UPC2 50 Stawell Street, Kew - boroondara.vic.gov.au · The application is for partial demolition...

Urban Planning Special Committee Agenda 20/03/17

UPC2 50 Stawell Street, Kew Application no.: PP16/00127 (File 40/409/02280) Responsible director John Luppino

City Planning Authorised by: Simon Mitchell

Manager Statutory Planning Report officer: Lachlan McGowan -

Senior Planner Statutory Planning

Abstract Proposal The application is for partial demolition and construction of an extension to an existing single dwelling. The buildings and works primarily consist of the removal of an existing deck on the north-western side of the dwelling and construction of a new deck that will maintain the existing height of the dwelling but will be located closer to the north-western boundary. Notably, the subject site backs onto Yarra Boulevard to the north-west, although a vegetated cliff of between 10-15m in height separates the subject site from the road. The Yarra River is a minimum of approximately 55m to the north-west of the subject site. The site is affected by the Heritage Overlay, Significant Landscape Overlay and Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 31) which relates to protection of the Yarra River corridor. ResCode is not applicable as the dwelling is on a lot greater than 500 square metres. Issues The following are key issues in respect of this application:

The impact on the Yarra River corridor and landscaped character of the area. The impact on the heritage significance of the existing dwelling and surrounding

heritage precinct. Thirteen (13) objections, with particular concern regarding the impact of the

development on access over the easement along the north-western boundary of the site.

Officer's response The proposal is considered to be respectful of the Yarra River corridor and landscaped character of the area. The site is setback a minimum of approximately 55m from the river where its impact on the river environs will be limited. The proposed works are relatively minor in scale and will maintain the height of the existing dwelling, which is lower than the surrounding tree canopy and will ensure the area continues to be read as a vegetation dominated corridor. Further to this, new planting is proposed between the deck and the north-western boundary that will filter views to the extension from Yarra Boulevard and contribute to the landscaped character of the area. Subject to the recommended permit conditions, this planting will be indigenous to the area. It is also noted that external colours and finishes will be dark non-reflective colours that will blend into the natural landscape.

City of Boroondara 50 Stawell Street Page 1 of 76


The proposed buildings and works are also considered to be respectful of the heritage significance of the existing dwelling and the surrounding heritage precinct, which is significant for its concentration of Modernist dwellings and landscaped character. The flat roof forms of the deck will be respectful of the existing dwelling on the site and the Modernist dwellings in the surrounding area, while the proposal is considered to be an appropriate response to the landscaped character as described above. In relation to objector concern regarding access to the easement along the northern boundary of the site, it is noted that this is a drainage easement located on private property. There is no legal right of access for the public or any other property owner over this land.

Officers' recommendation That the Urban Planning Special Committee resolve that a Notice of Decision to Grant Planning Permit No. PP16/00127 for the partial demolition and construction of buildings and works in association with an existing dwelling in a Significant Landscape Overlay (Schedule 1), Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 31) and Heritage Overlay, and variation of a restriction on Lot 2 on CS1068 at 50 Stawell Street, Kew, be issued under the Boroondara Planning Scheme subject to the following conditions: Amended plans required 1. Before the development starts, amended plans to the satisfaction of the

Responsible Authority must be submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plans must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies provided. When the plans are endorsed they will then form part of the permit. The plans must be substantially in accordance with the plans advertised in October 2016 but modified to show:

(a) A development plan consistent with the one referred to in Schedule No. 1

part 1(b) on Cluster Plan CS1068 but modified so that the building envelope includes the buildings and works allowed by this permit. This plan must be prepared by a Licensed Surveyor; and

(b) A Landscape Plan in accordance with Condition 4 of this permit; Variation of restriction 2. This permit has no force or effect until such time as:

(a) The modified development plan required by Condition 1(a) has been

certified under the Subdivision Act 1988; and (b) The certified plan has been registered on title at Land Registry.

Layout not to be altered 3. The layout of the site and the size, levels, design and location of buildings and

works shown on the endorsed plans must not be modified for any reason (unless the Boroondara Planning Scheme specifies that a permit is not required) without the prior written consent of the Responsible Authority.

Landscape plan 4. A landscape plan to the satisfaction of the responsible authority must be

submitted to and approved by the Responsible Authority. The plan must be drawn to scale with dimensions and three (3) copies provided. When endorsed, the plan will form part of the permit.



The landscape plan must be generally in accordance with the landscape concept plan dated 11 August 2016 and advertised in October 2016 except that the plan must show:

(a) The four Eucalyptus mannifera ‘Little Spotty’ trees identified on the plan as

‘Em’ replaced with indigenous species; and (b) A planting schedule of all proposed trees, shrubs and ground covers

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

Completion of landscaping works 5. Landscaping as shown on the endorsed landscape plan/s must be carried out

and completed to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority prior to the occupation of the development.

Landscaping maintenance 6. All landscaping works shown on the endorsed landscape plan/s must be

maintained and any dead, diseased or damaged plants replaced, all to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Drainage 7. The site must be drained to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Sediment laden run-off 8. No polluted and/or sediment laden runoff is to be discharged directly or

indirectly into Council's drains or watercourses during and after development, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Melbourne Water condition/s 9. Pollution and sediment laden runoff shall not be discharged directly or indirectly

into Melbourne Water's drains or waterways. External lighting 10. All external lighting must be designed, baffled and located so as to prevent light

from the site causing any unreasonable impacts on the locality, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Concealment of pipes 11. All pipes (except down-pipes), fixtures, fittings and vents servicing any building

on the site must be concealed in service ducts or otherwise hidden from external view, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority.

Permit to expire: 12. This permit will expire if:

(a) The development does not start within two (2) years of the issue date of this permit; or

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

(c) The variation of the restriction is not certified within two (2) years of the issue date of this permit; or

(d) The variation of the restriction is not registered within five (5) years of the date of certification.



The Responsible Authority may extend the times referred to if a request is made in writing before the permit expires or:

(i) within six (6) months afterwards if the development has not

commenced; or (ii) within twelve (12) months afterwards if the development has not been

completed.

Council and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal are unable to approve requests outside of the relevant time frame.

Notes: Headings are for ease of reference only and do not affect the interpretation of permit conditions. This is not a Building Permit. A Building Permit may be required prior to the commencement of any works associated with the proposed development. Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, the owner/developer must submit drainage plans for assessment and approval by the Responsible Authority (Asset Management). Stormwater drains are to be connected to a legal point of discharge approved by Council. Drainage Connections within a road reserve, right-of-way, parkland, within an easement or to a Health Act drain must be to Council’s standards. A Council Supervision Permit is required for this work. All fees and charges associated with the connection are to be borne by the applicant. Plant, equipment or services (other than those shown on the endorsed plans) that are visible from a street or a public park may require further planning permission. This includes air-conditioners, solar panels, water tank and the like. An Asset Protection Permit is required prior to the commencement of site works in accordance with Council’s Protection of Council Assets and Control of Building Sites Local Law 2011. Prior consent from Council and any and all public authorities is required to be obtained for alteration or reinstatement of assets or services affected as a result of the development. The full cost of reinstatement of any Council assets damaged as a result of demolition, building or construction works, must be met by the permit applicant or any other person responsible for such damage, to the satisfaction of the Responsible Authority. Discharge to the legal point of discharge will be allowed subject to the flow being limited to a rate equivalent to pre-development levels or less. Any additional discharge and / or runoff above the pre-development level is to be detained on site, via an approved storm water detention system. This matter should be discussed with Council’s Asset Management Department.



The permit application was not assessed against the provisions of Clause 54 - One Dwelling on a Lot (ResCode) of the Boroondara Planning Scheme. It is the responsibility of the applicant/owner to appoint a Registered Building Surveyor to determine compliance pursuant to the Building Regulations. Non-compliance with ResCode provisions will require dispensation from Council’s Building Services Department. An application for certification drawn by a Licensed Surveyor must be lodged with Council for approval. Works over easement Prior to the issue of a building permit, the owner must obtain the consents of all relevant authorities for any buildings or works, including any paving, fences and landscaping, over any easement or underground services under the control of a public authority including sewers, drains, pipes, wires or cables. The owner must accept all reinstatement costs in carrying out repairs to any buildings, works or landscaping over the easements should such buildings, works or landscaping be disturbed by any works undertaken by Council in the future. Discovery of Aboriginal cultural heritage Pursuant to Sections 24 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 if an unregistered Aboriginal place or object is discovered in the course of works being carried out the person in charge of the works is required to report the discovery to the Secretary of the Office of Aboriginal Affairs Victoria (OAAV) as soon as practicable. It is an offence to knowingly harm Aboriginal cultural heritage unless permitted by Section 29 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 2006 and penalties apply. Melbourne Water If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water's permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on 9679 7517, quoting Melbourne Water's reference 287876.


Page 1 of 42

STATUTORY PLANNING OFFICERS REPORT Urban Planning Committee

Application Number PP16/00127Date Application Received 15/02/2016Planning Officer Lachlan McGowan

Applicant Architects Eat Owner AP Moulton, DQ Holt

Property Address 50 Stawell Street, Kew Proposal Partial demolition and construction of

buildings and works in association with an existing dwelling in a Significant Landscape Overlay (Schedule 1), Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 31) and Heritage Overlay, and variation of a restriction on Lot 2 on CS1068.

Ward Studley

Zoning General Residential Zone (Schedule 1) Overlays Heritage Overlay (Schedule 530)

Significant Landscape Overlay (Schedule 1)Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 31)

Drainage Area of Interest? No Heritage Significance Contributory

Advertised? Yes Number of Objections Received 13 (1 letter of support) Recommendation Issue a Notice of Decision to Grant a

Planning Permit subject to conditions

PLANS ASSESSED IN THIS REPORT Plans advertised in October 2016 and the amended ground floor and roof plans received 2 March 2017.

Urban Planning Special Committee Agenda 20/03/17______________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________City of Boroondara 50 Stawell Street Page 6 of 76

Page 2 of 42

PROPOSAL

Appendix A - Plans

An application has been made to Council for the partial demolition and construction of buildings and works in association with an existing dwelling in a Significant Landscape Overlay (Schedule 1), Design and Development Overlay (Schedule 31) and Heritage Overlay, and variation of a restriction on Lot 2 on CS1068.

Details of the proposal are summarised as follows:-

Buildings and works

Replacement of an existing deck on the north-western side of the existing dwelling with a new larger deck to the same finished floor level.

The existing deck is setback around 2m from the north-western boundary and generally runs parallel to the boundary. The proposed deck will extend to the boundary, although with a staggered alignment so that only the corners of the deck extend to the boundary.

Construction of a small (5.1m x 1.79m) pool within the proposed deck. Minor increase in the size of the dining room and study (total floor area increase:

9.9m2). New glazing installed throughout. Extension of the existing ‘basement’ level beneath the northern end of the proposed

deck.

Figure 1: 3D drawing of the proposed deck (provided by permit applicant)

Proposed pool

Extension to ‘basement’ level

Proposed deck



Page 3 of 42

Restriction variation

The certificate of title is burdened by a restriction that limits building to within a specified envelope (amongst other things). It is proposed to vary the restriction to allow the construction of the proposed deck, which would otherwise be partially located outside of the building envelope. This matter is discussed in detail later in the report.

THE SITE

Appendix B - Locality Plan

Site Location The subject site is located on the northern side of Stawell Street, although there is no street frontage and access is via a common driveway.

The subject site also backs onto Yarra Boulevard to the north-west, although a 10-15m high vegetated cliff separates the subject site from the road (refer to Figures 4 and 5 below). The Yarra River is approximately 55m to the north-west.

Width of Frontage 12.11m (width of the common driveway along the Stawell Street frontage)

Total Site Area 599m2

Easements The site is encumbered by a 1.5m wide drainage easement, situated along the north-western boundary of the site.

Fall of the Land The site falls approximately 8m from south to north, although this is most pronounced closest to the north-western boundary where the topography begins to transition to the much lower level of Yarra Boulevard.

Front Fencing Details N/A - no street frontage.

The subject site is currently developed with a single storey dwelling with a deck on the north-western side with views over the Yarra River.

Vehicle access is via a crossover from Stawell Street and a common driveway. The subject site is devoid of significant vegetation.



Page 4 of 42

Figure 2: Aerial photograph of the subject site (outlined in white).

Figure 3: Photograph of the existing dwelling taken from the common driveway.



Page 5 of 42

Figure 4: Photograph of the existing dwelling taken from Yarra Boulevard to the north.

Figure 5: Photograph of the existing dwelling taken from Yarra Boulevard to the west.

Subject site

Subject site



Page 6 of 42

Figure 6: Photograph of the existing deck taken from the northern corner of the site facing south-west



Page 7 of 42

THE SURROUNDING AREA

Figure 7: Aerial photograph of the subject site and surrounding area.

North-west:

The subject site adjoins Yarra Boulevard to the north and west, although the road is between 10-15m below the level of the subject site and separated by a vegetated cliff (see Figures 4 and 5). The Yarra River is located further to the north-west approximately 50-55m from the subject site and the Yarra Bend Golf Course is on the opposite side of the river.

North-east:

Adjoining the subject site to the north-east is the property at No. 48 Stawell Street which is located within the cluster subdivision that includes the subject site. This property contains a two-storey brick dwelling with a hipped, tiled roof. This dwelling is visible to the left of the subject site in the photograph at Figure 4. The site has a ‘contributory’ heritage grading.

Subject site



Page 8 of 42

South-east:

To the south-east of the subject site, on the opposite side of the common driveway, is the property at No. 46 Stawell Street. This site has a frontage to Stawell Street and contains a single storey dwelling with brick and render walls and a hipped, tiled roof. The rear elevation of this dwelling is visible from the common driveway in front of the subject site (see Figure 8 below). This property is not part of the cluster subdivision but is within the same heritage precinct and has a ‘contributory’ heritage grading.

Figure 8: Photograph of the rear of the existing dwelling at No. 46 Stawell Street, taken from the common driveway in front of the subject site.



Page 9 of 42

South:

Adjoining the subject site to the south is the property at No. 50A Stawell Street. This property contains a two-storey brick dwelling with a hipped, tiled roof (see Figure 9 below). The site has a ‘significant’ heritage grading.

Figure 9: Photograph of the rear of the existing dwelling at No. 50A Stawell Street, taken from the common driveway in front of the subject site.

South-west:

Adjoining the subject site to the south-west is the property at No. 13-15 Fenwick Street. This property contains a two-storey brick dwelling with a flat roof. The dwelling is setback approximately 3m from the rear boundary (facing Yarra Boulevard) and has a ‘non-contributory’ heritage grading.



Page 10 of 42

STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE

The following statement of significance provides a summary of the significance and key attributes of Boroondara's Heritage Overlay precinct HO530. Unless otherwise referenced, the statements have been identified in the Review of Heritage Overlay Precinct Citations (2006) prepared by Lovell Chen Pty Ltd.

Heritage Precinct HO530 Yarra Boulevard Precinct, KewStatement of Significance

Reference - Assessment of Heritage Precincts in Kew (April 2013)

The Yarra Boulevard Precinct, Kew, is an area of cultural heritage significance for the following reasons:

Historically, the precinct is significant for its association with a phase of Modernist and architect designed residential development, which occurred largely between the 1940s and 1960s complemented by some residential development dating from the earlier interwar period and the late 1960s-1970s. During these years, the precinct was closely developed with houses that adapted to the natural setting and hilly topography. The move towards the simplified Modernist mode of dwelling, and in some cases experimental approach, also represented a move away from the more conservative house designs found elsewhere in the municipality. This aspect of the precinct’s history reflected both the period of development, and also the willingness of property owners to embrace new and innovative residential design, a trend which has continued into more recent times. The precinct is accordingly also important for its association with many prominent architects and architectural practices of the postwar era; these include, but are not limited to, Theodore Berman, Chancellor and Patrick, Ernest Fooks, Anatol Kagan, McGlashan and Everist, Romberg and Boyd, and Bernard Slawik.

A number of houses on the outer edges of the precinct which date from the interwar period and precede the predominant postwar development are also significant in that they help demonstrate the gradual subdivision of the area.

The precinct has historical significance for its association with the sustenance employment schemes of the Great Depression, which resulted in the construction of the Yarra Boulevard.

Architecturally, the Yarra Boulevard precinct is significant for its high concentration, richness and diversity of Modernist residential dwellings, complemented by examples of interwar and late 1960s-1970s residential development, set within an irregular, median-strip divided curvilinear street layout. The overall intactness of the more visible components of the dwellings is comparatively high, and alterations generally adopt a sympathetic approach. Many of the residences also display a high degree of sensitivity to site and



Page 11 of 42

Heritage Precinct HO530 Yarra Boulevard Precinct, KewStatement of Significance

topography, and ingenuity in their architectural approach, including to the design and orientation of buildings. This has created a distinctive aesthetic character for residential development within this area of the municipality. The concentration of well-preserved postwar Modernist houses is also arguably distinctive in the wider metropolitan context.

The landscaped character of the precinct is significant. This is demonstrated in the garden settings to many of the houses which were often sympathetic to the Modernist architecture and reflected a contemporary response to the area’s topography and natural setting, as well as site-sensitive planting schemes and approach. Noted landscape designers, such as Ellis Stones, are also believed to have been involved in some of the residential developments. The adaptation of street layout and house siting to the unusually hilly Melbourne terrain is additionally significant, including the irregular, median-strip divided curvilinear street layout.

RESTRICTION ON CLUSTER TITLE

The Cluster Title (Cluster Plan No. 001068) contains the following restrictions relevant to the proposal:

SCHEDULE NO. 1 (Restrictions on lots 1-5)

1. A member shall not erect or construct or permit any person to erect or construct any building

(a) other than one dwelling-house and carport or garage in accordance with plans and specifications approved.

(i) While Alcedo Pty. Ltd., is registered as the proprietor of any lot by Alcedo Pty. Ltd. or any person nominated by Alcedo Pty. Ltd., (subject nevertheless as provided in Schedule 3); and

(ii) After Alcedo Pty. Ltd. ceases to be registered as aforesaid by the Body Corporate.

(b) or any part thereof outside the area delineated as hatched on any lot on the development plan annexed hereto; or



Page 12 of 42

(c) on any lot or part of a lot of greater height at any point than that (if any) established by reference to the R.L. level or levels specified on such lot on the development plan annexed hereto.

2. No trees shall be planted or allowed to stand on lot 4 or lot 5 which substantially and unreasonably restrict the view from any other lot across the River Yarra or Yarra Bend National Park.

3. A member shall not on or about any lot or the Parcel

(a) make or permit any person to make any improvement; or

(b) except as required by Clause 2 of this Schedule damage alter or remove any building or improvement unless he has previously obtained the consent in writing

(i) while Alcedo Pty. Ltd., is registered as the proprietor of any lot, or Alcedo Pty. Ltd., or any person nominated by it, (subject as provided in Schedule 3)

(ii) after Alcedo Pty. Ltd., ceases to be registered as aforesaid, of the Body Corporate.

In this Clause “improvement” includes any fence, tree or shrub.

4. A member shall not use any lot otherwise than for the purpose of a detached house pursuant to the Melbourne Metropolitan Planning Scheme Ordinance as amended.



Page 13 of 42

Figure 10: The development plan referred to in Schedule 1 of the Cluster Plan. The subject site is lot 2.



Page 14 of 42

Officer Comment:

Clause 1 restricts building to within the building envelope shown on the development plan shown at Figure 10. The proposed deck would be located outside of the building envelope and in an area designated as private open space. The application seeks to vary the restriction by modifying the development plan so that the building envelope includes the proposed buildings and works. As such, the restriction would not be breached. The permit can be conditioned so that it has no force or effect until such time as the variation to the restriction has been registered on title.

Clause 3 requires the consent of the Body Corporate before making any improvement or altering or demolishing any building. This consent has been provided by the permit applicant.

ABORIGINAL CULTURAL HERITAGE

Is the site within an area of Aboriginal cultural heritage sensitivity?

Yes

Is a Cultural Heritage Management Plan required?

No The proposal is exempt.

PERMIT/SITE HISTORY

Details of relevant previous applications are as follows:-

ApplicationNo

Date of Decision

Decision Description of Proposal

KEW/77/00851 15 June 1977

Permit Cluster subdivision

PP13/00992 19 March 2014

Refused Construction of additions (balcony) to an existing dwelling in an Environmental Significance Overlay (Schedule 1), Heritage Overlay and vary a restriction to remove a Schedule No .1(b) on Lot 2 on CS1068

Planning Permit PP13/00992 was refused on the basis that a beneficiary objected to the variation of the restriction and not on the merits of the previously proposed balcony. In circumstances where a beneficiary has objected to an application to remove or vary a restriction, the Planning and Environment Act 1987 requires that Council must refuse the application. For this current application, no objection has been received from any beneficiaries to the restriction.



Page 15 of 42

NOTICE OF APPLICATION

Pursuant to Section 52 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987, the application was advertised by:-

Sending notices to the owners and occupiers of adjoining land and beneficiaries of the restriction on the title;

Placing a sign on the land for a period of 14 days; and Publishing a notice in the local newspaper.

Thirteen (13) objections and one letter of support have been received. The grounds of objection are summarised as follows:-

The proposal will be imposing when viewed from Yarra Boulevard. The proposed deck will be located over a drainage easement. The proposal will restrict public access to the easement. The proposed roof style is different than that of the existing dwelling. The proposal does not respect the landscaped character of the area. The proposal does not respect the heritage significance of the heritage

significance of the area. The proposal will result in a loss of vegetation. The proposal will cause erosion.

AMENDMENTS TO THE PROPOSAL

An amendment to a planning application was lodged with Council after notification. The proposed changes are as follows:

Provision of a shower adjacent to the study and removal of the roof over this area.

The proposed amendment is largely internal to the dwelling and will generally not be visible. As such, it was considered that the proposed changes did not warrant re-notification.



Page 16 of 42

INTERNAL REFERRALS

The application was referred to the following:-

Asset Management (Drainage)

There are no specific drainage requirements as existing drainage connections will be utilised. The owner will however require consent from the Owner’s Corporation for the development for the proposed structures over the easement.

According to Council records there are no Council assets in the easement so the easement most likely contains private services benefitting adjoining properties.

Officer Comment

Council’s Drainage Engineers have not raised any concerns with the proposed construction over the easement and adjoining properties benefitting from the easement have not objected.

Heritage

Heritage Overlay: Grading:HO530 (Yarra Boulevard Precinct) Contributory

SCHEDULE TO THE HERITAGE OVERLAY COMMENT/S No additional controls apply.

CONTEXT / BACKGROUND The subject property is located in a cluster subdivision (approved in 1977) behind the significantly graded residence at 50A Stawell Street. It is assumed that the cluster subdivision formed the rear grounds of 50A Stawell Street originally.

Alterations to ‘Significant’ or ‘Contributory Heritage Places Comments: Having reviewed the application, it appears that the single-storey built form of the subject property is to be retained with only minor alterations/additions proposed. These additions largely consist of the alteration of fenestration, the enlarging of existing deck areas and the incorporation of a small swimming pool on the north-west elevation. This elevation is located toward the rear of the property, overlooking the cliff-top above Yarra Boulevard.

Currently, the subject property is located at the rear of the significantly graded residence at 50a Stawell Street. In light of the subject property being located within a cluster subdivision behind 50a Stawell Street, views of the subdivision and therefore the subject property are concealed from Stawell Street.



Page 17 of 42

The proposed additions are effectively to the rear elevation of the subject property and as such will not be visible from the subdivision specifically and, as such, nor from Stawell Street. The maintaining of the existing single-storey built form results in the subject property remaining concealed from view behind 50a Stawell Street.

In light of the above, there are no heritage concerns.

Officer Comment

Council’s Heritage Advisor has no concerns with the proposal.

EXTERNAL REFERRALS

Melbourne Water

Melbourne Water, pursuant to Section 56 (1) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987, does not object to the proposal, subject to the following conditions and footnotes:

1. Pollution and sediment laden runoff shall not be discharged directly or indirectly into Melbourne Water's drains or waterways.

Footnote(s) to be placed on Permit

If further information is required in relation to Melbourne Water's permit conditions shown above, please contact Melbourne Water on 9679 7517, quoting Melbourne Water's reference 287876.

Officer Comment

The above permit condition and note can be included on the permit.

GOVERNANCE ISSUES

The implications of this report have been assessed and are not considered likely to breach or infringe upon the human rights contained in the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006.

The officers responsible for this report have no direct or indirect interests requiring disclosure.



Page 18 of 42

CONSIDERATIONS

In assessing this application, consideration has been given to the following:-

The objectives of planning in Victoria as detailed in Section 4 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987;

Section 60 of the Planning & Environment Act 1987; The relevant provisions and decision guidelines of the Boroondara Planning

Scheme including the decision guidelines of Clause 65; Any comment or decision of a referral authority; Any objections received.

This proposal does not raise any significant adverse social or economic impacts. General social and economic impacts are addressed by the planning policy assessment below.

BOROONDARA PLANNING SCHEME

ZONING & OVERLAYS

Appendix C - Zoning Map

General Residential Zone (GRZ1)

Pursuant to Clause 32.08-3 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, a permit is required to construct or extend one dwelling on:-

A lot of less than 300 square metres A lot of between 300 square metres and 500 square metres if specified in the

schedule to this zone.

A permit is required to construct or extend a front fence within 3 metres of the street if:-

The fence is associated with one dwelling on a lot of less than 300 square metres, or

A lot of between 300 and 500 square metres if specified in a schedule to this zone, and

The fence height exceeds the maximum height specified in Clause 54.06-2.

A development must meet the requirements of Clause 54. No permit is required to:-

Construct or carry out works normal to a dwelling.



Page 19 of 42

Construct or extend an out-building (other than a garage or carport) on a lot provided the gross floor area of the out-building does not exceed 10 square metres and the maximum building height is not more than 3 metres above ground level.

Officer Comment

As the lot size is greater than 500 square metres, the above controls are not applicable.

Maximum Building Height

Pursuant to Clause 32.08-7 (Maximum building height for a dwelling or residential building), the maximum height of a building used for the purpose of a dwelling or residential building must not exceed the building height specified in a schedule to this zone as follows:

Maximum Building Height for the Schedule to the General Residential Zone GRZ1 A building used as a dwelling or a residential building must not exceed

a height of 9 metres unless the slope of the natural ground level at any cross section wider than 8 metres of the site of the building is 2.5 degrees or more, in which case it must not exceed a height of 10 metres.

This does not apply to:

An extension of an existing building that exceeds the specified building height provided that the extension does not exceed the existing building height.

A building which exceeds the specified building height for which a valid building permit was in effect prior to the introduction of this provision.

Officer Comment

The proposal complies with the height requirements of the Clause. The maximum height of the proposed deck is 6.65m above natural ground level.

Heritage Overlay (HO530)

Pursuant to Clause 43.01-1 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, a permit is required to:

Demolish or remove a building. Construct a building or construct or carry our works, including:



Page 20 of 42

o A domestic swimming pool or spa and associated mechanical and safety equipment.

o A deck, including a deck to a dwelling with a finished floor level not more than 800mm above ground level.

Externally alter a building by structural work, rendering, sandblasting or in any other way.

Officer Comment

A planning permit is required for the proposed partial demolition and buildings and works pursuant to the Heritage Overlay.

Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO1)

Pursuant to Clause 42.03-2 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, a permit is required to construct a building or to construct or carry out works.

Schedule 1 of the Significant Landscape Overlay states that a permit is not required to construct a building less than 6m in height above natural ground level at any point.

Officer Comment

The proposed buildings and works will have a maximum height of 6.65m above natural ground level and therefore require a permit pursuant to the Significant Landscape Overlay.

Design and Development Overlay (DDO31)

Pursuant to Clause 42.02-2 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme, a permit is required to construct a building or to construct or carry out works, including construct a swimming pool associated with a dwelling.

Schedule 31 of the Design and Development Overlay includes the following mandatory and discretionary requirements:

Mandatory Requirements

Buildings and works must not cast any additional shadow across the Setback Reference Line specified in each Setback Map Reference to this schedule between 11:00am and 2:00pm on 22 June. A new building must:

o Not exceed the maximum height specified in Table 1 of this schedule measured from natural ground level.



Page 21 of 42

o Be set back at least the minimum specified in Table 1 of this schedule from the Yarra River.

The complete or partial replacement of an existing building within the minimum setback specified in Table 1of this schedule from the Yarra River must not:

o exceed the maximum building height specified in Table 1 of this schedule from natural ground level;

o reduce the existing setback of the building from the Yarra River and public open space; and

o increase the existing gross floor area of the existing building.

Extract from Table 1:

DDO31

Map Ref. Location

Mandatory Requirements

Minimum Setback Line Maximum Height

Distance Maximum Sloping

I Yarra Boulevard, Kew - 9m 10m

Officer Comment

The subject site is located in Area I (Yarra Boulevard) which does not include a minimum setback line or setback reference line. Therefore, the proposal complies with the mandatory overshadowing and setback requirements of the schedule.

The proposed maximum height of 6.65m above natural ground level complies with the 10m mandatory maximum height of the schedule.

Discretionary Requirements

Fencing within the minimum setback specified of this schedule from the Yarra River should:

o not impede the flow of flood waters; o not be more than 1.4 metres above natural ground level; and o be visually permeable and utilise non-reflective colours and finishes.

Buildings should not cast any additional shadow across any public open space between 11:00am and 2:00pm on 22 September. The site area covered by buildings (including tennis courts and swimming pools) and other impervious surfaces within a residential area should not exceed 40 per cent of the total area of land within a lot. Tennis courts, swimming pools and other outbuildings associated with a dwelling should be set back the minimum distance specified in Table 1 of this schedule from the Yarra River.



Page 22 of 42

Building materials should utilise non-reflective colours and finishes to blend with the existing natural landscape character of an area.

Officer Comment

The proposal generally complies with the above requirements as follows:

No fencing is proposed. No additional shadow will be cast over the public open space adjoining the

subject site to the north-west between the hours of 11am and 2pm on 22 September (notwithstanding that this public open space comprises a vegetated cliff that is not easily accessible to the public).

The proposal will increase the total permeability from 44.5% to 49.9% of the site area. Both the existing and proposed permeability figures exceed the discretionary requirement of 40%. The associated decision guidelines require Council to consider ‘the need to minimise impervious surfaces to allow for filtration of water and retention and establishment of indigenous vegetation and canopy trees.’ Given the relatively minor scale of the proposed works, it is considered that the proposal will not have a significant impact on the filtration of water. Furthermore, landscaping is proposed in spaces between the proposed deck and the north-western boundary of the site where there is no existing landscaping, which will improve the filtration of water and is consistent with the decision guideline.

Table 1 does not specify any minimum setback for swimming pools (or tennis courts or outbuildings). The proposed materials include dark coloured timber lining boards, brick to match the existing dwelling and black metal balustrades. These materials are non-reflective and will blend with the existing natural landscape character of the area.

PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 52.02 - Easements, Restrictions & Reserves

Pursuant to Clause 52.02 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme;

A permit is required before a person proceeds:

Under Section 23 of the Subdivision Act 1988 to create, vary or remove an easement or restriction or vary or remove a condition in the nature of an easement in a Crown grant.

Under Section 24A of the Subdivision Act 1988.



Page 23 of 42

Under Section 36 of the Subdivision Act 1988 to acquire or remove an easement or remove a right of way.

Officer Comment

It is proposed to vary the existing restriction on the cluster title by modifying the development plan so that the building envelope includes the proposed buildings and works.

A planning permit is required to vary a restriction pursuant to Clause 52.02 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme.

This matter is discussed further in the ‘Officer Assessment’ section of this report.

Clause 52.06 - Car Parking

Clause 52.06 does not apply to the extension of one dwelling on a lot in the General Residential Zone.

OFFICER ASSESSMENT

STATE PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

The following State policies are relevant to the assessment of the current application:-

Clause 9 - Plan Melbourne Clause 12 - Environmental and Landscape Values Clause 11 - Settlement Clause 15 - Built Environment & Heritage Clause 16 - Housing Clause 18 - Transport Clause 19 - Infrastructure

Plan Melbourne is a long-term plan to accommodate Melbourne’s future growth in population and employment. It seeks to integrate long-term land use, infrastructure and transport planning to meet the population, housing and employment needs for the future and to build a vibrant central city core.

Plan Melbourne provides communities with clear direction about the future of their neighbourhoods, identifies areas that can accommodate future growth, seeks to ensure that any new development will make a positive contribution to local areas whilst



Page 24 of 42

simultaneously acting to protect the majority of our existing suburban areas from inappropriate development.

The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the objectives outlined in the relevant Clauses of the State Planning Policy Framework. Furthermore, the proposal is considered to respect the character of the surrounding area.

Clause 12.05-2 of the Planning Scheme includes the following objective specific to the protection of the Yarra River:

Maintain and enhance the natural landscape character of the Yarra River corridor in which the topography, waterway, banks and tree canopy are dominant features providing a highly valued, secluded, natural environment for the enjoyment of the public.

The impact on the environmental and landscape value of the Yarra River valley environs is considered to be acceptable and will achieve the relevant objectives of Clause 12. A detailed assessment of the environmental and landscape impacts of the proposal is included later in this report.

LOCAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

The following Local policies are relevant to the assessment of the current application:-

Clause 22.05 - Heritage Policy Clause 22.07 - Neighbourhood Character Policy.

Clause 22.05 - Heritage Policy

The objectives of the Heritage Policy are:

To encourage the retention and conservation of all ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places in the Heritage Overlay. To consider the cultural heritage significance described in the statement of significance for any heritage place as part of the design process of any proposal and when making decisions about proposed buildings and works associated with that place. To ensure that works, including conservation, alterations, additions and new development, respect the cultural heritage significance of the heritage place. To ensure that subdivision respects the cultural heritage significance of the heritage place.



Page 25 of 42

To ensure that, when determining or when considering issues of bulk, form and appearance of additions or new development, the evaluation is based on the characteristics of the significant or contributory components of the fabric of the heritage place, rather than any non-contributory elements that may exist in the area.To promote urban and architectural design which clearly and positively supports the ongoing significance of heritage places. To retain original fabric that contributes to the cultural heritage significance of the heritage place. To ensure that development within activity centres respects, protects and enhances the cultural heritage significance of identified heritage places.

The following policies apply when considering planning permit applications under the Heritage Overlay or any application for the amendment of plans.

The provisions of this policy apply in the place of the various guidelines contained within the heritage studies referenced at the end of this policy:

Statement of Significance It is policy to:

Take into account the statement of significance for a heritage place when making decisions about proposed buildings and works associated with that place; Where more than one statement of significance exists in relation to a heritage place, only the more recent statement of significance should be considered. Where an individual heritage place is located within a heritage study, any proposal must have regard to both the most recent statement of significance for the individual place (where available) as well as the most recent statement of significance for the heritage precinct in which it is located.

Officer Comment

The statement of significance identifies this precinct as significant primarily due to its concentration of Modernist residential dwellings and landscaped character.

The proposed deck and minor extension will not be visible from Stawell Street and will be visible only from Yarra Boulevard to the north and west. The proposed deck, including generally flat roof above, is considered to be respectful of the Modernist dwellings in the precinct and the existing flat roof dwelling on the subject site. Space is also retained between the proposed deck and the north-western boundary for landscaping that will contribute to the landscape character of the area and filter views to the dwelling from Yarra Boulevard and the Yarra River environs. It is noted that there is no landscaping currently located between the dwelling and the north-western boundary.



Page 26 of 42

Demolition It is policy to:-

Retain ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places and not normally allow their total demolition. Permit partial demolition of ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places for the purpose of additions and alterations if the additions and alterations will not adversely affect the cultural heritage significance of the place and the proposed addition or alteration is in accordance with the provisions of this policy. Permit partial demolition to remove non-original and non-contributory additions to heritage places in line with the conservation provisions of this policy. Consider the following, as appropriate, before determining an application for demolition of ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places or parts of ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places:-

o The cultural heritage significance of the heritage place, and, when located in a heritage precinct, the contribution of the place to the significance of the precinct;

o Whether the demolition or removal of the entire heritage place or any part of the place will adversely affect cultural heritage significance;

o Whether the demolition or removal contributes to the long-term conservation of the heritage place; and

o Whether the heritage place is structurally unsound. The poor condition of a heritage place should not in itself, be a reason for permitting demolition of ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places.

Require an application for a new building or works to accompany a demolition application. The demolition or removal of any heritage place or part of a heritage place will not normally be approved until a replacement building or development is approved. Require a visual record of the important or original fabric of any ‘significant’ heritage place which is to be demolished or removed to the satisfaction of the responsible authority prior to demolition being approved.Normally permit the demolition of ‘non-contributory’ places. However, the demolition or removal of ‘non-contributory’ places will not generally be approved until a replacement building or development is approved. An application for a new building or works should accompany a demolition application.

Officer Comment

The proposed demolition works are limited to demolition of the existing rear deck and walls on the north-west elevation of the dwelling.

The above policy permits partial demolition of ‘contributory’ heritage places for the purpose of additions and alterations if the additions and alterations will not adversely affect the cultural heritage significance of the place and the proposed addition or alteration is in accordance with the provisions of this policy.



Page 27 of 42

The proposed demolition works are relatively minor in scale and as noted above, the replacement deck and minor extension to the floor area of the dwelling will not adversely affect the heritage significance of the precinct.

Alterations to ‘Significant’ or ‘Contributory’ Heritage Places It is policy that:-

All alterations which are not restoration or reconstruction works should be directed at maintaining the cultural heritage significance and integrity of the place. New openings in the principal façade(s) or principal visible roof forms of ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places will not normally be permitted.Any new signage on a heritage building should minimise visual clutter and should not obscure or destroy any architectural features of cultural heritage significance.Any Internally Illuminated Signs should not have an area greater than 1.5 square metresThe following sign types are discouraged:

Above verandah signs Sky Signs Animated signs Reflective signs Electronic Signs

Any alterations should not obscure or remove existing signage that is deemed to have heritage value.

Officer Comment:

The proposed alterations are limited to the replacement of glazing to windows. This will have a negligible impact on the appearance or heritage significance of the existing dwelling.

Additions to ‘Significant’ or ‘Contributory’ Heritage Places It is policy that all additions to ‘significant’ or ‘contributory’ heritage places:-

Should not change the principal façade or principal visible roof forms of the heritage place. Should not alter or obscure fabric that contributes to the cultural heritage significance of any part of a ‘significant’ heritage place. Should be designed in a manner that responds to, is respectful of, and is compatible with the built form and architectural treatment of the heritage place. Should make use of materials and surface finishes that are complementary to the original fabric of the heritage place but should be discernible as new. Details (including, but not limited to the type and form of windows, doors, architectural features and verandahs) should be interpretive, that is, a simplified, modern



Page 28 of 42

interpretation of the historic form rather than a direct reproduction. That involve ground level additions, should preferably be located to the rear of the building where they have less impact on any aesthetic and architectural contribution of the building to the streetscape and/or heritage precinct. These additions should be visually recessive and read as a secondary element to the heritage place. Where side setbacks are an important feature in a heritage precinct, ground level additions should have side setbacks that are the same or similar to those of the precinct. That involve upper level additions to commercial, retail or industrial heritage buildings, should be sufficiently set back from the front facade to appear as a secondary element of the heritage place and provide a clear distinction between the original building and the new addition. That involve upper level additions to dwelling forms (as shown in Figure 1), should be sited and massed behind the principal façade and principal visible roof forms so they are not visible from the street. Upper-storey additions may be considered to be ‘not visible from the street’ if:

o they are sited within an “envelope” created by projecting a sight line from 1.6 metres above ground level (this being the eye level of an adult person of average height) from a point where the footpath on the opposite side of the road meets the property line directly opposite the site to the top of the front parapet or the ridge of the principal roof form (see Figure 1), and

o they are centrally sited or are sited to ensure that where visible to oblique views, the additions are visually recessive and read as secondary elements to the heritage place and that those views are minimised. Particular regard is to be given to the roof form of the existing building and the location of any driveway on the site as the driveway side setback generally allows for greater visibility of the addition.

For corner sites, the sight line is taken from the primary street frontage. All additions visible from other street frontages should be distinct from, and read as a secondary element to, the heritage place.



Page 29 of 42

Applications for upper-storey additions should be accompanied by oblique view diagrams from each side of the property boundary, taken from the point where the footpath meets the side edge of the property boundary on the opposite side of the road and looking towards the proposed addition.

Vegetation and fences are not considered to be permanent screening and will not be taken into account when determining if a proposed addition is visible from the street.

Officer Comment

As discussed previously, the proposed buildings and works will have no visibility from Stawell Street and, where visible from Yarra Boulevard, will maintain the same height and generally flat roof forms of the existing dwelling and are therefore considered to be respectful and compatible with the built form of the heritage place.

Proposed materials are shown on Drawing No. TP00.3 and are compatible with the materials of the existing dwelling. This includes brick to match the existing dwelling, a dark coloured vertical timber lining board to replace the previous horizontal timber lining board, and black vertical metal picket balustrade to replace the previous black metal and horizontal wire balustrade.

Clause 22.07 - Neighbourhood Character Policy

This policy applies to the following applications within residential zones:

Multi-dwelling development. Single dwelling development on lots of less than 500 square metres. Land subdivision. The variation or removal of covenants and restrictions on land titles. All other planning permit applications in residential areas, including discretionary uses, but excluding proposals requiring planning approval solely because of their location in heritage areas.

Council's Neighbourhood Character Policy seeks to "encourage design solutions which enhance and respond positively to the existing neighbourhood character of residential areas in the City".



Page 30 of 42

Precinct Number 13 (Extract from the Neighbourhood Character Precinct Statement)

Description

This medium sized precinct in Kew adjoins Yarra Boulevard and the associated Yarra river parklands which contribute to the area’s bushland feel. The precinct has a high concentration of post war Modernist dwellings, many by notable architects. Heritage overlays cover a number of individual properties. A large proportion of the central precinct is currently proposed for heritage protection. A number of new dwellings that exhibit innovative, contemporary design are also present.

The precinct includes Laver Street which has a similar character to the streets adjoining Yarra Boulevard. This character is created by the absence of front fences, the often terraced front setbacks and the densely vegetated surrounds. The rest of the precinct is defined by its hilly topography and treed streets. Houses are generally constructed from brick and masonry with pitched or flat roof forms.

Larger block sizes and lot frontages (10 to 20m or greater) allow for medium sized front gardens that contribute to the leafy character of the area. While dwellings are generally detached, the siting of dwellings, including front and side setbacks varies greatly due to the curvilinear streets and hilly topography.

This precinct includes a proportion of tall dwellings (up to 3 storeys) arranged along generally narrow streets in a curvilinear and cul-de-sac configuration as a response to the steeper terrain. Mature native trees and shrubs are characteristic in many streets.

Front boundaries are often defined by retaining walls or low front fences. While rear gardens are often small, they are generally densely planted. Few apartments or town houses are present. Many dwellings in this area are visible from the parklands adjoining the Yarra River.

Car parking is often integrated into the design of buildings through undercroft or similar arrangements.

Design Guidelines

The following “Design Response” contained within the Design Guidelines provide direction for new buildings which ensures future development assists in achieving the area’s preferred character.



Page 31 of 42

Building Height & FormDesign Response

Ensure buildings integrate with the prevailing scale and form of houses in the street and sit comfortably within the tree canopies in the immediate area.

Ensure buildings follow the contours of the land and step down in accordance with the slope of the site.

Officer Comment

The proposed extension is considered minor in scale and will maintain the existing height of the dwelling, which sits comfortably below the tree canopy of the immediate area. Due to the minor extent of the proposed works, there is no practical opportunity to have the building step down with the slope of the site as recommended by the design guidelines above.

SitingDesign Response

Ensure buildings are setback from front and side boundaries to integrate with the streetscape and surrounding natural setting.

Ensure buildings are sufficiently setback from rear boundaries to maintain the open, backyard character of the immediate area where this exists.

Provide a secluded private open space with a minimum dimension of 4m to enable the planting and retention of large trees.

Ensure new development on a corner site is adequately set back to provide a transition between the adjoining buildings.

Officer Comment

The proposal does not alter the front or side boundary setbacks but does decrease the setback towards the north-western (rear) boundary. It is considered that this will not unreasonably impact on the natural setting of the dwelling given the minor scale of the proposed works. Specifically, the height of the dwelling will remain unchanged and the setback will decrease by a maximum of approximately 2m. Furthermore, space is retained between the proposed deck and the north-western boundary for the provision of landscaping in a location where there is currently no landscaping.

Building Materials & Design DetailsDesign Response

Use muted colours and building materials which integrate with the landscaped



Page 32 of 42

setting of the precinct. Ensure new dwellings and visible additions complement the historic buildings

in the precinct.

Officer Comment

As noted previously, the materials are visually compatible with the landscaped character of the area.

The proposal is also considered to be respectful of the heritage significance of the area as detailed in the assessment against Council’s Local Heritage Policy.

Front Boundary TreatmentDesign Response

Require no or low front fencing in accordance with the prevailing streetscape character.

Ensure the retention of original front fences where heritage overlays apply. Front fences along declared main roads (RD1Z) may be up to 2m in height

where this is consistent with the prevailing fence height on the neighbouring properties.

Officer Comment

No front fence is proposed.

Car Parking StructuresDesign Response

Ensure driveways and car parking structures are located to the side or rear of dwellings.

Ensure basements project no more than 0.5m above natural ground level, unless the finished floor level of abutting properties is greater than 0.5m.

Where possible, locate the entry to basement garages to the side or rear of dwellings so they are not visible from the street.

Officer Comment

No changes to car parking are proposed.



Page 33 of 42

VegetationDesign Response

Ensure front gardens incorporate soft landscaping that complements the streetscape,including native plantings where this is characteristic.

Ensure the retention of large trees.

Officer Comment

No trees are proposed for removal and there are no proposed works within the front setback area that will affect the existing front garden. As noted previously, planting is proposed between the deck and the north-western boundary of the site that will contribute to the landscaped character of the area.

ZONING & OVERLAYS

Heritage Overlay (HO530)

Amongst other things, the Decision Guidelines at Clause 43.01-4 require the following be considered, as appropriate, when deciding on an application under the Heritage Overlay:

The State Planning Policy Framework and the Local Planning Policy Framework, including the Municipal Strategic Statement and local planning policies. The significance of the heritage place and whether the proposal will adversely affect the natural or cultural significance of the place. Any applicable statement of significance, heritage study and any applicable conservation policy. Whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place. Whether the location, bulk, form and appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place. Whether the demolition, removal or external alteration will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place. Whether the proposed works will adversely affect the significance, character or appearance of the heritage place.

Officer Comment

As detailed in the assessment of the proposal against Council’s Heritage Policy (Clause 22.05) above, it is considered the proposal will not impact adversely upon the heritage significance of the subject site or the surrounding precinct, and is therefore acceptable.



Page 34 of 42

Significant Landscape Overlay (SLO1)

Statement of nature and key elements of landscape

The Yarra River has metropolitan significance as an environmental, aesthetic, cultural, recreation and tourism asset. The river corridor links parklands and reserves into a near continuous vegetated landscape experience that provides a highly valued, secluded natural environment, enjoyed by local and metropolitan communities.

The Yarra River corridor contains some of the most valued flora, fauna, geological and geomorphological assets in metropolitan Melbourne. Indigenous vegetation and remnant riparian vegetation provide habitat and contribute to the protection of water quality and flow regimes.

This segment of the Yarra River flows through the traditional land of the Wurundjeri people. The waterway, its natural landscape and key features have social, cultural and spiritual significance, with areas such as the river flats and billabongs being important gathering spots.

Within Boroondara, the Yarra River corridor is dominated by a canopy of mature trees and understorey planting. River flats dominate the northern segment of the corridor with expansive parklands and a number of golf courses bordered by the Eastern Freeway.

Yarra Bend Park provides the transition to a more steeply sloping river bank environment creating a series of prominent hilltops and ridgelines as the river travels south. The historic Studley Park Boathouse and Dights Falls are popular visitor attractions within a highly naturalistic setting.

South of Walmer Street, a leafy residential character containing a mix of native and non-native species provides a continuous and consistent vegetated backdrop filtering immediate views of development from the Yarra River, the Main Yarra Trail and longer range views from a number of bridge crossings.

Landscape character objectives to be achieved

Landscape, environmental and cultural values

To protect and enhance the natural landscape character of the Yarra River corridor where the river, its topography, adjacent public open space and a continuous corridor of vegetation and canopy trees are the dominant features. To protect, rehabilitate and expand a continuous corridor of riparian and indigenous vegetation using appropriate indigenous species. To protect and enhance both terrestrial and aquatic habitat to allow the movement of wildlife within the Yarra River corridor.



Page 35 of 42

To protect and conserve areas of known indigenous and non-indigenous cultural or archaeological significance. To retain exotic vegetation of heritage or neighbourhood character where it contributes to landscape significance.

Officer comment

The proposal will not remove any significant remnant or non-remnant indigenous vegetation and proposes new planting within the setbacks between the north-western boundary and the deck.

The proposed planting includes the provision of four eucalyptus mannifera ‘Little Spotty’, noted as ‘Em’ on the submitted landscape plan. This is a tree that is native but not indigenous to the area and it is recommended that a condition be included on the permit requiring these trees to be replaced with indigenous planting to the satisfaction of Council. Subject to this permit condition, it is considered that the proposal makes an appropriate contribution to the landscape character of the area. It is noted that the other landscaping shown on the landscape plan comprises only small potted plants to be located on the proposed balcony. It is not considered necessary to require these plants to be indigenous given their small size and generally ornamental nature.

Protection of waterway and the riparian zone

To ensure buildings and works are set back from the banks of the river to protect existing riparian vegetation, habitat and not impede its natural flood and watercourse characteristics. To maintain and protect the river’s natural geomorphology, banks stability and reduce the risk of erosion. To reduce the rate or quantity of stormwater, sediment or other pollutants directly entering watercourses or wetlands.

Officer comment

The subject site is at the outer edge of what can be considered the riparian zone, with the proposed buildings and works setback a minimum of approximately 55m from the banks of the river and on significantly higher ground. Due to this separation from the river, the proposal will not impede its natural flood and watercourse characteristics. Furthermore, no existing riparian vegetation and habitat will be removed to allow for the proposed works, the river’s natural geomorphology will not be changed and the stability of the river banks will not be impacted, noting that any issues relating to the proposed construction close to the cliff along Yarra Boulevard will be a matter for the relevant Building Surveyor to address.

In relation to stormwater runoff, a standard permit condition is recommended that will require the site to be drained to the satisfaction of Council. Council’s Asset



Page 36 of 42

Management Department typically requires the rate of discharge to be limited to pre-development levels or less, which can be achieved via a stormwater detention system if necessary. A note to this effect can be included on the permit. A further condition is recommended to require that no polluted and/or sediment laden runoff is to be discharged directly or indirectly into Council's drains or watercourses during and after development. It is considered that these conditions and notes will adequately protect the waterway from stormwater runoff and other pollutants in accordance with the above objectives.

Public open space and access

To maintain and protect linear public open space and provide for secluded areas of public open space with appropriate public access to the river and its public open space. To encourage the co-location or clustering of buildings, jetties and mooring facilities on public land. To encourage bicycle and shared paths that are well located, avoid unnecessary earthworks and vegetation removal and have good visibility to help increase safety for users.

Officer comment:

Adjoining the subject site to the north-west is an area zoned as public open space (Public Park and Recreation Zone). However, this public open space comprises a vegetated cliff that is not easily accessible to the public. As such, the proposed extension towards this space will have no significant detrimental impact on public open space or access. It is noted that the issue of access over the public open space has been raised by objectors, however, the proposed works are located entirely within the subject site and therefore cannot be restricting legal access to public land.

Siting and design of built form

To avoid light spill and overshadowing from buildings and works on the banks and water of the Yarra River, adjacent public open space and along bicycle and shared paths. To minimise the visual intrusion of buildings and works when viewed from the Yarra River and adjacent public open space, bicycle and shared paths and bridge crossings.To ensure buildings are sited and designed to reduce visual contrast with the natural landscape character setting of the Yarra River corridor. To ensure all buildings are subordinate to the existing vegetation with all views of buildings filtered through vegetation. To ensure all fencing within close proximity to the Yarra River is low in scale, visually permeable and does not create contrast with its natural landscape character.



Page 37 of 42

Officer comment

The proposal is considered unlikely to cause any significant light spill. A standard permit condition is recommended that will require all external lighting to be designed, baffled and located so as to prevent light from the site causing any unreasonable impacts on the locality, to the satisfaction of the Council.

Given the orientation of the site, shadows from the proposed buildings and works will largely fall within the subject site. In the mornings the proposal will cause some additional overshadowing of the public open space adjoining the site, however, as previously noted, this is not an easily useable area of public open space and therefore the minor additional overshadowing is not considered to be a significant issue.

The overall level of visual intrusion into the Yarra River corridor is not considered to be unreasonable. The proposed buildings and works will be visible from Yarra Boulevard in certain locations but will be generally not visible from the more sensitive Yarra River and its banks, which are at a distance of approximately 55m from the subject site. Furthermore, the proposed buildings and works will generally not be visible from within the public open space between the Yarra Boulevard and the river. This space is heavily vegetated and the sole walking track through the area is located adjacent to the banks of the river, approximately 50m from the subject site and at a level approximately 30m lower. Given this significant separation and the amount of vegetation within the public open space, it is considered that the proposed buildings and works will generally not be visible.

Where the buildings and works are visible from Yarra Boulevard, they will blend into the landscape. The buildings and works will maintain the existing height of the dwelling, which is lower than the surrounding tree canopy and lower than neighbouring dwellings that are also visible from Yarra Boulevard. Additional planting is proposed between the deck and Yarra Boulevard to further ensure that views to the proposed buildings and works are filtered through vegetation. As noted previously, external colours and finishes will be dark coloured and non-reflective, which will blend into the natural landscape. For these reasons, it is considered that the proposed buildings and works will not cause an unreasonable visual intrusion into the landscape dominated corridor.



Page 38 of 42

Design and Development Overlay (DDO31)

Design objectives

Landscape protection

To protect and enhance the natural landscape character of the Yarra River corridor where the waterway, its topography, adjacent public open space and a continuous corridor of vegetation and canopy trees are the dominant features. To minimise the visual intrusion of development when viewed from the Yarra River and adjacent public open space, bicycle and shared paths and bridge crossings.To ensure development on visible hillslopes, crests, skylines and ridgelines is subordinate to existing local vegetation and natural landscape character setting. To ensure sufficient space is provided between buildings to maintain views to the Yarra River and allow for the planting and growth of vegetation, including large canopy trees.

Siting and design

To ensure new buildings are appropriately set back from the banks of the Yarra River and adjacent public open space. To avoid additional light spill and overshadowing from buildings on the banks and water of the Yarra River, its adjacent public open space, bicycle and shared paths.To ensure building elevations are presented at a variety of heights, avoid visual bulk and are stepped back from the frontage of the Yarra River and adjacent public open space. To ensure all external colours and finishes are non-reflective and do not create contrast with the natural landscape character setting. To ensure public views of buildings are filtered through vegetation and trees.

Site coverage and permeability

To avoid tennis courts, swimming pools and other structures within identified setbacks from the Yarra River to protect and enhance the natural landscape character setting and riparian zone. To minimise impervious surfaces to allow for the filtration of water and retention and establishment of vegetation and canopy trees. To ensure all fencing within close proximity to the Yarra River is low in scale, visually permeable and does not create contrast with its natural landscape character setting.



Page 39 of 42

Officer comment:

Many of the above design objectives overlap with those of the Significant Landscape Overlay and have been previously discussed. In particular, the following is noted:

The site is setback a minimum of approximately 55m from the river and 50m from the walking track along the river where its impact on the river environs will be limited.

The proposed works are relatively minor in scale and will maintain the height of the existing dwelling, which is lower than the surrounding tree canopy.

New planting is proposed between the deck and the north-western boundary that will filter views to the extension from Yarra Boulevard and contribute to the landscaped character of the area. Subject to the recommended permit conditions, this planting will be indigenous to the area.

The proposal will cause no significant light spill or overshadowing on public open space or the river and its banks.

External colours and finishes are dark, non-reflective colours that will blend into the natural landscape.

Impervious surfaces will not be significantly increased (an increase equal to 5.4% of the site area). Issues relating to drainage and sediment laden runoff can be controlled via the recommended permit conditions.

On this basis, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the design objectives of Schedule 31 of the Design and Development Overlay.

PARTICULAR PROVISIONS

Clause 52.02 - Easements, Restrictions & Reserves

The purpose of Clause 52.02 is to enable the removal and variation of an easement or restrictions to enable a use or development that complies with the planning scheme after the interests of affected people are considered.

There is one decision guideline of Clause 52.02, which is as follows:

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

Furthermore, section 60(5) of the Planning and Environment Act 1987 provides the legislative 'test' for the removal of registered restrictive covenants and restrictions. Section 60(5) provides that:

The responsible authority must not grant a permit which allows the removal or variation of a restriction...unless it is satisfied that:



Page 40 of 42

(a) The owner of any land benefited by the restriction (other than an owner who, before or after the making of the application for the permit but not more than three months before its making, has consented in writing to the grant of the permit) will be unlikely to suffer any detriment of any kind (including any perceived detriment) as a consequence of the removal or variation of the restriction; and

(b) If that owner has objected to the grant of the permit, the objection is vexatious or not made in good faith.

Several Tribunal cases provide commentary on assessing the test of 'perceived detriment' as set out in Section 60(5) of the Act. In Dennis Marsden Subdivisional Services Pty Ltd v City of Heidelberg (1994) 13 AATR 7, the tribunal stated…. “Thetribunal believes the test must be an objective one. It is not an easy task to apply an objective test to a perception. Nonetheless the Tribunal believes on its proper construction that their (sic) must be, at the least, a reasonable basis for believing that the proper perception of detriment has some basis” (page 14). In Wilde v City of Moonee Valley 18 AATR 145, the Tribunal concluded that 'perceived detriment' must be detriment that someone 'perceives' and does not mean the 'perception of detriment' (pages 158 - 159).

On this basis, Council must be satisfied that any beneficiaries of the covenant will be unlikely to suffer any detriment of any kind (including any perceived detriment) as a result of the proposed variation to the covenant

Officer Discussion

In this instance, the owner of another lot on Cluster Plan CS001068 is an ‘owner of any land benefitted by the Restriction’ within the meaning of section 60(5) of the 1987 Act.

Council Officers are satisfied that the owners of the other lots within the cluster plan will be unlikely to suffer any detriment of any kind (including any perceived detriment) as a result of the variation of the restriction. None of the owners of any other lots on the cluster plan have objected to the proposal. Furthermore, the proposed variation to the restriction will allow the construction of the buildings and works on the north-western side of the existing dwelling where they will generally not be visible from the other lots.

It is also noted that a letter of support has been received from one of the owners of a lot within the subdivision.



Page 41 of 42

OBJECTION RESPONSE

Those matters not already addressed in the foregoing report are discussed below:-

Total Number of Objections Received: 13 (1 letter of support)

Summary of Objection Officer Comment The proposal will be imposing when viewed from Yarra Boulevard.

As discussed in the foregoing report, it is considered that the proposal will not have an unreasonable visual impact when viewed from Yarra Boulevard. Specifically, the proposed deck will extend only a maximum of approximately 2m closer to Yarra Boulevard, will retain the same height as the existing dwelling, will be constructed of materials that blend into the landscape and will be partially screened by proposed planting to reduce its visual impact on the Yarra Boulevard.

The proposed deck will be located over a drainage easement.

Council’s Asset Management Department has raised no concerns with the proposed construction over the easement.

The proposal will restrict public access to the easement.

The easement is a drainage easement located on private property. There is no right of access over the easement for the public or any other property owner.

The proposed roof style is different than that of the existing dwelling.

The proposed sections of roof covering parts of the deck are generally flat, albeit with a profile that has raised edges (refer to plans). Although this profile is slightly different than the simple flat roof of the existing dwelling, it is considered to be compatible and will sit comfortably at the same level as the existing dwelling roof.

The proposal does not respect the landscaped character of the area.

As discussed in the foregoing report, the proposal is considered to be respectful of the existing landscaped character of the area. The height of the deck will maintain the existing height of the dwelling and will be below tree canopy in the surrounding area, the materials and colours are muted and will blend into the landscape, and new planting is proposed in areas where there is currently no landscaping.



Page 42 of 42

The proposal does not respect the heritage significance of the heritage significance of the area.

The proposal is supported by Council’s Heritage Advisor and complies with the heritage policy at Clause 22.05 of the Boroondara Planning Scheme as detailed in the report.

The proposal will result in a loss of vegetation.

No significant vegetation is proposed for removal.

The proposal will cause erosion. It is considered that issues relating to drainage, sediment laden runoff and erosion can be adequately addressed via the recommended permit conditions.





























































Date post:	10-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

UPC2 50 Stawell Street, Kew - boroondara.vic.gov.au · The application is for partial demolition...

Documents