.

Page 40 of 141



Setbacks

Street Setback

The existing dwelling on the adjoining lot to the west (26 Tennyson Street) is setback approximately 15.48 metres from the street whilst the neighbouring dwelling at 30 Fernhill Road is setback approximately 6.05 metres. The proposed dwelling is setback a minimum of 5.34 metres at ground floor level and a minimum of 4.5 metres at first floor level. These setbacks fail to comply with the 9 metre requirement of Standard B6. The reduced setbacks are considered acceptable in this instance for the following reasons:

The triangular frontage of the lot imposes a significant constraint on the siting of the new dwelling;

The proposed staggered setback provides adequate stepping of built form between both adjoining dwellings at 26 Tennyson Street and 30 Fernhill Road. This setback continues the angled form of buildings parallel to Tennyson Street; and

The façade’s architectural features limit the dominance of the built form and provide an interesting and contemporary interface with the street.

Side and Rear Setbacks

The required and proposed side and rear setbacks are as follows:

Ground Floor First Floor

Required Proposed Required Proposed

North-East (Side)

0, 2.00m and 2.72m

1.00m, 1.67m and 2.27

3.8m, 3.86m and 5.38m

1.67m, 2.27, 2.77m, 3.8m and 4.9m

South-West (Side)

1, 2.00 and 2.06m 0m, 1.00m, 1.8m and 2.9m

4.18m and 5.98m 2.4m, 2.9m, 3.4 and 3.8m

South-East (Rear) 0, 3.00m

3.4m to verandah and 5.89m to façade.

4.92m 3.4m

All areas of non-compliance are underlined.

North-east (side) The wall of the ground floor theatre room is setback approximately 1 metre from the north-east common boundary with 30 Fernhill Road. Other areas of non-compliance include the laundry proposed at 1.67 metres in lieu of 2.0 metres and the stairwell proposed at 1.67 metres in lieu of 2.72 metres. These areas of non-compliance are either located opposite a blank wall or a fence screened with vegetation and it is considered that these reduced setbacks will not generate impacts to the adjoining property.

At first floor the majority of the built form is proposed to be setback between 2.27 and 2.77 metres in lieu of 3.86 metres while the raised ceiling features are proposed to be setback between 3.8 metres and 4.9 metres in lieu of 5.38 metres.

These areas of non-compliance do not generate any adverse off-site effects given they are not opposite any sensitive interfaces. The reduction in setbacks are not considered to result in any unreasonable impacts to the adjoining property at 30 Fernhill Road. It is noted that a non-habitable room window is located along this common boundary at ground floor level and two highlight windows are located at first floor level. These windows are protected by a 1.2 metre wide air and light easement located along the common boundary. These windows serve a bar at ground level

Page 41 of 141



and a dressing room at first floor level and no proposed windows are located directly opposite. Given this, no direct views into these windows are possible.

At ground floor level, the previous approved dwelling was setback 1.72 metres from 30 Fernhill Road. The dwelling now proposed is setback a maximum of 2.27 metres from 30 Fernhill Road. Where this setback is directly opposite the facing wall of 30 Fernhill Road, this is 550mm more than previously approved.

At first floor level, the previous approved dwelling was setback 3.15 metres from 30 Fernhill Road. At first floor level the proposed dwelling will be setback 2.27 metres from the facing wall of 30 Fernhill Road. This is 850mm less than previously approved.

Given these setbacks however largely face a blank wall, it is considered that no direct adverse amenity effects will result. Whilst two windows exist on the facing wall of 30 Fernhill Road, these windows serve spaces ancillary to habitable rooms and are protected by a 1.2 metres wide air and light easement within the subject site.

South-west (side) To the ground floor south-west side boundary a variation of 1.0 metre is proposed to both ensuites while a 0.26 metre variation is sought for bedrooms 2 and 3. These variations are considered acceptable as they do not create any unreasonable amenity impacts to the adjoining by way of significant overshadowing or visual bulk.

At first floor the proposed variation from 4.18m to 2.9m is not acceptable and will result in unreasonable amenity impacts through visual bulk and overshadowing to the adjoining neighbour at 5 Campbell Street, particularly as this site sits at a much lower natural ground level than the subject site. It is considered that the setback at this location should be increased to provide the minimum setback requirement of 4.18 metres resulting in the reconfiguration of the master bedroom suite. The raised ceiling element at this location should be relocated so as to sit centrally within the amended roof form.

South-east (Rear) The rear setback is proposed at 3.4 metres in lieu of 4.92 metres. This area of non-compliance will also result in unreasonable visual bulk and amenity impacts to adjoining neighbours including overshadowing. It is recommended that a condition requiring this element to be reconfigured to comply with the required setbacks be included on any permit issued. The master bedroom, ensuite and dressing area in conjunction with all living spaces at first floor are generously proportioned and it is considered the required setbacks will not undermine the liveability of the dwelling given sufficient space will still exist to accommodate living spaces and a bedroom.

Subject to the recommendations noted, the overall building form will be more compact than that previously approved and condition will further limit visual bulk.

Overlooking

At ground floor the north-east facing games room window sits diagonally opposite a bar window at 30 Fernhill Road. A 1.2 metre wide air and light easement runs along this common boundary and the bar window is screened.

The first floor north-east facing dining window, al-fresco and pool / spa create overlooking opportunities into the secluded private open spaces of 30 Fernhill Road. It is recommended these elements be screened in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55.

All windows to the south-western elevation are required to be screened in accordance with Standard B22.

All other windows are to feature sill heights in excess of 1.70 metres above finished floor level to prevent overlooking whilst the ground floor deck has a visual barrier exceeding 1.8 metres high to all side and rear boundaries to also prevent overlooking.

Page 42 of 141



Overshadowing

The overshadowing diagrams at 22 September has been assessed and found to be inaccurate. The overshadowing diagrams indicate an additional 1.5 metres of overshadowing at 9am, an additional 3 metres of overshadowing at noon and an additional 3 metres at 3pm.

A review of these diagrams reveals that at 9am the proposed development is non-compliant with the requirements of Standard B21 and the overshadowing to the secluded private open spaces of 5 Campbell Street fails to preserve a minimum of 40m² of unshadowed area for five hours between 9am and 3pm. However given recommended conditions requiring side and rear setbacks to be increased to comply with the schedule to the NRZ, the extent of overshadowing is compliant with Standard B21.

The additional shadows cast at noon will result is some marginal increase in overshadowing to the secluded private open spaces of 5 and 9 Campbell Street and 32 Fernhill Road. The extent of overshadowing at this time largely falls within the shadows cast by the existing boundary fences.

By 3pm the shadowing falls over the roof of the adjoining property at 30 Fernhill Road where a marginal increase in shadowing beyond the existing fence line will be experienced. The extent of overshadowing is compliant and it is noted the main areas of secluded private open spaces are located to the north-east and north-west of this site and will not be overshadowed.

Traffic & Car Parking

Car parking is to be provided in a double garage, accessed directly from Tennyson Street via a new crossover. Council’s Traffic Engineer has viewed the proposal and raised no objection.

The proposed parking arrangements comply with the requirements of Clause 52.06.

Open Space

The dwelling will be provided with secluded private open space in the form of a private garden area at the rear of the dwelling totalling 68m² with supplementary first floor al fresco of 15m². Additional private open space (approximately 80m²) would have been provided within the front setback of the dwelling although the reduced height of the fence will not render this space private.

The amount of private open space complies with the requirements of Standard B28 of Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme.

Landscaping/Vegetation

The application was referred to Council’s Arborist who noted there is only one tree on the site, a small Acer pseudoplatanus (Sycamore) which has a low amenity and retention value. The removal of the tree is accepted on this basis and the fact it is of little value to the streetscape.

The Arborist generally supports the proposed landscaping plan subject to a condition requiring a canopy tree capable of reaching minimum dimensions at maturity of 8 metres high x 4 metres width located within the front setback.

Council’s Street Tree Arborist offers no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. The Arborist notes the proposed crossover will have minimal impact on a Corymbia ficifolia (Red-flowering Gum) street tree fronting the property, close to the east boundary provided there is no soil excavation within 2.0 metres from the tree’s stem at ground level.

Noise

The plans do not show where pool equipment will be located. In accordance with recommended Condition 1(i), details of this equipment must be provided to Council. This equipment must be located away from the habitable room windows of neighbouring dwellings so as to ensure the general amenity of surrounding residents.

Page 43 of 141



Matters Raised by Objectors

Objectors have raised concerns that the type of Planning Permit Application made is incorrect.

Planning Permit 2011/377/1 was issued for the construction of a second dwelling on a lot and this application seeks to amend this dwelling albeit to an entirely new design. Pursuant to Condition 8 of Planning Permit 2012/4362/1 (Subdivision Permit) written consent from the Responsible Authority (Council) is required to amend the approved design. This application forms a request for written consent.

Concerns have been raised regarding the lack of information provided to Council, specifically relating to the location of the pool plant equipment. It is noted that these have not been identified on the plans reviewed by Council, but a condition requiring their siting does form a recommended condition.

CONCLUSION

The proposal has been assessed and is considered appropriate with respect to the requirements of the Bayside Planning Scheme. The built form exhibits a general level of compliance with Clause 55, and the design is responsive to the site’s context. Subject to conditions, the dwelling will not result in any unreasonable amenity impacts upon neighbouring properties and will positively contribute to streetscape character.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council having caused notice of Amend Planning Permit 2011/377/2 to be given under Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and having considered all the matters required under Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 determine to Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant an Amended Permit under the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme in respect of the land known and described as 28 Tennyson Street, Sandringham for a Section 72 amendment to an additional dwelling on a lot approved by Planning Permit 2011/377/1 in accordance with the plans dated 23 October and 2 December 2014, subject to the following conditions:-

1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the plans received 23 October and 2 December 2014 but modified to show:

a. The framed structure to the first floor north-facing al fresco and pool/ spa deleted and replaced with a canopy extending no more than 2 metres from the first floor front façade.

The ground floor supporting structures for the swimming pool / spa must be finished in a mix of contemporary and traditional coastal materials, textures and finishes, including render, timber, non-masonry sheeting, glazing, stone and brick.

b. Screening in accordance with Standard B22 (Overlooking) of Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme:

the north-east and south-west facing living room windows;

the north-east and south-west facing al fresco area, pool / spa;

Page 44 of 141



the north-east facing dining room window;

the south-west facing study window;

the south-west facing kitchen window

the south-west facing master bedroom window; and

the south-west facing ensuite window.

c. The front fence to Tennyson Street reduced to a maximum height of 1.2 metres.

d. The first floor south-west side setback to the master bedroom increased to 4.18 metres. The raised ceiling element at this location must be relocated so as to sit centrally within the amended form of the rear of the dwelling.

e. The first floor rear setback increased to a minimum of 4.92 metres and the ground floor rear verandah redesigned to incorporate a flat roof not exceeding 3 metres in height above the finished floor level of the deck below.

f. The provision of 6m³ storage space on site.

g. Water Sensitive Urban Design measures in accordance with Condition 16;

h. A schedule of all external materials and finishes to be provided to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The schedule shall show the materials, colour (including two colour samples) and finish of all external walls, roof, fascias, window frames and paving (including car park surfacing); and

i. All plant and equipment (including air conditioning units, heating units, hotwater systems, etc.) which is proposed to be located externally shall be identified on the plans and located to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Such equipment should be located away from habitable room windows of adjoining properties.

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

3. Before the occupation of the site commences or by such later date as is approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4. All pipes, fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

5. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

6. The walls on the boundary of the adjoining properties must be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. Car spaces, access lanes and driveways must be kept available for these purposes at all times.

8. Vehicular crossings must be constructed to the road to suit the proposed driveways to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and any existing crossing or crossing opening must be removed and replaced with footpath, nature strip, and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. All disused or redundant vehicle crossings must be removed and the area reinstated to kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

10. Before the development starts, a landscape plan generally in accordance with Urban

Page 45 of 141



Solutions; Amling Residence, 28 Tennyson Street, Sandringham; Ground Floor Plan – Landscape Layout; Rev. C – Upgrade Plan To Planning Req; 14/10/14. 4099TP4, C. must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority but modified to show:

a. A canopy tree capable of reaching minimum dimensions at maturity of 8 metres high x 4 metres wide located in the front setback.

b. A survey including botanical names of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed

c. Buildings and trees including botanical names on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary

d. Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways

e. A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant

f. Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site

All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

The landscape plan must also indicate that an in-ground irrigation system is to be provided to all landscaped areas.

11. Tree Protection fencing must be installed approximately 2 metres inside the boundary fence around the following trees:

The row of Prunus sp. (Prunus lusitanica, Portugese laurel) located in the north/east corner of the neighbouring property at 26 Tennyson Street, adjacent to the shared boundary fence with 28 Tennyson Street.

A Lemon tree located in the north-west corner of the adjacent property 30 Fernhill Road, adjacent to the shared boundary fence with 28 Tennyson Street.

A Pittosporum tenuifolium (Kohuhu) located in the neighbouring property to the rear 32 Fernhill Road, adjacent to the shared boundary fence.

a. The tree protection fences must be installed before site works start and not be removed until the site is landscaped.

b. The fence should be 1.8 metres high chain mesh or similar.

c. No works are to occur inside the Tree Protection Fencing.

12. Tree Protection Fencing is to be established around the street tree prior to demolition and maintained until all works on site are complete.

a. The fencing is to be constructed and secured so its positioning cannot be modified by site workers.

b. The fencing is to encompass the entire naturestrip under the drip line of the tree.

c. The Tree Protection Zone is to be established and maintained in accordance with Australian Standards 4970 (Protection of trees on development sites).

No excavation may occur within 2.0 metres from the street tree’s stem at ground level.

Page 46 of 141



During construction of the crossover, tree protection fencing may be reduced to the edge of the council approved crossover to facilitate the construction of the crossover.

13. Before the occupation of the development or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

14. The landscaping shown on the endorsed plans must be maintained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority, including that any dead, diseased or damaged plants are to be replaced.

15. Before the commencement of works, detailed plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and be 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 in accordance with the guidelines outlined in Clause 22.08 of the Bayside Planning Scheme and must show:-

a. The type of water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures to be used;

b. The location of the water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures in relation to buildings, sealed surfaces and landscaping areas; and

c. Design details of the water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures, including cross sections.

These plans must be accompanied by a report from an industry accepted performance measurement tool, which details the treatment performance achieved and demonstrates the level of compliance with the Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines, CSIRO 1999.

The water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment system as shown on the endorsed plan must be retained and maintained at all times in accordance with the Urban Stormwater - Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines, CSIRO 1999, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

16. The nominated legal point of discharge for the development is the front of the property where water must be collected and free drained via a pipe to the Council drain to Council standards. If the point of discharge cannot be located then notify Council’s Asset Management Department.

17. Stormwater discharge is to be retained for that portion above the discharge calculated using a Coefficient runoff - 0.35. The development is to have a 'Stormwater Detention System' installed the design capacity to be Council approved.

18. Any seepage / agricultural drainage water (filtered to rain water clarity) must be discharged to the nearest Council Drain /Pit and not be discharged to the kerb and channel.

19. All on-site stormwater is to be collected from the hard surface areas and must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled into adjoining properties. The on-site drainage system must prevent discharge from each driveway onto the footpath. Such a system may include either:

a. A trench grate (150mm minimum internal width) located within the property; and/or

b. Shaping the driveway so that water is collected in a grated pit on the property; and/or

c. Another Council approved equivalent.

Page 47 of 141



20. Before the development begins, detailed plans (3 sets) draw to scale and indicating the method of stormwater discharge to the nominated 'Legal Point of Discharge' (and Stormwater Detention Systems where applicable), must be lodged with Council's Asset Management department for approval.

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

a. The development is not started within two (2) years of the date of this permit.

b. The development is not completed within four (4) years of the date of this permit.

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing:-

Before the permit expires; or Within 6 months afterwards if development has not commenced; or Within 12 months afterwards if the development has lawfully commenced.

Notes

A permit must be obtained from Council for all vehicular crossings. These must be constructed under Council's supervision for which 24 hours notice is required.

Building approval must be obtained prior to the commencement of the above approved works.

Consultation should take place with Council respect of the removal of the vehicular crossing and reinstatement works.

Prior to commencement of any building works, an Asset protection Application must be taken out. This can be arranged by calling Asset Protection Administrator, Mon-Fri 9:00am to 1:00pm on 9599 4638.

Construction of any fence/wall/letterbox structures may necessitate removal/damage of some sections of footpath. If this is the case, a 'Road Opening Permit' must be obtained to facilitate such work

A 'Road Opening / Stormwater Tapping Permit' is to be obtained from the Infrastructure Department prior to the commencement of the connection to the Council Drain/kerb/channel.

Date Brief description of amendment

9 June 2015 Amendment to plans under Section 72 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987:

Amendment to Planning Permit

Condition 1 reworded to refer to plans dated 23 October and 2 December 2014

Condition 1 a) to f) added and the remaining conditions renumbered.

Addition of arboricultural conditions at 10 to 13 inclusively and remaining conditions renumbered.

Amendment to plans

Plans substituted with Urban Solutions Plans 4099 TP1 to TP4 Rev C date stamped by Council 23 October 2014 and 2 December 2014.

Page 48 of 141



STANDARDS OF THE BAYSIDE PLANNING SCHEME For Two Or More Dwellings On A Lot (Clause 55 And Schedule To The Neighbourhood Residential Zone)

Title and Objective Complies with Standard?

Requirement and Proposed

B1 Neighbourhood Character

Design respects existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character.

Development responds to features of the site and surrounding area.

Yes See report for assessment.

B2 Residential Policy

Residential development is consistent with housing policies in the SPPF, LPPF including the MSS and local planning policies.

Support medium densities in areas to take advantage of public transport and community infrastructure and services.

Yes Policy allows for two dwellings on a lot in this area.

B3 Dwelling Diversity

Encourages a range of dwelling sizes and types in developments of ten or more dwellings.

N/A N/A

B4 Infrastructure

Provides appropriate utility services and infrastructure without overloading the capacity.

Yes The developer will be responsible for any necessary upgrades at the time of construction to accommodate the development.

B5 Integration with the Street

Integrate the layout of development with the street

Yes Direct and clearly defined vehicle and pedestrian access. A condition recommending the front fence height to be reduced to 1.2m will assist in further integrating the development with the street.

B6 Street Setback

The setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site.

No Required: 9m

Proposed: Minimum 4.5m

See report for further assessment.

B7 Building Height

Building height should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes Required: 8m

Proposed: 7.9m

Page 49 of 141



B8 Site Coverage

Site coverage should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

Yes Required: 50%

Proposed: 42.9%

B9 Permeability

Reduce the impact of stormwater run-off on the drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration.

Yes Required: 20%

Proposed: Approximately 38%

The applicant has not provided a written report demonstrating compliance with Clause 22.08 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. However a 3,000L rain water tank has been annotated on the plans. A condition has been included requiring the applicant to demonstrate compliance with Clause 22.08 prior to the commencement of the development.

B10 Energy Efficiency

Achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings.

Ensure orientation and layout reduces fossil fuel energy use and makes appropriate use of daylight and solar energy.

Yes The proposal has been designed to maximise solar access and provide for effective passive energy use. While the orientation of the lot generally requires that secluded private open space be to the rear (south) of the dwelling, this space directly adjoins the ground floor living area. The supplementary private open space (first floor al fresco) has been located to the north of the dwelling to maximise solar access.

B11 Open Space

Integrate layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development.

N/A N/A

B12 Safety

Layout to provide safety and security for residents and property.

Yes The entrance to the proposed dwelling will be visible from the street and not obscured.

Page 50 of 141



B13 Landscaping

To provide appropriate landscaping.

To encourage:

Development that respects the landscape character of the neighbourhood.

Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance.

The retention of mature vegetation on the site.

Yes A landscape plan will be required by conditions on any permit issued.

B14 Access

Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient vehicle access to and from the development.

Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood character.

Yes The number of crossovers is considered acceptable.

B15 Parking Location

Provide resident and visitor vehicles with convenient parking.

Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood.

Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments.

Yes Parking spaces are conveniently located for the dwellings.

B16 Parking Provision

Ensure car and bicycle parking meets the needs of residents and visitors.

Accessways should be practical, attractive and easily maintainable.

Removed under Ministerial

Amendment VC90.

See report for assessment under

Particular Provision 52.06 that

replaced B16.

Page 51 of 141



B17 Side and Rear Setbacks

Ensure the height and setback respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

No

North-East (Side)

South-West (Side)

South-East (Rear)

North-East (Side)

South-West (Side)

South-East (Rear)

Required:

Ground Floor

2.00m and 2.72m

2.00 and 2.06m

3.00m

First Floor

3.8m, 3.86m and 5.38m

4.18m and 5.98m

4.92m

Proposed:

1.00m, 1.67m and 2.27m

0m, 1.00m, 1.8m and 2.9m

3.4m to verandah and 5.89m to façade.

1.67m, 2.27, 2.77m, 3.8m and 4.9m

2.4m, 2.9m, 3.4 and 3.8m

3.4m

B18 Walls on Boundaries

Ensure the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

No Maximum: 18.925m not exceeding an average height of 3.2m with no part higher than 3.6m.

Proposed: 7.02m with an average height of 3.45m.

The proposed variation is considered acceptable as adjacent to a garage on the adjoining property at 26 Tennyson Street which stands to a height of 2.8m.

Page 52 of 141



B19 Daylight to Existing Windows

Allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows.

N/A The boundary windows of 30 Fernhill Road are non-habitable and therefore the standard is not considered as being applicable to this assessment.

It is noted if these windows did serve habitable rooms, ground and first floor setback of 3.3 metres would be required.

B20 North Facing Windows

Allow adequate solar access to existing north-facing habitable room windows.

N/A North facing habitable room windows on the adjoining property at 30 Fernhill Road are not affected by the proposed development.

B21 Overshadowing Open Space

Ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space.

Yes, subject to recommended conditions

See report.

B22 Overlooking

Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows.


See report.

B23 Internal Views

Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within the same development.


See report.

B24 Noise Impacts

Protect residents from external noise and contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings.

Yes The site is in an established residential area where no atypical noise sources are anticipated. Recommended conditions require details of where building services will be located so as to ensure these are not located adjacent to sensitive interfaces.

B25 Accessibility

Consider people with limited mobility in the design of developments.

Yes The lift ensures all levels can be easily accessed.

B26 Dwelling Entry

Provide a sense of identity to each dwelling/residential building.

Yes The dwelling entry is identifiable from the streetscape.

B27 Daylight to New Windows

Allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows.

Yes Sufficient space around new habitable windows will ensure adequate light infiltration into new dwelling

Page 53 of 141



B28 Private Open Space

Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate private open space.

Yes Required:

80sqm (POS)/25sqm (SPOS)

Proposed:

68m² (secluded private open space to the rear) plus 15m² (alfresco area)

B29 Solar Access to Open Space

Allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings/buildings.

Yes The secluded private open space has generally been located to the rear of the dwelling and the first floor al fresco area.

Due to the orientation of the site, the ground floor areas of secluded private open space will be overshadowed by the built form on site and of adjoining properties for the majority of the day. This area is still considered usable and will assist in providing space for outdoor services.

The primary area that benefits from good solar access is the first floor, north-facing al fresco area which will not be overshadowed throughout the course of the day. A condition requiring an amended design response to the proposed weather protection element has been included in the recommendation section of this report.

B30 Storage

Provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling.

Yes Adequate storage is provided in the garage.

B31 Design Detail

Encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes See report.

B32 Front Fences

Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

No Required: 1.2m

Proposed: 1.8m

A planning permit condition has been added to satisfy this requirement to ensure views to the streetscape and opportunities for passive surveillance.

Page 54 of 141



B33 Common Property

Ensure car parking, access areas and other communal open space is practical, attractive and easily maintained.

Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.

N/A N/A

B34 Site Services

Ensure site services and facilities can be installed and easily maintained and are accessible, adequate and attractive.


Yes There is sufficient room to provide for bin storage, clotheslines and can all easily be accessed on site. All building services will be installed in accordance with the requirements of relevant service authorities.

Page 55 of 141



4.5

1 Florida Avenue Beaumaris Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit Application No: 2014/61/1 Ward: Southern


File No: 2014/61/1

APPLICATION DETAILS

Land/Address: 1 Florida Avenue, Beaumaris

Application is for: Construction of two (2) double storey dwellings and removal of native vegetation

Melway Reference: 86/B7

Ward: Southern


Applicant's/Owner's Name: Lowe Architecture

Date Received: 11 February 2014 (Amendment declaration received 16 September 2014)

Statutory Days Expiry: 15 November 2014

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ3)

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay Schedule 1 (DDO1)

Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 3 (VPO3)

Under what clause(s) is a permit required? Clause 32.09-5 – NRZ3

Clause 43.02 – VPO3

Restrictive covenants on the title? Yes

Current use and development: Single dwelling

Objections: Two (2)

PROPOSITION

It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued subject to conditions as set out in the recommendation.

PROPOSAL

This application seeks approval to construct two double storey dwellings and the removal of native vegetation. The proposal is detailed on amended plans received on 16 September 2014 prepared by Lowe Architecture.

Dwellings 1 and 2 will comprise:

At ground floor, living, dining, kitchen, bedroom, ensuite, W.C and laundry.

At first floor, two bedrooms, living room, bathroom, and W.C.

A double car garage for each dwelling.

Page 56 of 141



Private open space to the rear (north) of 90m² for dwelling 1 and 84m² for dwelling 2 accessible from the living area.

The dwellings will have an overall maximum height of 7.2 metres and will be finished in rendered masonry and blockwork.

Dwelling 1 is accessible via an existing crossover and access to dwelling 2 is proposed via a new crossover.

It is proposed to remove 18 trees from the site that are protected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO3). It is also proposed to remove a further seven trees, which are not protected under the VPO3 or the Local Law.

A total of seven trees on the site are proposed to be retained.


An inspection of the site and the surrounding area has been undertaken.

The site is located on the north side of Florida Avenue and is currently occupied by a single storey dwelling. The site has an overall area of 745m2.

The site is adjoined by:

A double storey dwelling to the north, at 4 Pacific Boulevard;

A double storey dwelling to the east, at 3 Florida Avenue;

Two double storey dwellings to the south at 2 and 2A Florida Avenue; and

Two dwellings on separate lots to the west at 6 and 8 Haydens Road.

The surrounding area generally consists of single and double storey dwellings. Dwellings are predominantly located on medium sized lots. There are some examples of medium density housing developments, however these are not common and vegetation is prominent in the front and rear setbacks with a strong bushy character.

PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

There are no previous planning permit applications for this site.

Title and Covenants

The applicant has submitted a copy of title for the subject site, issued by the titles office on 11 February 2014. The title is subject to Covenant A258282, which states that:

“[the proprietor] will not erect or cause to be erected on the said land hearby transferred any building or buildings other than a building or buildings constructed with exterior walls of brick or concrete”

Such covenants are not uncommon and are usually directed at ensuring minimum standard of buildings on land affected by the covenant to ensure that buildings are not constructed of ‘cheap’ materials which ‘might lower the tone of the estate.’ The covenant requires materials only be of brick or concrete. The elevation plans submitted with the application shows that the dwellings will be constructed from rendered masonry and blockwork. It is considered that these materials are not in breach of the covenant.

Page 57 of 141



PUBLIC NOTIFICATION



Placing one (1) sign on site fronting Florida Avenue.

The notification has been carried out correctly and Council has received two (2) objections to date.

The key issues raised in objections are as follows:

Inconsistent with State and Local planning policy

Inconsistent with neighbourhood character

Unnecessary removal of vegetation due to the siting of the dwelling and location of driveway

Non-compliant front and side setbacks

Traffic safety concerns

Overdevelopment

Locality Plan

One objection is not shown on the plan as it was received from a PO Box address.

Legend

Subject Site

Objector

Page 58 of 141



CONSULTATION

The applicant declined an invitation to a consultation meeting as they considered there were no further amendments that could be made to the plans that would satisfy objector’s concerns.

REFERRALS

The application plans was referred to the following Council departments:

Internal Referral Agency Response

Arborist No objection, subject to conditions

Drainage Engineer No objection, subject to conditions

Traffic Engineer No objection, subject to conditions

Street Tree No objection, subject to conditions

ASSESSMENT


Clause 9 - Plan Melbourne Amendment VC30 was gazetted on 30 May 2014. The amendment introduces Plan Melbourne into all planning schemes state wide. The objectives of Plan Melbourne are listed in a re-ordered Clause 11. These objectives are:








Clause 12 Environmental and Landscape Values - The objectives of planning should include the protection of the health of ecological systems and the biodiversity they support as well the conservation of areas with identified environmental and landscape values. This objective includes the protection of biodiversity including native vegetation retention and the provision of habitats for native plants and animals and the control of pest plants and animals. Clause

Page 59 of 141



12.01-2 seeks to achieve a net gain in the extent and quality of native vegetation. Clause 12.02-1 aims to recognise and enhance the value of coastal areas to the community and ensure sustainable use of natural coastal resources. Clause 12.02-4 encourages suitably located and designed coastal and marine tourism opportunities. Clause 12.02-5 seeks to improve the environmental health of the bays and their catchments. Clause 12.04-1 aims to ensure the protection and conservation of environmentally areas such as Port Phillip Bay and its foreshores. Clause 12.04-2 seeks to protect landscapes and significant open spaces that contribute to character, identity and sustainable environments. This clause requires strategies that ensure sensitive landscape areas such as the bays and coastlines are protected and that new development does not detract from their natural quality.









Clause 21.02 Bayside Key Issues and Strategic Vision - Aims to encourage development that responds to the vision, key issues and overarching goals of Bayside City Council.


Clause 21.04 – Environmental and Landscape Values – Seeks to retain significant tree and vegetation cover, protect habitat provided by established trees and gardens, protect indigenous vegetation forming part of the corridor along the sandbelt, and recognise the substantial contribution of the Highett Grassy Woodland which contribute to biodiversity at both a local and regional level.

Clause 21.06 - Built Environment and Heritage - Aims to achieve quality design outcomes which improve the image of land use and development in Bayside and contribute to a sense of place appropriate to Bayside’s character and maintains, strengthens and enhances local character.

Clause 22.06-1 Neighbourhood Character Policy - Aims to encourage development in the area that responds to the particular built form and natural environment elements that make up the neighbourhood character of Bayside.

Page 60 of 141



Clause 22.06-2 Neighbourhood Character Objectives - Aim to ensure that development is responsive to the preferred future character of the area and to retain and enhance the identified elements that contribute to the character of the area.


Zone


A planning permit is required pursuant to Clause 32.09-5 of the Bayside Planning Scheme to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.

Overlays

Clause 43.02 Design and Development Overlay Schedule 1 – Seeks to protect and enhance the foreshore environment and views of Bayside from Port Phillip Bay and to relate the scale and form of any new development to the landform of the coast. The policy aims to maintain a pedestrian scale along Beach Road and to maintain consistency with urban design and development objectives in the Bayside Coastal Strategy 1997 and the Victorian Coastal Strategy 2002.The overlay advocates to protect the foreshore from overshadowing, to manage the increased pressure for higher buildings along the coast and to protect the amenity and privacy of residential properties.

A planning permit is not required in accordance with this provision to construct a building not more than 2 storeys and where the floor to floor heights are less than 3.5m.

Clause 42.02 - Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 3 – Seeks to prevent the loss of native and particularly indigenous vegetation incurred by development, to retain the amenity, aesthetic character and habitat value of Australian native vegetation and indigenous vegetation in particular within the Beaumaris and Black Rock area and to promote the regeneration and replanting of indigenous species in the Beaumaris and Black Rock area.

A planning permit is required to remove vegetation native to Australia in accordance with this provision.


The following particular provisions are relevant to the assessment of the application:


Clause 55 Two or more dwelling on a lot - Specifies objectives and standards for the construction of two or more dwellings on a lot within a Neighbourhood Residential Zone. Included within are requirements pertaining to the design response, neighbourhood character and infrastructure, site layout and building massing, on-site amenity and amenity impacts of the proposal.

Page 61 of 141



General Provisions

Clause 65 Decision Guidelines - Sets out decision guidelines for the Responsible Authority to consider in ensuring acceptable outcomes in terms of State Planning Policies and Local Planning Policies.


In considering this application, regard has been given to the State and Local Planning Policy framework, the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme, objections received and the individual merits of the application.


The preferred future character statement of Precinct H4 is:

The single and double storey dwellings sit within the topography and informal landscaped surrounds, including remnant and indigenous coastal trees. The variety of dwelling styles reflect the coastal setting through their design, details and finishes. An informal feel to the streetscapes is achieved by spaces around buildings, the lack of or unobtrusive style of front fencing and informal street treatments. Along Beach Road, development responds to its highly visible location on the edge of the coast by providing visually interesting forms and facades. Informal street treatments remain in those streets with no kerbing and remnant street tree planting is retained.

Precinct Guidelines


To enhance the bayside vegetation character of the area through the planting of indigenous coastal species.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all

applications for new dwellings that utilises

indigenous coastal species.

Retain large, established trees and provide

for the planting of new trees and shrubs

wherever possible (locate footings outside

root zone).

Lack of a landscape plan.

Removal of large established trees.

Use of exotic species and planting of environmental weeds

To maintain the rhythm of spacious visual separation between buildings.

Dwellings should be sited to create the

appearance of space between buildings and

to accommodate substantial vegetation.

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

Locate garages and carports behind the line

of the dwelling.

Minimise paving in front garden areas

including driveways and crossovers.

Underground car parking accessed from the

front of the site should only be provided

where other options are not possible due to

site constraints, the garage doors do not

dominate the façade and the front setback

area is retained as predominantly garden

space.

Car parking facilities that dominate the façade or view of the dwelling.

Creation of new crossovers and driveways or wide crossovers.

Front setbacks dominated by impervious surfaces.

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

Page 62 of 141




To encourage innovative architecture that reflects the bayside setting.

New buildings should be individually

designed to respond to the characteristics of

the bay side location and the site.

Incorporate building elements and details

that contribute to a lightness of structure

including balconies, verandahs, glazing and

light transparent balustrading.

Large, bulky buildings with poorly articulated front and side wall surfaces.

Heavy design detailing (erg. Masonry columns and piers).

Highly reflective materials or glazing.

To use lighter looking building materials and finishes that complement the bayside setting.

Use a mix of contemporary and traditional

coastal materials, textures and finishes

including render, timber, non-masonry

sheeting, glazing, stone and brick.

Period reproduction styles and detailing.

To maintain the openness of the streetscape and views to coastal garden settings.

Provide open style front fencing, other than

in exceptional circumstances.

High or solid front fencing.

To create a visually interesting and attractive built form interface with the foreshore reserve, on properties fronting Beach Road and visible from the reserve.

Where the properties front to both Beach

Road and another street, ensure the

dwellings present visually interesting

elevations on all faces visible from the

public domain.

Use landscaping materials and coastal

plants within the front setback that

contribute to the coastal character and

amenity of the street.

Provide articulated roof forms to create an

interesting skyline when viewed from the

beach.

Provide low or open style front fencing

along Beach Road frontages.

Flat, poorly articulated roof forms and facades visible from the public domain.

High, solid front fencing on Beach Road.

The proposed development includes materials and colours on the elevations which respect the existing character of the neighbourhood, whilst complying with the materials dictated in the covenant affecting the site. The use of blockwork, render and varying colours will add visual interest to the development and will present appropriately to the streetscape.

The compliant upper floor setbacks and modest first floor footprint will result in dwellings with a low scale built form and mass that will reflect the built form in the area but also result in a development that will have minimal impact on adjoining properties.

As proposed, the combination of the double garages and the reduced ground floor side setbacks will create a dominant appearance in the streetscape and will detrimentally impact the rhythm and visual separation between dwellings. The proposal can be modified to ensure it appropriately respects the character of the neighbourhood by reducing the width of the garages and the providing compliant side setbacks. The changes will also reduce the amount of concrete paving of the driveways allowing greater landscaping opportunities and the retention of trees 22, 24, 29, 30 and 43. Conditions are included in the recommendation to accommodate the above.

From a landscaping perspective, the proposal does not enhance the bayside vegetation character and instead provides little opportunity for new landscaping to contribute to the neighbourhood. In addition, the landscape character of the neighbourhood will be further degraded by the loss of existing vegetation to allow for the dwelling entrances and decking areas. The proposal can be

Page 63 of 141



modified to provide appropriate opportunities for landscaping whilst retaining a number of existing trees. The modification necessary to retain trees 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 24, 29, 30 and 43 include increasing the front setback of the garage of dwelling 2 is increased to a minimum 8.5 metres to comply with Standard B6 of Clause 55, increasing the front entrance deck and common party wall of both dwellings are setback a minimum of 8.5 metres and the reduction/modification of the rear decks of dwellings 1 and 2 and the living area of dwelling 2. Conditions are included in the recommendation to this effect.

Setbacks

Front Setback

The proposed dwellings are setback 7.29 metres (dwelling 1) and 7.7 metres (dwelling 2) from the front boundary, which does not comply with Standard B6 of Clause 55.03-1.

Having regard to the Neighbourhood Character policy, the proposal should “…ensure that new buildings and extensions do not dominate the streetscape”. It is acknowledged that the neighbourhood includes varied front setbacks. However, a reduced front setback with projecting porch elements does not achieve compliance with the character policy or the objectives of Clause 55.03-1, particular given the proposal includes two double garages.

A condition is included requiring the proposal achieve compliance with Standard B6, being 7.7 metres for both dwellings. As noted earlier, the front setback will be substantially increased for dwelling 2 and the porches of both dwellings to accommodate for the retention of trees 22, 24, 29 and 30.

Side and Rear setbacks

Ground floor First Floor

Requirement Proposed Requirement Proposed

West (side) 2.0m 1.04m - 2.34m 3.83m 4.45m

East (side) 2.0m 1.51m - 2.5m 3.83m 4.43m

North (rear) 3.0m 6.33m - 7.47m 4.56m 8.47m - 9.77m

The dwelling 1 store room, ensuite and laundry and dwelling 2 bedroom 1, walk in pantry and garage do not comply with the side and rear setback Standard B17 of Clause 55.04-1. It is considered necessary that the side setback standards are achieved to enhance the landscape setting of this site in lieu of the proposed tree removal and to retain the rhythm and visual separation between dwellings. The variations sought can be reduced without compromising the integrity of the accommodation being provided. A condition is included in the recommendation requiring these greater setbacks.

At first floor, both dwellings are setback in accordance with Standard B17 of Clause 55.04-1. The setback respects the existing neighbourhood character and ensures that the level of bulk is kept to a minimum and has minimal impact on neighbouring properties. No variations to the first floor setbacks are proposed.

Overlooking

The first floor rumpus rooms have full size windows with no overlooking treatments. For dwelling 2, the window abuts a driveway and no habitable room windows or private open space areas are within 9.0 metres and therefore there is no unreasonable levels of overlooking and the window in its current form may remain. For dwelling 1, the window is within 9.0 metres of neighbouring private open space areas at 6 and 87 Haydens Road and while there will be minimal overlooking issues, the proposal does not comply with the standard and it is therefore recommended a condition be

Page 64 of 141



included requiring the addition of a treatment to the window to comply with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6.

The windows at the rear at first floor are considered to comply with Standard B23 as there is less than 50% of overlooking into each of the private open space areas of each dwelling. All other windows at first floor are highlight windows or have obscure glazing to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level.

Overshadowing

The shadow diagrams show complaint levels of overshadowing. Being a northern orientated site, the development benefits from having northern located private open space and does not have any properties located due south.

Traffic and Car Parking

Each dwelling is provided with two car spaces and a driveway in excess of 3 metres in width. There is no front fence proposed as part of this application and so appropriate sight line distances are provided. The proposal provides car parking and vehicle access compliant with Clause 52.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. Conditions requiring the reduction of the garages will still comply with the requirements of Clause 52.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme.


The site is within a Vegetation Protection Overlay (VPO3). The purpose of the VPO3 is:

To protect areas of significant vegetation,

To ensure that development minimises loss of vegetation,

To preserve existing trees and other vegetation,

To recognise vegetation protection areas as locations of special significance, natural beauty, interest and importance,

To maintain and enhance habitat and habitat corridors for indigenous fauna.

To encourage the regeneration of native vegetation.

The table below outlines the trees to be removed and those to be retained from the site. Assessment detail of each tree proximate to the works is included as an attachment. Importantly, it identifies those trees protected by the VPO3, those protected by a Local Law (not requiring a planning permit for their removal) and those that are not protected.

There are nine trees (trees 15 to 18 and 31 to 35) on the adjoining neighbour’s properties, which are all to be retained and will not be impacted by the proposed development. The neighbour’s trees are a variety of native and exotic species.

There are two street trees in the nature strip directly in front of the site. These are trees 36 and 37 and are proposed to be retained. The proposed vehicle crossing servicing dwelling 2 will not impact these trees. Conditions are included in the recommendation to ensure these trees are not impacted during construction.

It is proposed to remove 18 trees protected by the VPO3 and seven trees which are not protected.

Page 65 of 141



Protected by the VPO Protected by the Local Law Not protected

Proposed for removal To be retained

Proposed for removal To be retained

Proposed for removal

To be retained

Supported for removal

Not Supported

Tree Nos.

5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,

Supported for removal

Not Supported

N/A Tree Nos. 14, 21, 38-42

Tree Nos. 4

Tree No.

1, 2, 3, 6 - 8, 19, 20, 22 – 30, 43

N/A N/A N/A

Tree 19 is proposed to be removed to accommodate dwelling 1. The tree lies largely in the middle of the site and would impact on any future development proposed on this site. The applicant’s Arborist report indicates this tree has a height of 6.2 metres, has fair health but poor structure. Council’s Arborist has reviewed the tree and has no objection to its removal, subject to appropriate replacement planting.

Construction of dwelling 2 requires the removal of 17 trees protected by the VPO3, being tree no’s 1 to 3, 6 to 8, 20, 22 to 30 and 43. These trees range in height from 2 metres to 7.9 metres with predominantly native species. The trees have varying degrees of health, ranging from poor to good. The trees are required to be removed to allow either construction of the dwelling or construction of the driveway to this dwelling. Realistically, a second dwelling generally as proposed could not be constructed whilst retaining these trees.

Council’s Arborist has no objection to the removal of the trees identified on the basis of suitable re-vegetation, including the planting of canopy trees. However, the Arborist has stated that the quantity and location of replacement canopy tree planting shown on the submitted landscape plan is not acceptable. The Arborist has recommended that a condition be included to ensure that the timber decks are constructed in a way to protect vegetation at the rear to be retained. The Arborist has provided conditions with regards to further information for tree protection and for the planting of six canopy trees (two in the front setback of each dwelling and one at the rear of each dwelling) to accommodate for the loss of vegetation.

There is a challenge in reconciling planning policy which seeks to encourage urban consolidation, efficient is of land and housing forms which meet the changing needs of the wider community and the preservation of existing trees in the VPO. IN this case, none of the trees have an individual significance and with one exception have all been graded to have low retention value. In this case, a balancing of the competing planning policy interests leads to a conclusion that the trees could be removed to allow for the proposed development subject to appropriate replanting that will in time contribute sensitively to the character of the area.

CONCLUSION

Subject to conditions the proposed development is acceptable and will not impact adversely upon streetscape character or the general amenity of the area. On this basis it is recommended that the application be approved.

Page 66 of 141



RECOMMENDATION

That Council having caused notice of Planning Application No. 2014/61/1 to be given under Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and having considered all the matters required under Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 decides to Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit under the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme in respect of the land known and described as 1 Florida Avenue Beaumaris, for the construction of two double storey dwellings and removal of native vegetation in accordance with the amended plans dated 16 September 2014 subject to the following conditions, including the specified conditions set out in the Council’s “Town Planning Standard Conditions” adopted by the Council on 28 November 2006:

1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plans will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The plans must be generally in accordance with the amended plans dated 16 September 2014 but modified to show:

a) The garages of both dwellings reduced to the minimum double garage width of 5.5 metres.

b) The reduction of the on-site driveways to accommodate the reduction in the width of the garages noted in Condition 1(a) and to ensure the retention of trees 22, 24, 29, 30 and 43.

c) The garages and building envelope of both dwellings setback from the side boundaries a minimum of 2 metres.

d) The front setback of the garage of dwelling 2 increased to a minimum 8.5 metres from the property frontage to ensure the retention of trees 22, 24, 29, 30 and 43.

e) The front entrance deck and common party wall of both dwellings setback a minimum of 8.5 metres from the property frontage to ensure the retention of trees 22, 24, 29 and 30.

f) The reduction and associated modification of the rear decks of dwellings 1 and 2 and the living area of dwelling 2 to ensure the retention of trees 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13.

g) New crossovers are to be constructed for both dwellings, being no more than 3 metres wide, with the crossover for dwelling 1 offset a minimum of 2 metres from the western boundary and both located to ensure they are 12 metres apart.

h) Notation on plan that the eastern boundary fence where it meets the footpath is to be tapered down to a height of 0.900mm for a length of 2.5 metres.

i) The rumpus room window for dwelling 1 to be screened to minimise overlooking compliant with comply with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-5 (Overlooking) of the Bayside Planning Scheme.

j) The location of any air-conditioning dwellings and other plant equipment, including any screening.

k) A schedule of all proposed exterior decorations, materials, finishes and colours, including colour samples (3 copies in a form that can be endorsed and filed).

l) A Landscape Plan in accordance with Condition 7 of this permit.

m) A Tree Protection Plan in accordance with Conditions 10, 11, 12 and 13 of this permit.

Page 67 of 141




3. Before the occupation of the site commences or by such later date as is approved in writing by the Responsible Authority, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4. All pipes, fixtures, fittings, air conditioning dwellings and vents servicing any building on the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

5. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

6. Vehicular crossings must be constructed to the road to suit the proposed driveways to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and any existing crossing or crossing opening must be removed and replaced with footpath, nature strip, and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

7. Before the development starts, a landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and be approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved, the plan will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The landscaping plan must show:

a) The retention of trees 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 22, 24, 29, 30 and 43.

b) Two indigenous trees to Bayside within the front setback of each dwelling.

c) An indigenous tree to Bayside in the rear private open space area for each dwelling. Timber deck areas may need to be reduced to accommodate these trees. No planting is to occur in the easement.

d) For (b) and (c) two trees selected must reach a minimum height of 6 metres a maturity and two trees must reach a minimum height of 12 metres at maturity.

e) Demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority that the planting locations of the new canopy trees provides adequate soil volume to allow these trees to reach maturity and considers probable interactions of the root systems and canopies with proposed and existing built form and vegetation.

f) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed.

g) Trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring properties within three (3) metres of the boundary.

h) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways.

i) 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. The planting must consist of 80% indigenous plantings.

j) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site.

All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Before the occupation of the development or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Page 68 of 141




10. A plan showing Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) in accordance with AS 4970-2009 Protection of Trees on Development Sites of all trees proposed for retention on the site and within three meters of the common boundary.

11. Where the built form encroaches the TPZ of a tree to be retained the applicant is required to specify the design and construction methods which will be used. This includes how the timber decks are to be constructed.

12. Before the development (including demolition) starts, a tree protection fence must be erected around any tree on site greater than 2.0m in height to be retained, any tree on neighbouring land where works encroach into the TPZ and the two street trees. The tree protection fence must extend to the edge of the TPZ of these trees and must be constructed of star pickets and chain mesh or similar to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The fence must be in accordance with AS 4970-2009. The tree protection fences must remain in place until construction is completed and be a minimum height of 1.8 metres. During construction of the crossover, tree protection fencing may be reduced to the edge of the Council approved crossover to facilitate the construction of the crossover.

13. The potential impacts of encroachment into TPZ are to be assessed with reference to AS 4970-2009 Protection of Trees on Development Sites, Section 3.3.4. TPZ encroachment considerations. The applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority that trees to be retained will remain viable post-construction.

14. Before the commencement of works, detailed plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and be 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 in accordance with the guidelines outlined in Clause 22.08 of the Bayside Planning Scheme and must show:

a) The type of water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures to be used;

b) The location of the water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures in relation to buildings, sealed surfaces and landscaping areas;

c) Design details of the water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures, including cross sections;



15. The applicant must apply for the nominated legal point of discharge for the development where stormwater run-off must be collected and free drained to Council's drainage assets to Council standards.

16. Stormwater discharge must be retained for the portion above the discharge calculated using a Coefficient of Runoff of 0.35. The development is to have a Stormwater Detention System installed, the design capacity to be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Page 69 of 141



17. Any seepage/agricultural drainage water must be filtered to rain water clarity and must be pumped to the nearest Council Drain/Pit and not be discharged to the kerb and channel unless directed otherwise.

18. Any subsurface water captured on the site must be treated in accordance with Council’s policy for “Discharge of pumped Subterranean Water Associated with Basement or Below Ground Structures”

19. All on−site stormwater is to be collected from the hard surface areas and must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled onto adjoining properties. The on-site drainage system must prevent discharge from each driveway onto the footpath. Such a system may include either:

a) A trench grate (150mm minimum internal width) located within the property; and/or

b) Shaping the driveway so that water is collected in a grated pit on the property; and/or

c) Another Council approved equivalent.

20. Before the development begins, three sets of detailed plans indicating the method of stormwater discharge to the nominated Legal Point of Discharge (and Stormwater Detention Systems where applicable) must be lodged with Council's Engineering Services department for approval.

21. The driveway / Parking areas / paved courtyards / paths and 'pervious' pavements must be graded / drained to prevent stormwater discharge onto the front footpath and into adjacent properties.

22. This permit expires if one of the following applies:

a) The development has not commenced within two years of the date of this permit

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

The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing before the permit expires; or

Within 6 months afterwards if development has not commenced; or

Within 12 months afterwards if the development has lawfully commenced.

Permit Notes

A permit must be obtained from Council for all vehicular crossings. These must be constructed under Council's supervision for which 24 hours notice is required.

Building approval must be obtained prior to the commencement of the above approved works.

Consultation should take place with Council respect of the removal of the vehicular crossing and reinstatement works.

The applicant must clearly identify what impact, if any, the proposed vehicle crossing will have on Council assets including pits and trees.

The applicant is to bear the cost to remove and reinstate any street furniture or infrastructure items to provide the required access to the proposed development.

The existing street tree/s must not be removed or damaged.

Reticulated sewerage must be provided to the requirements of the Sewerage Authority.

Council records indicate that there is an easement to the rear of the property. Plans indicate there are no proposals to build over or encroach into the easement with any building/structure of note. Proposals to be built over the easement will require Build Over Easement approval from the Responsible Authority.

Page 70 of 141



Construction of any fence / wall / letterbox structures may necessitate removal / damage of some sections of footpath. If this is the case, a 'Road Opening Permit' must be obtained to facilitate such work.

A 'Road Opening / Stormwater Tapping Permit' is to be obtained from the Infrastructure Department prior to the commencement of the connection to the Council Drain / kerb / channel.

Page 71 of 141



STANDARDS OF THE BAYSIDE PLANNING SCHEME Two Or More Dwellings On A Lot (Clause 55)






Yes




Yes Policy allows for two dwellings on a lot in this area.



N/A N/A

B4 Infrastructure


Yes The developer will be responsible for any necessary upgrades at the time of construction to accommodate the development.



Yes Dwelling entries are clearly identifiable from the street

B6 Street Setback


No Required: 7.7m

Proposed: 7.5m

See report.

B7 Building Height


Yes Required: 8 metres

Proposed: 7.22 metres

B8 Site Coverage


Yes Required: 50%

Proposed: 48.6%

Page 72 of 141



B9 Permeability


Yes Required: 20%

Proposed: 43.4%




Yes Windows, habitable room windows and private open spaces have been located to allow for solar access.

B11 Open Space


N/A N/A

B12 Safety


Yes Entrances are visible from the street and are not obscured.

B13 Landscaping


To encourage:




Yes A landscape plan will be required by conditions on any permit issued.

B14 Access



Yes The number of crossovers is considered acceptable. The old crossover is to be reinstated as per conditions on permit.





Yes Parking spaces are conveniently located for the dwellings. There is space for on-street parking between crossovers.

Page 73 of 141





No

Ground floor First Floor


West (side) 2.0m 1.04m - 2.34m 3.83m 4.45m

East (side) 2.0m 1.51m - 2.5m 3.83m 4.43m

North (rear) 3.0m 6.33m - 7.47m 4.56m 8.47m - 9.77m



Yes None proposed.



Yes No existing neighbouring windows will be impacted upon by the proposal.



Yes There are no north facing windows in close proximity to the development which will be overshadowed.



Yes See report.

B22 Overlooking


Yes See report.

B23 Internal Views


Yes See report.

B24 Noise Impacts


Yes The site is in an established residential area where no atypical noise sources are anticipated.

Page 74 of 141



B25 Accessibility


Yes Both dwellings have bedrooms at ground floor which could be used with by people with limited mobility.

B26 Dwelling Entry


Yes The entrances have landings which step down and are identifiable from the street.



Yes All windows will receive adequate levels of solar access.



Yes Minimum: 40m²

Proposed:

Dwelling 1 – 90m²

Dwelling 2 – 84m²



Yes The site has northern orientated private open space and this space is configured in accordance with the provisions of this standard.

B30 Storage


Yes Adequate storage is provided in garages.

B31 Design Detail


No See report.

B32 Front Fences


Yes None proposed

B33 Common Property



N/A N/A

Page 75 of 141



B34 Site Services



Yes Bin storage, clotheslines and storage areas are shown and can all easily be accessed on site. Water tank locations will be requested through conditions on any permit to be issued. All building services will be installed in accordance with the requirements of relevant service authorities.

Page 76 of 141



TREE ASSESSMENT - SUMMARY

# Common name Origin Protected by VPO

Retention value

Comments

1 Coast Tea Tree - Indigenous - Yes - Low

-

Fair health & poor structure

2 Coast Tea Tree Indigenous Yes - Low

Poor health & structure

3 Slender Myaporum

Local Native Yes - Low

-

Poor health & fair structure

4 Cumquat Exotic No - Low

Good health & fair structure

5 Lemon Scented Tea Tree

Native No - Low

Poor health & fair structure


Fair health, poor structure


Fair health & structure

8 Weeping Bottlebrush

Native Yes - Low



Native Yes - Low



Native Yes - Low



Native Yes - Low



Dead and poor structure



14 New Zealand Cabbage Tree

Exotic No - Low


15 Loquat Exotic No - Low


16 Flowering Gum Native Yes - Low


17 Italian Cypress Exotic No - Low

Good health and structure

18 Italian Cypress Exotic No - Low Good health and

Page 77 of 141



structure



20 Albany Woolly Bush

Native Yes - Low

Good health and fair structure

21 Slender Myoporum

Local Native No - Low


22 Forest She Oak Native Yes Low Good health and fair structure

23 Brittle Gum Native Yes Medium Fair health & structure

24 Needle Leafed Bottlebrush

Native Yes Low Fair health & poor structure

25 Coast Tea Tree Indigenous Yes Low Fair health & poor structure


27 Scarlett Bottle Brush

Local Native Yes Low Fair health & poor structure


29 Coast Tea Tree Indigenous Yes Low Poor health & structure

30 Wirilda, Swamp Wattle

Local Native Yes Low Fair health & poor structure

31 Japanese Camellia

Exotic No Low Fair health & poor structure

32 Coast Tea Tree Indigenous Yes Low Poor health & structure

33 Silky Oak Native Yes Low Good health and poor structure



36 Coast Tea Tree Indigenous Yes Low Good health and poor structure

37 Weeping Bottlebrush

Local Native Yes Low Good health and poor structure

Page 78 of 141



38 Coast Rosmary Local Native No Low Poor health & structure

39 Coast Rosmary Local Native No Low Fair health & poor structure


41 Coast Rosmary Local Native No Low Poor health & structure


43 Robyn Gordon Native Yes Low Good health and poor structure

Page 79 of 141



Page 80 of 141



Page 81 of 141



4.6

103 Dalgetty Road Beaumaris Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit Application No: 2014/303/1 Ward: Southern


File No: 2014/303/1

APPLICATION DETAILS

Land/Address: 103 Dalgetty Road BEAUMARIS

Application is for: Construction of two double storey dwellings with basement car parking, a front fence exceeding 1.2 metres and removal of native vegetation in a Vegetation Protection Overlay 3

Melway Reference: 86D7

Ward: Southern Ward


Applicant's/Owner's Name: Pascall Projects

Date Received: 12 May 2014

Statutory Days Expiry: 31 July 2014

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone Schedule 3 (NRZ3)

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay, Schedule 3 (DDO3)

Vegetation Protection Overlay, Schedule 3 (VPO3)

Under what clause(s) is a permit required? Clause 32.09-5 – Neighbourhood Residential Zone

Clause 42.02 Vegetation Protection Overlay

Restrictive covenants on the title? No

Current use and development: Double storey dwelling

Objections: Two (2)

SUMMARY ADDENDUM

On 10 March 2015, the Planning and Amenity Committee deferred consideration of this application to allow for further consultation with the applicant in regards to the proposed landscaping within the front setback of Unit 1. The previous report recommended that the pool, spa, sun deck and fire pit of Unit 1 be deleted, the front fence be setback 2.5 metres and an additional canopy tree be planted within the front setback.

Council Officers met with the applicant on 26 March 2015 and following the meeting a revised ground floor, elevation and landscape plan were submitted. The revised plans show the following changes to Unit 1:

The pool reduced in size;

The fire pit deleted to accommodate a Silver Banksia; and

The front fence re-aligned to accommodate additional landscaping at the front of the site including an additional Coastal Banksia tree which will help to complement the treed character of the area.

Page 82 of 141



Having reviewed the revised landscape plan, Council Officers are satisfied that the plan represents an appropriate landscape outcome. The previously recommended conditions relating to the removal of the pool and fit pit from within the front setback have been deleted and replaced with conditions which reflect the amended landscape plan.

PROPOSITION

It is recommended that a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit be issued subject to conditions.

PROPOSAL

It is proposed to construct two double storey attached dwellings comprising the following:

A shared basement garage comprising two car spaces, store and stair access for each dwelling;

At ground floor each dwelling will feature a large open plan living, dining and kitchen area, powder room, laundry and store;

At first floor each dwelling will feature a master bedroom with ensuite and walk in robe, two additional bedrooms, bathroom and family room;

An outdoor terrace, pool, spa and sundeck;

A 3.2 metre high gatehouse with a Balinese roof marking the entrance to Unit 1;

A 2.6 metre high pergola structure marking the entrance to Unit 2; and

A 1.8 metre high stone clad and rendered block column front fence.

The dwellings will stand to a maximum height of 7.75 metres, be finished in rendered masonry, timber look cladding and feature pitched Balinese roofs.

In total, 11 trees, (including 6 native trees, of which 2 are protected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay) are proposed to be removed from the site.

The trees to be removed are:

Tree as identified by the Applicant’s Arborist

Species Type Protected by VPO

Tree 3 Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum)

Native No

Tree 4

Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum)

Native No

Tree 5 Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle)

Native Yes

Tree 6 Acer negundo (Box Elder) Exotic No

Page 83 of 141




Tree 8 Liquidambar styraciflua (Liquidambar)

Exotic No

Tree 10 Corymbia ficifolia (Red-flowering Gum)

Native Yes


Tree 13 Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) Native Yes

Tree 14 Banksia integrifolia (Coast Banksia)

Native No

Tree 15 Ulmus glabra ‘Lutescens’ (Golden Wych Elm)

Exotic No


An inspection of the site and the surrounding area has been undertaken.

The subject site is located on the west side of Dalgetty Road just north of Herbert Street, Beaumaris. The site has an 18.29 metre frontage, depth of 39.62 metres and area of 725m2. The site is occupied by a double storey brick dwelling with low brick front fence.

The main locality characteristics are:

To the north, at 105 Dalgetty Road, is a single storey brick dwelling with low brick front fence;

To the east at:

o 104 Dalgetty Road is a double storey weatherboard dwelling with no front fence; and

o 106 Dalgetty Road is a single storey weatherboard dwelling with no front fence.

To the south, at 101 Dalgetty Road, is a double storey brick dwelling with high brick front fence; and

To the west, at 1-2/19 Herbert Street, are a double storey dwelling and a single storey dwelling with a high render and timber front fence.

Page 84 of 141



PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

Title and Covenants The applicant has submitted a copy of title for the subject site, issued by the titles office on 22 April 2014. The title is not subject to any covenants or restrictions.

Background No previous planning applications have been determined for the subject site.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION



Placing a sign on site.

The notification has been carried out correctly and Council has received two (2) objections to date.

Locality Plan

Legend

Subject Site

Objector

NB. Not all objectors are shown on the plan. The other objector is from the Beaumaris Conservation Society.

The key issues that were raised in the objections are:

Impact upon neighbourhood character;

Overdevelopment of the site;

Overshadowing during winter solstice;

Page 85 of 141



Landscaping; and

Lack of dwelling diversity;

CONSULTATION

The applicant declined an invitation to a consultation meeting.

REFERRALS

The application was referred to the following Council departments for comment.


Arborist No objection to amended landscape plan submitted following previous Planning and Amenity Committee Meeting

Drainage Engineer No objection

Traffic Engineer Objection

Street Tree Arborist No objection, subject to conditions

ASSESSMENT









As a consequence of the introduction of Plan Melbourne, all references to its predecessor (Melbourne 2030) have now been deleted from the State Planning Policy Framework along with the Activity Centre Hierarchy central to Melbourne 2030 and previously detailed in Clause 11. This includes the deletion of the references used in association with this hierarchy, including 'Principal Activity Centres', 'Major Activity Centres' and 'Neighbourhood Activity Centres'. These references have now been replaced with 'Activity Centres' and 'Neighbourhood Centres'.

Page 86 of 141





Clause 12 Environmental and Landscape Values - This clause includes the protection of biodiversity including native vegetation retention and the provision of habitats for native plants and animals and the control of pest plants and animals. The clause seeks to achieve a net gain in the extent and quality of native vegetation and aims to recognise and enhance the value of coastal areas to the community and ensure sustainable use of natural coastal resources. The clause seeks to protect landscapes and significant open spaces that contribute to character, identity and sustainable environments. This clause requires strategies that ensure sensitive landscape areas such as the bays and coastlines are protected and that new development does not detract from their natural quality.











Page 87 of 141



Clause 21.04 Environmental and Landscape Values – seeks to assist the conservation of biodiversity through retention of native vegetation, protection of habitat and control of pest plants and animals to and protect the flora and fauna values of the Bay Road Heathland Sanctuary and complement the conservation measures outlined in the current Bay Road Heathland Masterplan.





Zone


Pursuant to Clause 32.09-5, a planning permit is required for the construction of two dwellings on a lot and a front fence exceeding a height of 1.2 metres.

Overlays

Clause 42.02 Vegetation Protection Overlay Schedule 3 – Seeks to prevent the loss of native and particularly indigenous vegetation incurred by development, to retain the amenity, aesthetic character and habitat value of Australian native vegetation and indigenous vegetation in particular within the Beaumaris and Black Rock area and to promote the regeneration and replanting of indigenous species in the Beaumaris and Black Rock area.

Pursuant to Clause 42.02-2, a planning permit is required to remove any vegetation native to Australia.

Clause 43.02 Design and Development Overlay Schedule 3 – Aims to achieve architectural and urban design outcomes that contribute positively to local urban character and enhance the public realm while minimising detrimental impact on neighbouring properties. The overlay aims to preserve the existing character and amenity of the areas as low rise (up to two storeys) suburban areas with a strong garden character. The overlay seeks to maintain the prevailing streetscape rhythm, building scale and height of neighbourhoods and to maintain a strong landscape character with buildings set within vegetated surrounds.

This overlay does not apply to residential buildings or dwellings.

Page 88 of 141




Clause 55 Two or more dwelling on a lot – Specifies objectives and standards for the construction of two or more dwellings on a lot within a Neighbourhood Residential Zone. Included within are requirements pertaining to the design response, neighbourhood character and infrastructure, site layout and building massing, on-site amenity and amenity impacts of the proposal.

General Provisions



Below is a summary of relevant planning considerations and matters raised by objectors.


The subject site is located within Neighbourhood Character Precinct H3 of Clause 22.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. Clause 22.06 details the following Preferred Character Statement and Precinct Guidelines for this precinct:

‘The bushy gardens surrounding the dwellings dominate the streetscapes. Where the topography is hilly, the buildings are set within the landscape, and are sometimes sited to take advantage of water views without dominating the streetscape. Adequate space is provided around dwellings for the retention and planting of vegetation, and indigenous canopy trees are common. Low or open style front fences are usually provided, in order to retain the openness of the front garden to the street.’

The following table outlines neighbourhood character objectives and what the policy seeks to achieve and avoid.


To strengthen the bushy garden character of the area through the planting of appropriate species.

Retain large established trees

and understorey, and provide

for the planting of new

indigenous trees wherever

possible (locate footings

outside root zone).

Prepare a landscape plan to

accompany all applications for

new dwellings that utilises

appropriate native, preferably

indigenous, vegetation.

Minimise impervious surfaces

particularly in front garden

spaces to ensure space for

plantings.

Lack of landscaping and substantial vegetation.

Removal of large established trees.

Planting of environmental weeds

To maintain the rhythm of spacious visual separation between buildings and ensure adequate space is provided around buildings for the retention and planting of vegetation.

Buildings should be sited to

allow space for a garden,

including trees and shrubs.

Buildings should be sited to

create the appearance of space

Loss of front garden space.

Page 89 of 141




between buildings and

accommodate vegetation.

To minimise the loss of front garden spaces and the dominance of car parking structures.

Locate garages and carports

behind the line of the dwelling.

Underground car parking

accessed from the front of the

site should only be provided

where other options are not

possible due to site constraints,

the garage doors do not

dominate the façade and the

front setback area is retained

as predominantly garden

space.

Car parking structures that dominate the façade or view of the dwelling.

To minimise site disturbance and impact of the building on the landscape.

Buildings should be designed to

follow the contours of the site

on sloping sites.

Minimise the use of retaining

walls and battering of slopes.

Design new buildings and

extensions so as not to exceed

the predominant tree canopy

height.

Major excavation works and site levelling.

Buildings that protrude above the tree canopy height.

To ensure that new buildings provide an articulated and interesting façade to the street.

Incorporate design elements

into the front façade design of

new dwellings such as

recessed portions, projecting

elements behind the front

setback line, combinations of

materials, textures or colours or

other elements providing

appropriate articulation.

Recess upper levels from the

front façade.

Large, bulky buildings

Poorly articulated front and side wall surfaces.

To use building materials and finishes that complement the natural setting.

Use a mix of materials, textures

and finishes including render,

timber, non-masonry sheeting,

glazing, stone and brick.

Period reproduction styles and detailing.

To maintain the openness of the front garden to the street.

Provide open style front fences,

other than along heavily

trafficked roads.

Use vegetation as an

alternative where possible.

High or solid front fences.

The surrounding area is characterised by traditional single storey dwellings and more recent double storey dwellings. Second storey additions tend to be recessive. Some dwellings feature

Page 90 of 141



native bushy front gardens with no front fences however most feature perimeter planting of natives and exotic species with high transparent or high solid front fences.

Subject to conditions, it is considered that the proposal is an appropriate design response. The proposal meets the objectives of the neighbourhood character precinct for the following reasons:

The proposal retains one native tree and the landscape plan includes three large and twelve medium native trees.

The proposal presents as one dwelling to the street due to the dwellings being within one building;

Generous side setbacks ensure there is adequate space around the building for the planting of native vegetation;

A shared basement garage with access from one driveway ensures the front garden is not dominated by car parking structures.

The projecting first floor element incorporating a Balinese roof and a flat roof and as well as extensive glazing provide an articulated façade to the street.

A variety of materials and finishes including render, timber look cladding and glazing provide visual interest to adjoining properties.

The proposed high front fence features open sections (including the gates) and is setback at each end from the street to allow for the planting of native vegetation along the street front.

Setbacks

The proposed setbacks and those required by Schedule 3 of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone are: Ground floor First Floor


North (side) 0 or 2 metres 2 – 3.4 metres 3.284 metres 3.4 metres

East (street) 9 metres 13.621 metres 9 metres 9.971 metres

South (side) 0 or 2 metres 3.4 metres 3.284 metres 3.4 - 4 metres

West (rear) 0 or 3 metres 8.253 metres 4.29 metres 4.598 metres

The proposed front, side and rear setbacks fully comply with the setback requirements of Schedule 3 of the NRZ of the Bayside Planning Scheme.

Visual Bulk/Building Height

The overall height of the building at 7.75 metres (2 storeys) complies with the maximum permissible height of Neighbourhood Residential Zone, Schedule 3.

The front façade of the development is well articulated with a projecting Balinese roof, sections of flat roof and glazing and its appearance as one dwelling reflects the single dwelling character of the streetscape. The use of a variety of materials and finishes, including render, timber look cladding and glazing provides visual interest to adjoining properties and the streetscape. The design response is appropriate for the site and will not present as a visually dominant element to the street or adjoining properties.

Page 91 of 141



Overdevelopment/Site Coverage

Objectors have raised concerns in regards to the proposal being an overdevelopment of the site. The proposed development has site coverage of 38%. This complies with the 50% maximum site coverage of Standard B8 of Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme and allows for landscaping around the building which will assist in softening its appearance.

Overlooking

All first floor south and north facing windows are either highlight windows with a sill height of 1.7 metres above finished floor level or appropriately screened to 1.7 metres. There is potential overlooking from the first floor west facing master bedroom of Unit 2 into a habitable room window of the adjoining property to the west. A condition is recommended to ensure this window is screened to prevent any overlooking.

Overshadowing

Objectors have raised concerns that the proposal will cast substantial shadows during the winter

solstice. The equinox is used to assess the extent of overshadowing to adjoining properties in

accordance with Standard B21 of Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. Therefore, the extent of overshadowing that occurs during winter solstice cannot be considered.

The shadow diagrams submitted have been checked and found to be correct. Taking into account the orientation of the site and the siting and height of the dwellings, the level of shadow cast by the development between the hours of 9am-3pm on the equinox complies with the provisions of Standard B21, Clause 55 (Overshadowing Open Space) of the Bayside Planning Scheme. For the west part the extent of overshadowing will be limited to the northern extremity of 101 Dalgetty Road and area the driveway of 19 Herbert Street.

Private Open Space Areas

Standard B27, Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme states that new dwellings should be provided with a minimum of 40 square metres of private open space, of which a minimum of 25 square metres should be secluded or 8 square metres for a balcony. The proposed private open space provisions are as follows:

SPOS

Unit 1 166 sqm

Unit 2 197 sqm

It is considered that the proposed open space areas provided are appropriately provide for service and recreational needs of the residents. Both open space areas will benefit from northern solar access.


The dwellings are each provided with two car spaces within a shared basement garage. The parking provided is in accordance with the requirements of Clause 52.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme.

Council’s Traffic Engineer has viewed the plans and objects to the access arrangement. A redesign of the basement ramp and head room, the relocation of the bins to the stores and alterations to access and crossover widths are recommended.

Council’s Street Tree Arborist has viewed the plans and supports the widening of the crossover closer to the southern boundary subject to 2 metre off-set from the southern street tree and a 2.9 metre offset from the northern street tree.

Page 92 of 141




Objectors have raised concerns in regards to the species selection and areas set aside for landscaping within the site. The advertised development plans show palm trees, however this is not proposed. The advertised landscape plan includes native species including Coastal banksia, Blackwood wattle, Silver banksia, Dwarf lillypilly and Correas.

The front and rear setback of the site will accommodate pools, spas and decking which will limit landscaping to the perimeter of the site. Three replacement trees (Coastal banksia) are proposed at the front of the site – two trees in front of the front fence at either end and one behind the front fence - and a Melaleuca stypheliodes (Prickly-leaved paperbark) will be retained at the rear of the site.

Council’s Arborist has viewed the plans and supports the removal of the trees from the site and the proposed landscape plan. In total, 11 trees, (including 6 native trees, three of which are protected by the Vegetation Protection Overlay) are proposed to be removed from the site and 15 new native trees planted. Only one tree of significance was identified on site, a mature Liquidambar styraciflua, which was assessed as not suitable for retention due to structural faults.

Front Fence

It is proposed to construct a 1.8 metre high front fence. The fence will be constructed of stone and rendered block columns. There will be space between the block columns and the gates will be transparent providing views to the front dwelling and garden. The height of the front fence is considered appropriate as there are many high solid and transparent front fences within the vicinity of the site. In addition, the fence will be setback at either end with native vegetation, including two canopy trees and shrubs. These will assist in softening the appearance of the fence to the street.

Other Matters Raised by Objectors

Objectors also raised concerns that the proposal does not provide for dwelling diversity or respond to changing demographic profiles because it includes pools. Swimming pools do not require primary planning consent in this instance and these elements are considered to be typical components of a dwelling.

CONCLUSION

The proposed development is considered to be appropriate for the site and will not detract from the existing streetscape and neighbourhood character. The proposed development is of a scale and design compatible with surrounding development and will sit comfortably within the streetscape.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council having caused notice of Planning Application No. 2014/303/1 to be given under Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and having considered all the matters required under Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 decides to Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit under the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme in respect of the land known and described as 103 Dalgetty Road BEAUMARIS, for the construction of two double storey dwellings with basement car parking, a front fence exceeding 1.2 metres and the removal of native vegetation in a Vegetation Protection Overlay 3 in accordance with the application dated 12 May 2014 subject to the following conditions, including the specified conditions set out in the Council’s “Town Planning Standard Conditions” adopted by the Council on 28 November 2006:-

1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. When approved,

Page 93 of 141



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 dated 20 October 2014 and the revised ground floor and elevation plan dated 13 April 2015 and landscape plan dated 28 April 2015 but modified to show:

a) A landscape plan in accordance with condition 6 of this permit.

b) A schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours (incorporating two (2) paint samples).

c) All plant and equipment (including air conditioning units, heating units, hotwater systems, etc.) which is proposed to be located externally identified on the plans.

d) The first floor west facing master bedroom window to Unit 2 to be screened in accordance with Standard B22 of Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme.

e) Water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures providing a minimum rating of 100% in accordance with Condition 15 of this permit.

f) The basement ramp to have a 1 in 10 grade for the first 2 metres, a 1 in 5 main grade and a 1 in 8 grade for the final 2 metres.

g) A longitudinal section of the basement ramp from the footpath that shows all grades, length of grades and levels.

h) 2.2 metre minimum headroom clearance at the entrance and throughout the basement garage.

i) The basement ramp to be a minimum of 3.6 metres wide.

j) The basement ramp where it intersects with the footpath must be 3.6 metres wide with at least a 1metre offset from the southern property boundary.

k) A 3.6 metre wide crossover must be constructed with a 1 metre minimum offset from the southern property boundary centred on the ramp. The crossover must have a minimum 2 metre offset from the southern street tree and minimum 2.9 metre offset from the northern street tree.

l) The bins to be relocated to the stores to allow convenient vehicular access and egress.

m) The car spaces to be line marked and allocated to each Unit.

n) Compliance with sight line requirements of AS2890.1 for the area where the driveway/ramp intersects with the footpath. All structures including foliage, front fences etc within the triangle must be limited to a height of 900mm.

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

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

4. All pipes, fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building without the written consent of the responsible authority.

Page 94 of 141



6. Before the development starts, 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 be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided.

The landscaping plan must be generally in accordance with the proposed landscape plan dated 5 August 2014 prepared by BJB Landscaping except that the plan must show:-

a) A survey including botanical names of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed

b) Buildings and trees including botanical names on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary

c) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways d) 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

e) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site.

7. Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.


9. The proposed internal drainage must be connected to the existing legal point of discharge. The applicant may apply for legal point of discharge and local drain information, or carry out on site verification.

10. The applicant must apply for the nominated legal point of discharge for the development where stormwater run-off must be collected and free drained to Council’s drainage assets to Council’s standards.

11. Stormwater discharge must be retained for the portion above the discharge calculated using a Coefficient of Runoff of 0.35. The development is to have a Stormwater Detention System installed, the design capacity of which is to be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

12. Any subsurface water captured on the site must be treated in accordance with Council's Policy for "Discharge of pumped Subterranean Water Associated with Basement or Below Ground Structures".

Any seepage/agricultural drainage water must be filtered to rain water clarity and must be pumped to the nearest Council Drain/Pit and not be discharged to the kerb and channel unless directed otherwise.

13. All on-site stormwater is to be collected from the hard surface areas and must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled onto adjoining properties. The on-site drainage system must prevent discharge from each driveway onto the footpath. Such a system may include either:

a) A trench grate (150mm minimum internal width) located within the property; and/or b) Shaping the driveway so that water is collected in a grated pit on the property;

and/or c) Another Council approved equivalent.

Page 95 of 141



14. The driveway / parking areas / paved courtyards / paths and any 'pervious' pavers must be graded / drained to prevent stormwater discharge onto the front footpath and into adjacent properties.



a) The type of water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures to be

used; b) The location of the water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures in

relation to buildings, sealed surfaces and landscaping areas; c) Design details of the water sensitive urban design stormwater treatment measures,

including cross sections; and

These plans must be accompanied by a report from an industry accepted performance measurement tool, which details the treatment performance achieved and demonstrates the level of compliance with the Urban Stormwater Best Practice Environmental Management Guidelines, CSIRO 1999


17. The protection requirements for Tree 9 (Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum)) growing in 101 Dalgetty Road and for Tree 16 (Melaleuca styphelioides (Prickly-leaved Paperbark)) as outlined in the Construction Impact and Tree Protection Assessment Report prepared by Treelogic, dated 15 December 2014 must be implemented to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority to ensure the survival of these trees during and after the construction process.

18. Tree Protection Fencing is to be established around the street trees prior to demolition and maintained until all works on site are complete. a) The fencing is to be constructed and secured so its positioning cannot be modified by

site workers. b) The fencing is to encompass the entire naturestrip under the dripline of the trees. c) The Tree Protection Zone is to be established and maintained in accordance with

Australian Standards 4970 (Protection of trees on development sites). d) During construction of the crossover, tree protection fencing may be reduced to the

edge of the council approved crossover to facilitate the construction of the crossover.

19. Root pruning within the TRZ (Tree Protection Zone) a) Prior to soil excavation, a trench along the line of the proposed crossover must be dug

by hand. b) All affected roots must be correctly pruned according to AS 4373-2007


Page 96 of 141



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


The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing:-

Before the permit expires; or Within 6 months afterwards if development has not commenced; or Within 12 months afterwards if the development has lawfully commenced.

Permit Notes

N1 Crossover permit N2 Building approval N10 Asset Protection

Build over easement:

There is no easement within the property although records suggest there is a sewer drain at the rear of the property and a stormwater pit in the south west corner of the property. Unit 2 has pool / structures over the sewer drain which will require approval from the responsible authority as part of the Building Permit process to build over.

Permits to be acquired:

a) Construction of any fence/wall/letterbox structures may necessitate removal/damage of some sections of footpath. If this is the case, a ‘Road Opening/Stormwater Tapping Permit’ is to be obtained to facilitate such works.

b) A ‘Road Opening/Stormwater Tapping Permit’ is to be obtained from the Infrastructure Department prior to connection to the Council drain/kerb/channel.

Page 97 of 141



STANDARD OF THE BAYSIDE PLANNING SCHEME

Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings (Clause 55 and Schedule 3 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone)






Yes See report.




Yes Although not in a residential opportunity area, policy supports two dwellings on a lot in this location.



N/A N/A

B4 Infrastructure


Yes The development will make use of the existing infrastructure serving the site or upgrade as necessary.



Yes Vehicle and pedestrian access is provided to each dwelling from Dalgetty Road.

B6 Street Setback


Yes Minimum: 9 metres


B7 Building Height


Yes Maximum: 8 metres


B8 Site Coverage


Yes Maximum: 50%

Proposed: 38%

B9 Permeability


Yes Minimum: 20%

Proposed: 32%

Page 98 of 141






Yes The dwellings have been designed to include north, west and east facing windows to allow for the natural lighting and heating of the dwellings. This will assist in reducing fossil fuel use.

B11 Open Space


N/A N/A

B12 Safety


Yes The dwellings have been designed to allow for the passive surveillance of the streetscape.

The basement provides direct access to the dwellings.

B13 Landscaping


To encourage:




Yes See report.

B14 Access



Yes A shared single crossover is provided for the basement car park.





Yes A basement, with direct access to the dwellings, provides 2 car spaces for each dwelling.

Page 99 of 141





Yes Required:

Ground Floor

North:

0 or 2 metres

West:

0 or 3 metres

South:

0 or 2 metres

First Floor

North:

3.284 metres

West:

4.29 metres

South:

3.284 metres

Proposed:

Ground Floor

North:

2 - 3.4 metres

East:

8.253 metres

South:

3.4 metres

First Floor

North:

3.4 metres

East:

4.598 metres

South:

3.4 - 4 metres



N/A



Yes No adjoining windows appear to be impacted by the proposed development.



Yes Habitable room windows of the dwelling to the south are appropriately setback from the boundary.



Yes Refer report.

B22 Overlooking


No Refer report.

B23 Internal Views


Yes No overlooking is possible between the proposed dwellings.

Page 100 of 141



B24 Noise Impacts


Yes No sources of external noise shown on plans and further details required by recommended conditions.

B25 Accessibility


Yes Ground floors are accessible/easy to be made accessible if required.

B26 Dwelling Entry


Yes Each dwelling is provided with an easily identifiable entry.



Yes All new habitable room windows are provided with adequate access to daylight.



Yes Unit 1: SPOS – 166 sqm

Unit 2: SPOS – 197 sqm



Yes

B30 Storage


Yes Adequate space for storage provided in both a formal and informal sense.

B31 Design Detail


Yes See report.

B32 Front Fences


No Maximum: 1.2 metres in height.

Proposed: 1.8 metres in height.

B33 Common Property



Yes

B34 Site Services



Yes

Page 101 of 141



4.7

23 Cloyne Street Highett Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit Application No: 2014/468/1 Ward: Central


File No: 2014/468/1

APPLICATION DETAILS

Land/Address: 23 Cloyne Street, Highett

Application is for: Construct two double storey dwellings and construction of a front fence exceeding a height of 1.2 metres.

Melway Reference: 77/D10

Ward: Central Ward


Applicant's/Owner's Name: Ms O Meltser

Date Received: 23 June 2014

Statutory Days Expiry: 20 July 2015

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone (NRZ3)

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay (DDO3)

Special Building Overlay (SBO)

Under what clause(s) is a permit required?

Clause 32.09-5 – NRZ3

Clause 44.05-1 – SBO


Current use and development: Single storey brick dwelling with associated outbuildings

Objections: Four (4)

PROPOSITION


PROPOSAL

It is proposed to construct two double storey dwellings on the site. The two dwellings are similar in design and comprise of the following:

Three bedrooms,

Two bathrooms/ensuites,

Two powder rooms,

A retreat,

A study/sitting room,

A family/dining/kitchen area, and

A single car garage and tandem visitor car space.

Page 102 of 141




The site has a total area of 640 square metres and currently contains:

A brick single storey pitched roof dwelling.

Attached single car carport.

Two outbuildings.

The main site/locality characteristics are:

Residential allotments with comparable dimensions to that of the site predominantly comprising of single detached dwellings with associated outbuildings. Although in the minority there are several recent and emerging examples of multi-dwelling development including some exhibiting side by side design.

Sporadic vegetation coverage within allotments.

Front fencing varying between low and open to high and solid designs. Occasional allotments feature no front fencing.

Frequent mature trees lining the road reserve.

PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

Title and Covenants

The applicant has submitted a copy of title for the site, issued by the titles office on 20 May 2014. The title is burdened by Registered Restrictive Covenant Number1195820, dated December 10 1929, which states that ‘…he or they will not at any time hereby excavate or remove or permit to be excavated carried away or removed any earth clay stone gravel or sand from the said land hereby transferred except for the purpose of excavating from the foundations of any buildings to be erected or use or permit or allow the said land hereby transferred to be used for the manufacturing or winning of bricks tiles or pottery ware…’

The proposal does not result in a breach of this restrictive covenant.

Background

No previous planning applications have been determined for subject site.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION


Sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land

Placing a sign on site

The notification has been carried out correctly.

Council has received five objections to date. 1 of these objections has since been withdrawn.

Page 103 of 141



Locality Plan

Legend

Subject Site

Objector

Objection Withdrawn

The key issues that were raised in the objections are:

Overbearing building height and design.

Side setback encroachment.

Excessive site coverage.

Overlooking.

Overshadowing.

Impact on adjoining vegetation.

Noise emission from air conditioning units.

Overdevelopment

CONSULTATION

A consultation meeting was held at Council on 19 February 2015, attended by a Council Statutory Planning Officer, the applicant and an objector.

As a consequence of this meeting the application was formally amended in May with changes made in light of the comments discussed between the applicant and objector. These changes included:

Page 104 of 141



All ground floor walls setback 2 metres from side boundaries.

Site coverage reduced to 50.01%.

Additional landscaping.

Relocation of air conditioning units.

Obscure glazing to windows.

REFERRALS

External Referrals/Notices by the Planning Scheme:

External Referral Authority Response

Melbourne Water No objection, subject to conditions.





Street Tree Arborist No objection subject to conditions. Requests no excavation within 2.7 metres of the edge of this street tree’s trunk.

ASSESSMENT









Page 105 of 141





Clause 13 Environmental Risks - This clause seeks to adopt best practice environmental management and a risk management approach which aims to avoid or minimise environmental degradation and hazards and to identify and manage the potential for the environment and environmental changes and their impact on the economic, environmental or social well-being of society. The objectives of this clause include the need to plan for and manage the potential coastal impacts of climate change and to protect areas prone to erosion, landslip or other land degradation processes and the need to assist the control of noise effects on sensitive land uses.











Page 106 of 141



Clause 21.05 Environmental Risks – This provision seeks to protect the surface waters and ground waters in the Port Phillip catchment from stormwater pollutants and the impacts of peak stormwater flows by providing a drainage system that promotes the on-site retention and re-use of stormwater run-off regulating overland flow to prevent flooding and improves water quality, particularly in terms of run-off to the Bay.





Zone

Clause 32.09-5 Neighbourhood Residential Zone - Schedule 3 - Aims to recognise areas of predominantly single and double storey residential development and to limit opportunities for increased residential development. The zone aims to manage and ensure that development respects the identified neighbourhood character, heritage, environmental or landscape characteristics and to implement neighbourhood character policy and adopted neighbourhood character guidelines.

A planning permit is required pursuant to Clause 32.09-5 to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.

Overlays


Pursuant to the provisions of this clause a planning permit is not required to construct a building or to construct or carry out works for a residential building or dwelling.

Clause 44.05 Special Building Overlay – Aims to identify land in urban areas liable to inundation by overland flows from the urban drainage system as determined by, or in consultation with, the floodplain management authority.

A planning permit is required pursuant to Clause 44.05-1 to construct a building or to construct or carry out works.

Page 107 of 141




The following particular provisions are relevant to the assessment of this application:


Clause 55 Two or more dwelling on a lot – Specifies objectives and standards for the construction of two or more dwellings on a lot within a Residential 1 Zone. Included within are requirements pertaining to the design response, neighbourhood character and infrastructure, site layout and building massing, on-site amenity and amenity impacts of the proposal.

General Provisions

Clause 65 Decision Guidelines – Sets out decision guidelines for the Responsible Authority to consider in ensuring acceptable outcomes in terms of State Planning Policies and Local Planning Policies.


In considering this application, regard has been given to the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks, the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme, objections received and the individual merits of the application.

Neighbourhood Character The site is located within Neighbourhood Character Precinct G1 pursuant to Clause 22.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. Clause 22.06 outlines the following preferred character statement for the precinct.

Preferred Future Character The well-articulated dwellings sit within landscaped gardens, some with established trees. New buildings are frequent and are designed to respond to the site, and include a pitched roof form to reflect the dominant forms in the area. Buildings are occasionally built to the side boundary, however the overall impression of the streetscape is of buildings within garden settings due to the regular front setbacks, well vegetated front yards and additional street tree planting in the area.

Precinct Guidelines


To maintain and enhance the garden settings of the dwellings.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all applications for new dwellings that includes substantial trees and vegetation.

Retain large, established trees and provide for the planting of new trees wherever possible.

Buildings should be sited to allow space for the planting of trees and shrubs.


Removal of large trees.

Planting of environmental weeds.

To maintain the rhythm of visual separation between buildings.

Buildings should be sited to create the appearance of space between buildings and accommodate substantial vegetation.

To ensure that new buildings provide an articulated and interesting façade to the street.

Incorporate design elements into the front façade design of new dwellings such as recessed portions, projecting elements behind the front setback line, combinations of materials, textures or colours or other elements providing appropriate articulation.

Use pitched roof forms with eaves.

Large, bulky buildings with poorly articulated front and side wall surfaces.

Page 108 of 141




To maintain the openness of the streetscape.

High, solid front fencing.

The proposal features a pitched roof development setback from Cloyne Street in a manner consistent with adjoining allotments to enable the planting of meaningful vegetation within the front setback. Furthermore, the development is also offset from both side boundaries to enhance the appearance of space between built forms on adjoining allotments and accommodate planting around the entirety of the building consistent with the precinct guidelines and existing neighbourhood character. The first floor is recessed to varying degrees from that of the ground floor below which when taken into consideration with the pitched roof exhibits a variety of design elements that break up the overall scale of the development in a manner that will mitigate any detrimental visual bulk that could be attributed to the proposal. Furthermore, the 7.452 metre maximum building height is consistent with established two storey development within the streetscape. Council Arborists have reviewed the submitted information and advised there is suitable space to accommodate mature canopy trees and smaller trees and shrubs to enhance the overall landscape character of the site. The proposed development will also feature a 1.5 metre high front fence with brick piers and metal infill panels allowing views between Cloyne Street and the front setback.

Setbacks

Front setback

The front wall of the proposed development is setback a minimum 7.7 metres from the front title boundary. As the greater of the two front setbacks to the dwellings either side of the subject site is 7.7 metres (25 Cloyne Street) the proposal complies with Standard B6 of Clause 55.03-1 ‘Street setback objective’.

Side and rear setbacks


Ground Floor First Floor

Required Proposed Required Proposed

North (side) 0 or 2.00m 2.007 m 3.47 metres 3.467 metres

South (side) 0 or 2.00m 2.007 m 3.47 metres 3.467 metres

West (rear) 0 or 3.00m 5.047 m 4.47 metres 6.3 metres

As demonstrated above, the proposed development achieves compliance with Standard B17 of Clause 55.04-1 ‘Side and rear setbacks objective’. It is therefore considered that the setbacks of the development are respectful of the ‘preferred neighbourhood character’ that encourages separation between built form and limits the impact on the amenity of adjoining allotments.

Page 109 of 141



Building Height

The proposed development features a maximum building height of 7.452 metres which is consistent with established two storey dwellings within Cloyne Street and compliant with the 8 metre mandatory height limited established by the Neighbourhood Residential Zone – Schedule 3.

Site coverage

The proposed development will feature a site coverage of 50.01% which represents a 0.01% variation to the 50% requirement of Standard B8 of Clause 55.03-3 ‘Site coverage objective’. As a consequence of the very minor nature of the variation proposed and the limited difference that could be attributed to reducing the site coverage by 0.01% it is considered reasonable to allow a variation.

Overlooking

The submitted plans feature obscure glazing along all relevant first floor windows where overlooking as defined by Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6 ‘Overlooking objective’ will occur. The proposal is therefore compliant with the standard.

The extent of obscure glazing along the west elevation will also prevent internal overlooking to more than 50% of the adjoining dwelling’s lower level private open space in accordance with Standard B23 of Clause 55.04-7 ‘Internal views objective’.

Overshadowing

The applicant has submitted shadow diagrams demonstrating the extent of shadow generated by the proposed development. These diagrams indicate that the proposed development will partially reduce sunlight to the secluded private open space of the existing dwelling at 21 Cloyne Street but not at a level greater than 75%. The proposal is therefore compliant with the Standard B21 of Clause 54.04-5 ’Overshadowing open space objective’.


The proposed development can accommodate two car spaces per dwelling in accordance with Clause 52.06 ‘Car Parking’. One space is within the single car garage provided to each dwelling while the other is an uncovered space located directly in front of the garage.

Council’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the submitted information and has no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions regarding the removal and reconstruction of the existing crossover and the provision of visibility splays where the access way intersects with the crossover.


Council’s Arborist has reviewed the submitted information and has no objection to the proposal subject to conditions regarding replacement of the existing Dwarf Yellow Gum (Eucalyptus leucoxylon ‘Euky Dwarf’) with trees capable of reaching a minimum mature height of 8 metres. In order to protect vegetation within close proximity of the site during construction of the development Councils’ Arborists have also requested the inclusion of a condition requiring tree protection fencing around specific vegetation. This vegetation comprises of two Betula pedula (Silver Birch) on 21 Cloyne Street adjacent to the common property, Small trees and shrubs on 25 Cloyne Street adjacent to the common boundary and Acer negundo (Box Elder) on 22 Beaumaris Parade adjacent to the common boundary.

Council’s Street Tree Arborist has reviewed the submitted information and advised that the street tree, Melia Azedarach (White Cedar), within the road reserve should be retained and that the proposed crossover must to be setback 2.7 metres from the edge of the trees trunk. A condition is included in the recommendation requiring this change.

Page 110 of 141




Issues raised by the objectors that have not been addressed in the assessment above are addressed below:

Noise emission from air conditioning units

As a consequence of the Consultation Meeting the applicant amended the plans to relocate these air conditioning units to the east end of the ground floor and first floor of the rear elevation to mitigate the impact of the units on adjoining allotments.

Overdevelopment

The number of dwellings per se does not constitute overdevelopment of a site, rather it is the ability of the built form to relate to its surrounds and comply with the objectives of Clause 55. In this instance, it is considered that the proposal is appropriate from a neighbourhood character perspective and demonstrates a high level of compliance with Clause 55 and accordingly does not constitute overdevelopment.

CONCLUSION

The proposed development of two dwellings on the site is considered to achieve a high level of compliance with both Clause 22.06 ‘Neighbourhood Character Policy’ and Clause 55 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. As a consequence, it is recommended that the development be approved subject to conditions as set out in the recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council having caused notice of Planning Application No. 2014/468/1 to be given under Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and having considered all the matters required under Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 decides to Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit under the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme in respect of the land known and described as 23 Cloyne Street, Highett for the construction of two dwellings generally in accordance with the submitted plans in accordance with the application dated 23/06/2014, subject to the following conditions, including the specified conditions set out in the Council’s “Town Planning Standard Conditions” adopted by the Council on 28 November 2006:-

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

a) The proposed crossover to ‘house 1’ setback 2.7 metres from the trunk of the Melia Azedarach (White Cedar) within the road reserve.

b) The existing crossover to ‘house 2’ to be re-constructed in accordance with Condition 7 of this permit.

c) Visibility splays provided in accordance with Design Standard 1 of Clause 52.06-8.

d) A report prepared by a suitably qualified arborist detailing the tree protection zones to the two Betula pedula (Silver Birch) on 21 Cloyne Street adjacent to the common property, Small trees and shrubs on 25 Cloyne Street adjacent to the common boundary and Acer negundo (Box Elder) on 22 Beaumaris Parade adjacent to the common boundary.

Page 111 of 141



e) A schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours.

f) The provision of 6 cubic metres of storage space to each dwelling in accordance with Standard B30 of Clause 55.05-6 ‘Storage objective’.

g) An amended Landscape plan in accordance with Condition 9 of this permit.


3. All pipes, fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building on the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

4. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the building(s) without the written consent of the Responsible Authority.

5. The walls on the boundary of the adjoining properties shall be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

6. Before the occupation of the development starts, the areas set aside for the parking of vehicles and access lanes as shown on the endorsed plans must be:

a) Constructed;

b) Properly formed to such levels that they can be used in accordance with the plans;

c) Surfaced with an all-weather-seal coat;

d) Drained;

e) Line marked to indicate each car space and all access lanes;

f) Clearly marked to show the direction of traffic along access lanes and driveways;

To the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Car spaces, access lanes and driveways must be kept available for these purposes at all times.

7. Vehicular crossings must be constructed to the road to suit the proposed driveway(s) to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and any existing crossing or crossing opening must be removed and replaced with footpath, nature strip, and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. All disused or redundant vehicle crossings must be removed and the area reinstated to kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

9. Before the development starts, an amended 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 be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided.

The plan must show:

a) A survey of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed.

b) Buildings and trees including botanical names on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary.

c) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways.

d) 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.

Page 112 of 141



e) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site.

f) The Dwarf Yellow Gum (Eucalyptus leucoxylon ‘Euky Dwarf’) replaced with two trees capable of reaching a mature height of at least 8 metres.

g) Details of any relevant tree protection zones.

h) That sufficient soil volume is provided to allow proposed canopy tree plantings to reach their potential mature height and spread.

All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

The landscape plan must also indicate that an in-ground irrigation system is to be provided to all landscaped areas.

10. Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the Responsible Authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.








13. Before the development starts, a tree protection fence must be erected around the Melia Azedarach (White Cedar) in the road reserve to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. The fence must be constructed and secured so its positioning cannot be modified by site workers. The fencing is to encompass the entire road reserve under the drip line of each tree. The Tree Protection Zone is to be established and maintained in accordance with Australian Standards 4970 Protection of trees on development sites. During construction of the cross-over, tree protection fencing may be reduced to the edge of the Council approved cross-over to facilitate the construction of the cross-over.

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

Page 113 of 141



15. Any pruning that is required to be done to the canopy of any tree to be retained is to be done by a qualified arborist to Australian Standard – Pruning of Amenity Trees AS4373-1996. Any pruning of the root system of any tree to be retained is to be done by hand by a qualified arborist.

16. The existing street trees must not be removed or damaged to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

17. All existing vegetation shown on the endorsed plans to be retained must not be removed, destroyed, pruned or lopped without the written consent of the Responsible Authority, all tree pruning must be carried out by a qualified Arborist to AS 4373, Pruning of Amenity Trees.

18. The applicant must apply for the nominated legal point of discharge for the development where stormwater run-off must be collected and free drained to Council's drainage assets to Council standards.


20. Any subsurface water captured on the site must be treated in accordance with Council's Policy for "Discharge of pumped Subterranean Water Associated with Basement or Below Ground Structures". Any seepage/agricultural drainage water must be filtered to rain water clarity and must be pumped to the nearest Council Drain/Pit and not be discharged to the kerb and channel unless directed otherwise.

21. All on−site stormwater is to be collected from the hard surface areas and must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled onto adjoining properties. The on-site drainage system must prevent discharge from each driveway onto the footpath. Such a system may include either:

i. A trench grate (150mm minimum internal width) located within the property and/or

ii. Shaping the driveway so that water is collected in a grated pit on the property and/or

iii. Another Council approved equivalent.



Melbourne Water conditions (Nos. 24)

24. Pollution and sediment laden runoff shall not be discharged directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drains or waterways.

Permit Expiry

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



The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing:

Before the permit expires; or

Page 114 of 141





Permit Notes

Build over easement

Records indicate there is an easement running across the property with sewer assets and Melbourne Water drainage assets. There appears to be no structure of note to be built over the easement. Any proposals, building over or near this asset will require approval from the Responsible Authority as part of the Building Permit process.

Permits to be acquired

Construction of any fence/ wall/ letterbox structures may necessitate removal/ damage of some sections of footpath. If this is the case, a ‘Road Opening Permit’ must be obtained to facilitate such work. A ‘Road Opening/ Stormwater Tapping Permit’ is to be obtained from the Infrastructure Department prior to the commencement of the connection to the Council drain/ kerb/ channel.

Flood zone

Property is partly within an area designated as land liable to flooding. Floor levels and requirements can be obtained from Land Development Team, Melbourne Water.

Page 115 of 141



STANDARDS OF THE BAYSIDE PLANNING SCHEME

Two Or More Dwellings On A Lot And Residential Buildings


Comments

B1 Neighbourhood Character Design respects existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character. Development responds to features of the site and surrounding area.

Yes See report.

B2 Residential Policy Residential development is consistent with housing policies in the SPPF, LPPF including the MSS and local planning policies. Support medium densities in areas to take advantage of public transport and community infrastructure and services.

Yes It is considered that overall design and siting of the proposed development, pursuant to conditions, is responsive to these policies.

B3 Dwelling Diversity Encourages a range of dwelling sizes and types in developments of ten or more dwellings.

N/A N/A

B4 Infrastructure Provides appropriate utility services and infrastructure without overloading the capacity.

Yes

B5 Integration with the Street Integrate the layout of development with the street.

Yes The propose development has been appropriately orientated to integrate with the streetscape.

B6 Street Setback The setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site.

Yes See report.

B7 Building Height Building height should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes The proposed 7.452 metre maximum building height of the development is within the 8 metre mandatory building height.

B8 Site Coverage Site coverage should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

No Max: 50% Proposed: 50.01%

B9 Permeability Reduce the impact of stormwater run-off on the drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration.

Yes Min: 20% Proposed:41.96%

B10 Energy Efficiency Achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings. Ensure orientation and layout reduces fossil fuel energy use and makes appropriate use of daylight and solar energy.

Yes The proposed development has been designed in manner that will allow appropriate use of solar energy without detriment to adjoining allotments.

Page 116 of 141



B11 Open Space Integrate layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development.

N/A No public or communal open space proposed.

B12 Safety Layout to provide safety and security for residents and property.

Yes The proposed entrances to the dwelling’s entries will be suitably distinguished when viewing the development from the streetscape while all landscaping within the front setback has been suitably positioned to ensure that no unsafe spaces are created.

B13 Landscaping To provide appropriate landscaping To encourage: Development that respects the landscape character of the neighbourhood. Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance. The retention of mature vegetation on the site.

Yes A landscape plan forms a condition of the approval.

B14 Access Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient vehicle access to and from the development. Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood character.

Yes Each dwelling is provided with accessways appropriate within the context of the streetscape.

B15 Parking Location Provide resident and visitor vehicles with convenient parking. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments.

Yes See report.

Page 117 of 141



B17 Side and Rear Setbacks Ensure the height and setback respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

Yes North (side) Required: Ground 0-2 metres First 3.47 metres

Proposed: Ground 2.007 metres First 3.467 metres

West (rear) Required: Ground 0-3 metres First 4.47 metres

Proposed: Ground 5.047 metres First 6.3 metres

South (side) Required: Ground 0-2 metres First 3.47 metres

Proposed: Ground 2.007 metres

First 3.467 metres

B18 Walls on Boundaries Ensure the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

Yes No walls on boundaries proposed.

B19 Daylight to Existing Windows Allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows.

Yes The proposed development will allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows.

B20 North Facing Windows Allow adequate solar access to existing north-facing habitable room windows.

Yes The proposed development will allow adequate solar access into existing north-facing habitable room windows.

B21 Overshadowing Open Space Ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space.

Yes See report.

B22 Overlooking Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows.

Yes See report.

B23 Internal Views Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within the same development.

Yes See report.

Page 118 of 141



B24 Noise Impacts Protect residents from external noise and contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings.

Yes The proposed development has been designed in a manner that will appropriately contain noise generated from the two dwellings.

B25 Accessibility Consider people with limited mobility in the design of developments.

Yes The proposed dwellings will be accessible to people with limited mobility.

B26 Dwelling Entry Provide a sense of identity to each dwelling.

Yes The two dwellings feature varying finishes and articulation to distinguish one from the other and establish each with its own sense of identity.

B27 Daylight to New Windows Allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows.

Yes The proposed development has been design to allow adequate daylight into habitable room windows.

B28 Private Open Space Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate pos.

Yes Each dwelling has been provided with private open space in excess of 40 square metres and secluded private open space in excess of 25 square metres.

B29 Solar Access to Open Space Allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings/buildings.

Yes The secluded private open space to each dwelling is located to the north side allowing efficient access to sunlight.

B30 Storage Provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling.

No Condition Compliance No specific location for storage has been notated on the plans, however, a condition of approval will require the provision of such space in accordance with the standard.

B31 Design Detail Encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes The proposed design is a contemporary design compatible with emerging built form within the area in both its overall style and material finishes.

Page 119 of 141



B32 Front Fences Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

No Variation The proposed development features a 1.5 metre high front fence. The proposed fence is considered a suitable variation to the 1.2 metre high standard given that the brick pier and metal infill panel design allows views between Cloyne Street and the front setback and vice versa.

B33 Common Property Ensure car parking, access areas and other communal open space is practical, attractive and easily maintained. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.

Yes No common property is proposed

B34 Site Services Ensure site services and facilities can be installed and easily maintained and are accessible, adequate and attractive.

Yes The proposed development is in a location that will ensure site services and facilities can be installed and maintained.

Page 120 of 141



4.8

4 Beenak Avenue Brighton East Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit Application No: 2014/425/1 Ward: Central


File No: 2014/425/1

APPLICATION DETAILS

Land/Address: 4 Beenak Avenue, Brighton East

Application is for: Construction of two double storey dwellings

Melway Reference: 76/K1

Ward: Central Ward


Applicant's/Owner's Name: Urbis Pty Ltd

Date Received: 17 June 2014

Statutory Days Expiry: 28 March 2015

Zoning: Neighbourhood Residential Zone Schedule 3 (NRZ3)

Overlays: Design and Development Overlay Schedule 3 (DDO3)

Special Building Overlay (SBO)

Under what clause(s) is a permit required? Clause 32.09-5 (NRZ)

Clause 44.05-1 (SBO)


Current use and development: Single storey detached dwelling

Objections: Three (3)

PROPOSITION


PROPOSAL

It is proposed to construct two double storey dwellings on the site, consisting:

Dwelling 1

Dwelling 1 will contain four bedrooms, an open plan living/meals/kitchen area, rumpus room and study. A single garage and tandem car space are proposed. Secluded private open space is located to the north and south totalling 69.14m².

Dwelling 2

Dwelling 2 will contain three bedrooms and an open plan living/meals/kitchen area. A single garage and tandem car space are proposed in the same arrangement as for dwelling 1. Secluded private open space is located to the north and south totalling 84.79m². Additionally, a first floor balcony is proposed with an area of 12.1m².

Page 121 of 141




The site has a total area of 741 square metres and is irregularly shaped representing a battle-axe block. The site currently contains a single storey detached dwelling constructed of brick with a concrete tiled gabled roof.

The main site/locality characteristics are:

The adjoining property to the north at 2 Beenak Avenue contains a single storey detached dwelling constructed out of brick with a concrete tiled gabled roof.

The adjoining property to the east at 8 Beenak Avenue contains a single storey detached dwelling constructed out of brick with a skillion roof.

The adjoining property to the south at 1 Sara Avenue contains a single storey detached dwelling constructed out of brick with a skillion roof.

The adjoining property to the west at 10 Hughes Street contains a double storey detached dwelling clad in render with a skillion roof.

PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

Title and Covenants The applicant has submitted a copy of title for the site, issued by the titles office on 23 January 2015. The title is burdened by Registered Restrictive Covenant Number 2219800, dated 27 May 1949, which states that: (a) no shop laundry factory business establishment hoardings or erections for advertisements

almshouses or charitable institutions shall at any time be erected or suffered on the land hereby transferred nor shall the said land hereby transferred nor any building erected thereon be at any time used or suffered to be used as a shop laundry factory business establishment hoarding or erection for advertisements almshouses or charitable institutions.

(b) no sand soil or gravel shall be dug or removed from the said land hereby transferred except in the way of excavation for the foundations of any building to be erected thereon or for use in such building or in preparing or laying out gardens to be occupied therewith and no bricks tiles clay or cement shall at any time be manufactured or burnt upon the said land hereby transferred.

The proposal does not result in a breach of the restrictive covenant.

Background No previous planning applications have been determined for the site.

Page 122 of 141



PUBLIC NOTIFICATION



Placing a sign on site facing Beenak Avenue.

The notification has been carried out correctly and Council has received three objections to date. The key issues that were raised by objectors are:

Overlooking and finished floor level requirements due to presence of Special Building Overlay.

Inadequate side and rear setbacks.

Overall height of development above 8m.

Overdevelopment of the land given previous subdivision effectively means there will be 3 buildings on the original title of land.

Insufficient landscaping/replacement vegetation.

Incorrect plotting of tree locations.

Schedule of external materials not provided.

Noise/air pollution from car parking locations and plant equipment.

Failure to provide a variety in household sizes.

Inappropriate location for increased density.

Lack of articulation and visual bulk.

Various plan inaccuracies.

Not in keeping with the existing neighbourhood character.

Existing and future service locations not provided.

Insufficient parking.

Page 123 of 141



Locality Plan

Legend

Subject Site

Objector

CONSULTATION

The applicant declined an invitation to a consultation meeting as they preferred to contact objector’s individually.

Page 124 of 141



REFERRALS

External referrals required by the Planning Scheme:

External Referral Authority

Response

Melbourne Water No objection, subject to conditions.

The application plans were forwarded to the following Council departments:





Street Tree Arborist No objection, subject to conditions.

ASSESSMENT











Page 125 of 141



Clause 13 Environmental Risks - This clause seeks to adopt best practice environmental management and a risk management approach which aims to avoid or minimise environmental degradation and hazards and to identify and manage the potential for the environment and environmental changes and their impact on the economic, environmental or social well being of society. The objectives of this clause include the need to plan for and manage the potential coastal impacts of climate change and to protect areas prone to erosion, landslip or other land degradation processes and the need to assist the control of noise effects on sensitive land uses.











Clause 21.05 Environmental Risks – This provision seeks to protect the surface waters and ground waters in the Port Phillip catchment from stormwater pollutants and the impacts of peak stormwater flows by providing a drainage system that promotes the on-site retention and re-use of stormwater run-off regulating overland flow to prevent flooding and improves water quality, particularly in terms of run-off to the Bay.




Page 126 of 141




Zone


A planning permit is required pursuant to Clause 32.09-5 to construct two or more dwellings on a lot.

Pursuant to Clause 32.09-8, the maximum height of a building used for the purpose of a dwelling must not exceed 8m. Transitional provisions however apply to this clause and state that this maximum height limitation does not apply to any application made before the introduction of this clause. This is the case with this application and accordingly the 8m height limit does not apply.

Overlays


Pursuant to this clause a planning permit is not required to construct a building or to construct or carry out works for a residential building or dwelling.

Clause 44.05 Special Building Overlay – Aims to identify land in urban areas liable to inundation by overland flows from the urban drainage system as determined by, or in consultation with, the floodplain management authority.

A planning permit is required pursuant to Clause 44.05-1 to construct a building or to construct or carry out works.


The following particular provisions are relevant to the assessment of this application:


Clause 55 Two or more dwelling on a lot – Specifies objectives and standards for the construction of two or more dwellings on a lot within a Residential 1 Zone. Included within are requirements pertaining to the design response, neighbourhood character and infrastructure, site layout and building massing, on-site amenity and amenity impacts of the proposal.

Page 127 of 141



General Provisions



In considering this application, regard has been given to the State and Local Planning Policy Frameworks, the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme, objections received and the individual merits of the application.

Neighbourhood Character The site is located within Neighbourhood Character Precinct D4 pursuant to Clause 22.06 of the Bayside Planning Scheme. Clause 22.06 outlines the following preferred character statement for the precinct.

The wide variety of dwelling styles sit within established gardens, with occasional canopy trees, and do not dominate the streetscape. The buildings are consistently set back from the front and at least one side boundary, which, combined with the open style front fencing, creates a sense of spaciousness in the streetscape. Avenues of street trees assist in unifying streetscapes.

Precinct Guidelines


To maintain and enhance the garden settings of the dwellings and rhythm of front boundary setbacks.

Prepare a landscape plan to accompany all

applications for new dwellings that includes substantial

trees and shrubs.

Retain large trees wherever possible.

Buildings should be sited to allow space for the

planting of trees and shrubs.


Removal of large trees.

To maintain the rhythm of visual separation between buildings.

Buildings should be sited to create the appearance of

space between buildings and accommodate

substantial vegetation.

To minimise the dominance of car parking structures in the streetscape.

Locate garages and carports behind the line of the

dwelling.

Car parking structures that dominate the façade or view of the dwelling.

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

Recess second storey elements from the front façade.

Use simple building details.

To maintain the openness of the streetscape and the views into front gardens.

Front fences should be open style, other than along

heavily trafficked roads.

High, solid front fences.

The neighbourhood character statement advocates for the enhancement of the garden setting of dwellings by retaining large trees wherever possible and providing space around buildings for the planting of trees and shrubs.

An Arborist report was submitted with the application which indicated that only one tree on the site was of significance being an Illawarra flame tree located within the front setback. It is proposed to

Page 128 of 141



retain this tree. Council’s arborist has advised that they agree that this tree is the only tree worthy of retention on the site.

Council’s Arborist has advised that a minimum of two canopy trees capable of reaching a mature height of 8m are required to be provided as part of this landscaping plan. This is included as part of the recommended landscaping condition of permit.

A landscape plan has not been submitted but there is considered to be sufficient space within the private and common open areas for the provision of appropriate landscaping. To better ensure that a sufficient landscape buffer is provided to the southern rear of the site, a condition of permit is recommended reducing the length of the tandem car spaces to 5.4m in accordance with Design Standard 1 of Clause 52.06-8 and providing additional landscaping (approximately 800mm) between this car space and the rear boundary.

The neighbourhood character statement also advocates for consistent front setbacks and from at least one side boundary to maintain the rhythm of visual separation between buildings.

Due to the irregular boundaries of the property, the street setback is unaffected being approximately 21m. Additionally the proposal is setback from the eastern boundary (the visible side boundary) by 1.5m to provide additional spacing. Whilst 1.5m does not comply with Standard B17 of ResCode it is considered acceptable and maintains the existing rhythm of visual separation between buildings.

The neighbourhood character statement also advocates for new buildings and car parking structures to not dominate the streetscape with an openness of front gardens sought via avoiding high solid front fences.

The car parking facilitates associated with the proposal will have limited visibility from the street due to the angled nature of the accessway and the presence of an existing high solid front fence. The front fence is existing, covered in a climbing plant and not proposed to be altered in this development.

An indicative schedule of external materials has been provided which are considered to be consistent with the Precinct D4 guidelines and the character of the existing area. A full colour schedule will be required as a condition of permit.

It is considered that the proposed development is appropriately articulated, whilst compliance or near compliance with Standard B17 of ResCode will reduce any visual bulk concerns.

Setbacks

Front setback

The street setback is well in excess of surrounding properties. The adjoining property to the east (8 Beenak Avenue) has a street setback of 7.5m and the adjoining property to the west (2 Beenak Avenue) has a street setback of 11.5m. Accordingly a street setback of 9m is required. The application proposes a front setback of approximately 21m which complies with Standard B6 of Clause 55.03-1.

Side and rear setbacks


Ground floor First floor


East (side) 0m or 2m 1.5m 3.44m – 3.56m 3.5m or 4.28m

West (side) 0m or 2m 0m 3.32m – 3.56m 3.5m

South (rear) 0m or 3m 3.5m or 4m 4.42m – 4.44m 3.5m

Page 129 of 141



Areas of non-compliance are underlined.

At ground floor level the setback proposed is non-compliant by 0.5m. This is considered acceptable for three primary reasons. Firstly, due to the front setback and the ability to provide extensive landscaping within a minimum 2.8m landscape bed, from a streetscape perspective the non-compliance will be largely unnoticeable. Secondly it is apparent that dwelling side setbacks within the immediate area are generally not large and thus it is considered the setback proposed is in keeping with the neighbourhood character. Thirdly, the existing dwelling is setback from the eastern boundary by 1m for a length of 10m (albeit in a slightly different location) and thus it is considered the impact on this adjoining property will not be material.

At first floor level, the non-compliances to the east and west are a maximum of 60mm due to the fall of the land. This is considered minor in nature and able to be supported.

The rear setback, however, is non-compliant by approximately 900mm which is considered inappropriate. The permit applicant has advised that they are accepting of a condition requiring this rear setback at first floor level to be brought into compliance and this has been included as a condition in the recommendation.

Height

The proposed development has a height of 8.4m, which the requirements of Melbourne Water will see increased to 8.7m.

The application was submitted prior to the application of the Neighbourhood Residential Zone and thus is not bound by the 8m height limit. Revised plans have subsequently been provided to Council in response to a further information request. These plans were not accompanied by a declaration to amend form given they were in response to a further information request under Section 54 of the Act. These plans were accompanied by a revised application form which changed the contact person and the owner of the land. The nature of the proposal has remained unchanged from its initial lodgement. These changes to the application form do not constitute an amendment to the application under Section 50 of the Act. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal still benefits from the transitional provisions under Clause 32.09-8.

A maximum height of 8.7m will be in accordance with Standard B7 of Clause 55.03-2 and accordingly is considered acceptable as the proposal therefore complies with the objective to this clause. There also exist two storey buildings in this street of similar height, meaning the development will not be out of place.

Site coverage and permeability

Site coverage is proposed at 32.68%, which accords with Standard B8 of Clause 55.03-3. Site permeability is proposed at 49.72% which accords with Standard B9 of Clause 55.03-4.

Overlooking

At ground floor level, boundary fencing of a minimum 1.9m in height is provided which will prevent overlooking, however Melbourne Water require the dwelling floor levels to be increased in height to account for future flooding. This in turn will require fence heights to be increased. Conditions are included in the recommendation to this affect.

At first floor level all habitable room windows, plus the balcony for dwelling 2 are provided with fixed obscure glass to a height of 1.7m above finished floor level. Accordingly, the first floor of the proposal complies with Standard B22 of Clause 55.04-6.

Page 130 of 141



Overshadowing

The shadow diagrams submitted indicate that there will be some minor additional overshadowing of adjacent properties during the day, however the proposal complies with Standard B21 of Clause 55.04-5.


Each dwelling is provided with an enclosed single garage (3.5m x 6m) plus a tandem car space (2.6m x 4.9m) to the rear of each garage. Whilst the arrangement of these car spaces is the reverse of the normal arrangement it is considered acceptable. The proposal complies with Clause 52.06 including the relevant design standards, subject to the inclusion of visibility splays as a recommended condition of permit.


As detailed previously, Council’s Arborist has not objected to the extent of vegetation removal proposed on the site. Council’s Arborist has recommended conditions be included in the recommendation relating to the protection of trees on adjoining sites where the tree protection zone extends in to the subject site. These conditions are included in the recommendation.

Special Building Overlay

Melbourne Water has been referred the application under Section 55 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and raised no objection subject to the inclusion of conditions. These conditions will see the overall height of the dwelling raised by approximately 300mm, which will have implications with regard to the potential for overlooking at ground floor level and also compliance with the side and rear setback requirements of Standard B17.

As the Melbourne Water requirements are mandatory requirements, it is proposed to include conditions on permit requiring all first floor setbacks to comply with Standard B17 of ResCode and appropriate screening to be provided at ground floor level to prevent overlooking.


Issues raised by objectors that have not been addressed in the assessment above, are discussed below.

Overdevelopment of the land given previous subdivision effectively means there will be 3 buildings on the original title of land.

The number of dwellings per se does not constitute overdevelopment of a site, rather it is the ability of the built form to relate to its surrounds and comply with the objectives of Clause 55. In this instance, it is considered that the proposal is appropriate from a neighbourhood character perspective and demonstrates a high level of compliance with Clause 55 and accordingly does not constitute overdevelopment.

Incorrect plotting of tree locations.

The street address of one of the trees of concern is incorrectly labelled within the applicant’s Arborist report, though the actual location of the tree is correctly nominated. This is considered of no material consequence. There is a lemon tree shown between the title boundary and the current fence location separating the site and 2 Beenak Avenue as per the re-establishment survey provided. To ensure the ongoing retention of this tree it is a recommended condition that the proposed porch be deleted and a cantilevered porch instead be provided over the dwelling entrance.

Page 131 of 141



Noise/air pollution from car parking locations and plant equipment.

Noise and air pollution are governed by EPA Regulations. In terms of the car parking locations, it is considered there will be no significant noise impacts, whilst all plant equipment locations will be required to be shown on plan as a condition of permit to limit the impact of noise from this equipment to adjoining neighbours.

Failure to provide a variety in household sizes.

Whilst local planning policy outlines a need for a greater diversity in housing and a trend towards smaller housing sizes, there is no provision requiring new development to only provide a certain number of bedrooms. Clause 55 requires diversity in dwellings to be provided only in developments of 10 or more dwellings.

Inappropriate location for increased density.

The site is located within a minimal residential growth area as per Clause 21.02. The proposal is considered to represent minimal growth and is in line with the purpose to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone regarding limiting housing opportunities.

Various plan inaccuracies.

The plan inaccuracies listed include that the plans do not scale, lack of appropriate dimensions and incorrect property address listing. The plans are to scale and sufficient dimensions are shown to provide an informed decision. The incorrect property address listing is considered immaterial to the consideration of the application.

CONCLUSION

It is considered that the proposed development is generally acceptable and will not impact adversely on the prevailing neighbourhood character or the general amenity of the area subject to the amendments as outlined above. On this basis it is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council having caused notice of Planning Application No. 2014/425/1 to be given under Section 52 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 and having considered all the matters required under Section 60 of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 decides to Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a Permit under the provisions of the Bayside Planning Scheme in respect of the land known and described as 4 Beenak Avenue, Brighton East, for the Construction of two double storey dwellings in accordance with the endorsed plans and subject to the following conditions:-

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

a) The tandem car spaces provided reduced in length to 5.4m measured from the southern end of the garages. The remaining area between these tandem car spaces and the southern boundary is to be landscaped.

b) Compliance with Standard B17 of ResCode in relation to all first floor side and rear setbacks.

Page 132 of 141



c) Visibility splays provided in accordance with Design Standard 1 of Clause 52.06-8.

d) The location of all plant equipment.

e) The proposed porch provided for Dwelling 2 deleted and replaced with a cantilevered porch over the entrance.

f) A schedule of external materials and finishes in accordance with Condition 3 of this planning permit.

g) A Tree Protection Plan (drawing) and Tree Management Plan (report) in accordance with Condition 8 of this planning permit.

h) A landscape plan in accordance with Condition 9 of this planning permit

i) Compliance with Melbourne Water Conditions 22-26 (inclusive) of this planning permit.

2. The development as shown on the endorsed plans must not be altered without the written consent of the responsible authority.

3. Before the development starts, a schedule of construction materials, external finishes and colours (incorporating paint samples) to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be submitted to and approved by the responsible authority. When approved, the schedule will be endorsed and will then form part of the permit.

4. Before the occupation of the site commences or by such later date as is approved in writing by the responsible authority, all buildings and works and the conditions of this permit must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

5. All pipes, fixtures, fittings and vents servicing the dwellings must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from view to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

6. No plant, equipment, services or architectural features other than those shown on the endorsed plans are permitted above the roof level of the dwellings without the written consent of the responsible authority.

7. The walls on the boundary of the adjoining properties shall be cleaned and finished to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

8. Before the development begins (including demolition), the applicant is to provide a Tree Protection Plan (drawing) and Tree Management Plan (report) for trees to be retained on the site and on neighbouring properties which have Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) that project into the subject site. This is to ensure that trees to be retained remain viable post-construction. The following information is to be provided:

a) The Tree Protection Plan must be drawn to scale and provide details of the TPZ for

trees to be retained on the site and neighbouring properties. b) Where encroachment of the TPZ is greater than 10% the structural root zone (SRZ)

must also be shown on the Tree Protection Plan. c) The location of tree protection fencing must be specified on the Tree Protection Plan. d) There must be a notation on the Tree Protection Plan referencing the Tree

Management Plan document. e) The Tree Management Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced

arborist in accordance with AS 4970-2009 Protection of Trees on Development Sites. This document must provide details of the activities required during the development process to protect trees to be retained on the site and neighbouring properties. The applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority trees that to be retained will remain viable post-construction.

Page 133 of 141



9. Before the development starts, 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 be drawn to scale with dimensions and three copies must be provided. The landscaping plan must show:

a) A survey (including botanical names) of all existing vegetation to be retained and/or removed

b) Buildings and trees (including botanical names) on neighbouring properties within three metres of the boundary

c) Details of surface finishes of pathways and driveways

d) Details of water sensitive urban design elements to be incorporated and the plant species to be used

e) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers, including botanical names, common names, pot sizes, sizes at maturity, and quantities of each plant. All species selected must be to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

f) Landscaping and planting within all open areas of the site

g) An in-ground irrigation system to all landscaped areas.

h) A minimum two canopy trees capable of reaching a minimum mature height of 8m.

10. Before the occupation of the development starts or by such later date as is approved by the responsible authority in writing, the landscaping works shown on the endorsed plans must be carried out and completed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority.

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

12. Tree Protection Fencing is to be established around the street tree prior to demolition and maintained until all works on site are complete. The fencing is to be constructed and secured so its positioning cannot be modified by site workers. The fencing is to encompass the entire nature strip under the drip line of the tree. The Tree Protection Zone is to be established and maintained in accordance with Australian Standards 4970 Protection of trees on development sites. During construction of the crossover, tree protection fencing may be reduced to the edge of the council approved crossover to facilitate the construction of the crossover.

13. Prior to soil excavation, a trench along the line of the proposed crossover must be dug by hand. All affected roots must be correctly pruned according to AS 4373-2007.

14. Vehicular crossing/s must be constructed to the road to suit the proposed driveway/s to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority and any existing crossing or crossing opening must be removed and replaced with footpath, nature strip, and kerb and channel to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.



Page 134 of 141







16. The applicant must apply for the nominated legal point of discharge for the development where stormwater run-off must be collected and free drained to Council’s drainage assets to Council standards.


18. Any subsurface water captured on the site must be treated in accordance with Council’s Policy for “Discharge of Pumped Subterranean Water Associated with Basement or Below Ground Structures” Any seepage / agricultural drainage water must be filtered to rain water clarity and must be pumped to the nearest Council Drain /Pit and not be discharged to the kerb and channel unless directed otherwise.

19. All on-site stormwater is to be collected from the hard surface areas and must not be allowed to flow uncontrolled onto adjoining properties. The on-site drainage system must prevent discharge from each driveway onto the footpath. Such a system may include either: a trench grate (150mm minimum internal width) located within the property and/or shaping the driveway so that water is collected in a grated pit on the property and/or another Council approved equivalent.



Melbourne Water Conditions (Nos. 22 – 33)

22. The dwellings must be constructed with finished floor levels a minimum of 300mm above the applicable flood level which is a minimum of 20.60 metres to Australian Height Datum (AHD).

23. The garages must be constructed with finished surface levels a minimum of 150mm above the applicable flood level which is a minimum of 20.45 metres to AHD.

24. Melbourne Water requires a setback from the northern property to be a minimum of 19.19 metres.

25. No fill is permitted outside the proposed dwelling envelope with the exception of minimal ramping required for vehicles to enter the proposed garage.

Page 135 of 141



26. Any new fence must be constructed of open style with a minimum of 50% of openings.

27. Prior to Council endorsement, the proposed development plan must be submitted to Melbourne Water that show Melbourne Water’s freeboard requirement have been met.

28. Prior to the commencement of works a separate application, direct to Melbourne Water, must be made for any new or modified storm water connection to Melbourne Water’s drains or watercourses. Prior to accepting an application, evidence must be provided demonstrating that Council considers that it is not feasible to connect to the local drainage system.

Contact Asset Services on telephone 9679 6614 for Melbourne Water’s connection requirements, including payment of appropriate fees.

29. A legal Buildover Agreement for structures/works over Melbourne Water’s asset must be entered into with Melbourne Water. Please contact Asset Services on 9679 6614.

30. Landscaping plans affecting the drainage easement/drain must be submitted to Melbourne Water for approval.

31. Prior to a Building Permit being issued, a separate Buildover Application must be made directly to Melbourne Water for detailed terms and conditions. Design plans must be submitted to include the following:

a) Driveway type, thickness etc.

b) Method of works.

c) Fencing/Landscaping.

d) Any other structures/works that re within easement or affecting the drain.

Please note, fees and bonds will be applicable for asset protection works.

32. Prior to the issue of an Occupancy Permit, a certified survey plan showing finished floor levels (as constructed) reduced to the Australian Height Datum must be submitted to Melbourne Water. The Plan must demonstrate that the floor levels have been constructed in accordance with Melbourne Water’s requirements.

33. Pollution and sediment laden runoff shall not be discharged directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water’s drains or waterways.




The Responsible Authority may extend the periods referred to above if a request is made in writing:

Before the permit expires; or



Permit Notes Build over easement

Records indicate there is an easement running across the property with sewer assets and Melbourne Water drainage assets. There appears to be no structure of note to be built over the

Page 136 of 141



easement. Any proposals, building over or near this asset will require approval from the Responsible Authority as part of the Building Permit process.

Permits to be acquired

Construction of any fence/ wall/ letterbox structures may necessitate removal/ damage of some sections of footpath. If this is the case, a ‘Road Opening Permit’ must be obtained to facilitate such work. A ‘Road Opening/ Stormwater Tapping Permit’ is to be obtained from the Infrastructure Department prior to the commencement of the connection to the Council drain/ kerb/ channel.

Flood zone

Property is partly within an area designated as land liable to flooding. Floor levels and requirements can be obtained from Land Development Team, Melbourne Water.

Melbourne Water

The applicable flood level for this property that has a probability of occurrence of 1% in any one year is 20.30 metres to Australian Height Datum (AHD).

If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water’s conditions shown above, please contact the Land Development on 9679 7517 quoting Melbourne Water’s Reference 76593.

For the purpose of the Building Code of Australia – Building in Flood Hazard Areas, Melbourne Water has determined that during a flood event that has a probability of occurrence of 1% in any one year, the maximum flow rate of flood water (velocity) will be below 1.5 metres per second.

Please note that flooding may be associated with the Melbourne Water regional drainage system and/or the local Council drainage systems. Melbourne Water does not have any information in relation to flow velocities associated with the local Council drainage system.

Page 137 of 141



STANDARDS OF THE BAYSIDE PLANNING SCHEME

Two or more dwellings on a lot and residential buildings (Clause 55 and Schedule 3 to the Neighbourhood Residential Zone)


Comments

B1 Neighbourhood Character Design respects existing neighbourhood character or contributes to a preferred neighbourhood character. Development responds to features of the site and surrounding area.

Yes See report.

B2 Residential Policy Residential development is consistent with housing policies in the SPPF, LPPF including the MSS and local planning policies. Support medium densities in areas to take advantage of public transport and community infrastructure and services.

Yes The subject site is appropriately located with regard to services and facilities to support a two dwelling development.

B3 Dwelling Diversity Encourages a range of dwelling sizes and types in developments of ten or more dwellings.

N/A N/A

B4 Infrastructure Provides appropriate utility services and infrastructure without overloading the capacity.

Yes Any upgrades required will be the responsibility of the developer.

B5 Integration with the Street Integrate the layout of development with the street.

Yes The dwellings appropriately address the street and entries are clearly identifiable.

B6 Street Setback The setbacks of buildings from a street respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and make efficient use of the site.

Yes

Required: 9m Proposed: 21m

B7 Building Height Building height should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes

Required: 9m Proposed:8.7m

B8 Site Coverage Site coverage should respect the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and respond to the features of the site.

Yes Required: <50% Proposed: 32.68%

Page 138 of 141



B9 Permeability Reduce the impact of stormwater run-off on the drainage system and facilitate on-site stormwater infiltration.

Yes Required: >20% Proposed: 49.72%

B10 Energy Efficiency Achieve and protect energy efficient dwellings and residential buildings. Ensure orientation and layout reduces fossil fuel energy use and makes appropriate use of daylight and solar energy.

Yes Both dwellings receive good northern solar access to their main living areas and areas of private open space.

B11 Open Space Integrate layout of development with any public and communal open space provided in or adjacent to the development.

N/A N/A

B12 Safety Layout to provide safety and security for residents and property.

Yes No issues of safety will arise as a result of the development.

B13 Landscaping To provide appropriate landscaping To encourage: Development that respects the landscape character of the neighbourhood. Development that maintains and enhances habitat for plants and animals in locations of habitat importance. The retention of mature vegetation on the site.

Yes

Sufficient room for planting is provided. A recommended condition of permit requires the submission of an amended landscape plant to provide further landscaping opportunities.

B14 Access Ensure the safe, manageable and convenient vehicle access to and from the development. Ensure the number and design of vehicle crossovers respects neighbourhood character.

Yes Suitable access is provided to the subject site.

B15 Parking Location Provide resident and visitor vehicles with convenient parking. Avoid parking and traffic difficulties in the development and the neighbourhood. Protect residents from vehicular noise within developments.

Yes No habitable rooms abut the accessways. All car parking facilities are conveniently located.

Page 139 of 141



B17 Side and Rear Setbacks Ensure the height and setback respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impact on existing dwellings.

Yes See report.

Ground floor First floor


East (side) 0m or 2m 1.5m 3.44m – 3.56m 3.5m or 4.28m

West (side) 0m or 2m 0m 3.32m – 3.56m 3.5m

South (rear) 0m or 3m 3.5m or 4m 4.42m – 4.44m 3.5m

B18 Walls on Boundaries Ensure the location, length and height of a wall on a boundary respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character and limits the amenity impacts on existing dwellings.

Yes

Each wall on boundary does not exceed an average height of 3.2m and is less than 10m in length plus 25% of the remaining boundary length.

B19 Daylight to Existing Windows Allow adequate daylight into existing habitable room windows.

Yes The proposal is well setback from property boundaries to ensure daylight to existing windows is maintained.

B20 North Facing Windows Allow adequate solar access to existing north-facing habitable room windows.

Yes The proposal is well setback from property boundaries to ensure daylight to north facing windows is maintained.

B21 Overshadowing Open Space Ensure buildings do not significantly overshadow existing secluded private open space.

Yes See report.

B22 Overlooking Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows.

Yes

See report.

B23 Internal Views Limit views into existing secluded private open space and habitable room windows of dwellings and residential buildings within the same development.

Yes See report.

B24 Noise Impacts Protect residents from external noise and contain noise sources in developments that may affect existing dwellings.

Yes The development will not generate any noise other than that typically expected from a residential building.

Page 140 of 141



B25 Accessibility Consider people with limited mobility in the design of developments.

Yes

The entries are accessible and the ground floors of each dwelling comprise living areas, with Dwelling 1 also containing a bedroom and ensuite.

B26 Dwelling Entry Provide a sense of identity to each dwelling.

Yes The porches sit forward of the dwellings and provide a sense of address and identity.

B27 Daylight to New Windows Allow adequate daylight into new habitable room windows.

Yes All habitable windows have direct access to daylight.

B28 Private Open Space Provide reasonable recreation and service needs of residents by adequate pos.

Yes

Required: 40m²

Proposed: 69.14m² - 84.79m²

B29 Solar Access to Open Space Allow solar access into the secluded private open space of new dwellings/buildings.

Yes The open space for each dwelling has been designed/ laid out to comply with this standard.

B30 Storage Provide adequate storage facilities for each dwelling.

Yes Formal space is located in either in the garage or under the staircase of each dwelling.

B31 Design Detail Encourage design detail that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes See report.

B32 Front Fences Encourage front fence design that respects the existing or preferred neighbourhood character.

Yes See report.

B33 Common Property Ensure car parking, access areas and other communal open space is practical, attractive and easily maintained. Avoid future management difficulties in common ownership areas.

Yes The likely future common property areas will be able to be easily maintained.

B34 Site Services Ensure site services and facilities can be installed and easily maintained and are accessible, adequate and attractive.

Yes Plans show clotheslines, mailboxes and storage areas.

Page 141 of 141

Date post:	12-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

Planning & Amenity Committee Agenda - bayside.vic.gov.au · Planning & Amenity Committee Agenda...

Documents